INTRODUCTION TO

QUANTITATIVE
RESEARCH IN
EDUCATIONAL
RESEARCH
By Muhammed KARA
PAPER 1
Denise A. Schmidt, Evrim Baran, Ann D. Thompson, Punya Mishra, Matthew J. Koehler
& Tae S. Shin (2009) Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The
Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers,
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42:2, 123-149,
BRIEF SUMMARY

The paper describes survey development process and results from

a pilot study on 124 preservice teachers. Data analysis procedures
included Cronbach's alpha statistics on the TPACK knowledge
domains and Factor Analysis for each domain. Results suggest that,
with the modification and deletion of 18 of the survey items, the
survey is a reliable and valid instrument that will help educators
design longitudinal studies to assess preservice teachers'
development of TPACK.
MAIN AIM OF THE STUDY

This paper addresses the need for a survey instrument designed to

assess TPACK for preservice teachers.
The purpose of this study is to develop and validate an instrument
designed to measure preservice teachers' self-assessment of their
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and
related knowledge domains included in the framework
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The researchers clearly set out the research questions

1. Are there any potentially impacts on the type of training and professional
development experiences that are designed for both preservice and in-
service teachers when using TPACK as a framework for measuring teaching
knowledge?
2. How preservice teachers develop and apply technological pedagogical
content knowledge (TPACK) throughout their teacher preparation program
and in PK-6 classrooms during practicum and student teaching experiences.
 METHOD
It was constructed the Survey of Preservice Teachers' Knowledge of Teaching and
Technology to collect data on preservice teachers' self-assessment of the seven knowledge
domains within the TPACK framework. These knowledge domains include:
1. technology knowledge (TK),
2. content knowledge (CK),
3. pedagogical knowledge (PK),
4. pedagogical content knowledge (PCK),
5. technological content knowledge (TCK), t
6. Technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK),
7. and finally, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)
 INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT
The instrument constructed contained 75 items for measuring preservice teachers' self-
assessments of the seven TPACK domains:
For these 75 items, participants answered each question using the following five-level Likert
scale: 1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Agree 5. Strongly
agree
The research team collected data for this survey development project from 124 students who
were enrolled in a 3-credit introduction to instructional technology course at a large
Midwestern university. The preservice teachers were required to attend two 1-hour lectures
and one 2-hour laboratory session per week.
The researchers created the TPACK survey using an online survey development tool and
posted it on the course WebCT site for participants to access.
ANALYSIS/FINDINGS

Factor analysis was used to develop this instrument

Researchers assessed each TPACK knowledge domain subscale for internal
consistency using Cronbach's alpha reliability technique.
Then investigated construct validity for each knowledge domain subscale using
principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation within each
knowledge domain and Kaiser normalization (Kaiser-Guttman Rule). As a
result, 28 items were deleted from the survey.
After eliminating problematic items, researchers ran a second factor analysis
on the remaining survey items within each of the seven subscales.
ANALYSIS/FINDINGS

The internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) ranged from .75 to .92
for the seven TPACK subscales.
According to George and Mallery (2001), this range is considered to be
acceptable to excellent.
A final set of analyses examined the relationship between TPACK subscales
using Pearson product-moment correlations.
TPACK was significantly correlated with eight subscales at the .001level and
with social studies content knowledge (SSCK) at the .05 level.
RESULTS
Use and modification of this instrument should encourage a line of research on
measuring the development of TPACK in preservice teachers and ultimately
help preservice teacher education programs design and implement
approaches that will encourage this development.
This information will provide valuable insight into the development of TPACK
and provide program feedback on effective approaches in encouraging this
development
PAPER 2
Harvey, M. W., Yssel, N., Bauserman, A. D., Merbler, J. B. (2010). Preservice
teacher preparation for inclusion: An exploration of higher education teacher-
training institutions. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 24-33. Google
Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI
BRIEF SUMMARY

This study obtained information about preservice teacher preparation for

inclusive classrooms from a national sample of faculty members in special
education, elementary and secondary education, and curriculum and instruction
at teacher education institutions.
Preservice teachers for inclusion were assessed through electronic survey
methods. The survey instrument used a 5-point, Likert-type scale. The study
identified issues with current practices, program coordination or collaboration
efforts, and training needed for preservice educators.
MAIN AIM OF THE STUDY
This study focused on training efforts used to prepare
preservice teachers for inclusion as well as on perceptions
of the level and effectiveness of preservice teaching
training in inclusion.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Are there differences in perceptions of the institution’s current status of inclusive

educational programming by programs or departments?
2. Are there differences in faculty expectations or experiences concerning preservice
teacher education inclusion instruction by programs or departments of special
education, elementary or secondary education?
3. What are the perceived issues concerning the current status of preservice teacher
preparation, program practices, and instructional needs in the area of inclusion in
preservice teacher education?
METHOD
Participants
Participation included respondents from 41 states and the District of Columbia
The sample consisted of specifically identified departmental faculty with returns from
57 special educators (46%), 32 elementary or secondary educators (26%), and 35
C&I respondents (28%) for a total of 124 survey respondents.
Instrument
Teacher Preparation for Inclusion Assessment Survey design features included four
sections and used a 5-point Likert-type scale
The survey instrument was tested for internal consistency, and a Cronbach’s alpha of
.83 was obtained for this study of national higher education teacher-training
institutions.
ANALYSIS/FINDINGS
Data were analyzed using descriptive and nonparametric
inferential statistics.
Means, standard deviations, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to
explore differences for specific questions by program areas.
Kruskal-Wallis tests used in this study are nonparametric measures
similar to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) used to explore
differences in the response distribution by mean ranks.
RESULTS
Survey respondents strongly agreed that education majors at their institutions took an
introductory course in special education.
Respondents tended to agree that their IHEs (institution of higher education offered
field experiences where preservice teachers could collaborate across disciplines and
majors, and experiences existed for cross-articulation in teacher education.
Respondents were given an opportunity to provide additional information concerning
“other opportunities” available to teaching majors regarding involvement in inclusion
instruction.
PART II
The representation of scientific research in the national curriculum and
secondary school pupils’ perceptions of research, its function, usefulness and
value to their lives (Yeoman, Bowater and Nardi, 2016).
Research Situation
It can be said that an increasing tendency to do research in schools from
early ages and awareness of the importance of doing research is
necessary in this era for pupils further career. In addition, it can be
thought that the study to be done in this area will also be useful to
curriculum developers. So that, the main purpose of the study is that
determining the perceptions of students about the value of research.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Q1 : Do the perceptions of secondary school students

about value of research differs due to the gender?
Q2 : Do the perceptions of secondary school students
about value of research do not differ due to the school
types?
Q3: Is there any relationship between age of secondary
school students and perceptions of students about value
of research?
METHODS
Cronbach’s alpha will be used as a measure of internal
consistency or reliability of this instrument.
After that, for Q1 and Q2:
It will be used independent t-test to determine whether there
is a statistically significant difference between the means in
gender and types of school.
For Q3: The chi-square method will be used to explore the
meaningful difference between the age of the secondary
school students and the perception of the value of the
students.
THANK YOU.