Handbook of

Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPACK)
for Educators
Second Edition

Edited by
Mary C. Herring,
Matthew J. Koehler,
and Punya Mishra
 1
Introduction to the Second Edition
of the TPACK Handbook
Mary C. Herring, Matthew j . Koehler; Pun ya Mishra,
joshua M. Rosenberg, jolene Teske

O ne of the earliest examples of educational technology appears in t hc wriling of Quint;l-

ia n ( 3~1 00 AD) over 2,000 years ago. Descri bing a possible innovatio n in teaching writing,
he wrote:

As soon as the child has begun \0 know the shapes of the various letters, it will be usc-
(ullo have them cui out on a boa rd, in as beautiful script as possible, so thal lhe pen
may be guided along the grooves, Thus mistakes such as occur with wax tablets will be
impossible to make for the prn witl be confined between the ed ges of the [etters and
will always be prevented from going astray.
(cited in Jllieh, 1993, p. 9 )

Even in this example from over 2,000 years ago, we can still identify themes that resonate
in contemporary conceptual i7-<ltions of ed ucational technology. For instance, Quintilian
expresses a theory of learning that focuses on th e im portance of practice and the role of
tl.'chnology in scaffolding learning. There is also an unde rstanding that diffe rent technolo -
gies (such as wax tablets) may provide different affo rd ances that make tha t tool more o r
less suited to the activity. Fina ll y, there is a deep con nection between the content to be
taught (e.g., wri ting o r pen manship) and the des ign of the tool (CUI-out letters to guide
learners). In some sense, the und erlying ideas of T PAC K- tha t tech nology, pedagogy. and
content are intricately linked-have always been an important part of thinking about
ed ucatio nal tech nology. Yet, the interplay between content, ped agogy, and technology has
often been an im plicit part of educational thinking.
Since the introduction o f the TPACK fra m ework ( Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Mishra &
Km'hler, 2006), scholarship tha t explicitly explores these con nectio ns has fl owered. Tho ugh
issues of technology integration in teaching had long been in the forefro nt of muc h schol-
arship, the introd uction of the TPACK framework has served to integrate many lines of
research, while at the same time focusing research on the interplay of content, pedagogy,

1
Mary C. Herring et al.

and technology. Of cou rse, it can be argued that something like the TPACK framewo rk was
in the zeitgeiSi- as Mis hra and Koehler (2006) have noted, the re we re my riad scholars who
had been proposing something sim ilar. So, in some sense, the attention given to the TPACK
fra me wo rk was a product of timing and, perha ps, luck.
Rega rdless, the impac t of the TPACK framework has been considerable. T he TPACK
commun ity has become a rich, vibrant, and intern ational one, with scholars from aro und
the globe st udying theo retical issues and practical ap plications of t he framework ( Voogt,
Fisser, Pareja Roblin, Tondeur, & van Braa k, 20 13). At the ti me of writing o f this introd uc'
tio n, the Mishra and Koeh ler (2006) article introducing the fra mework has been cited over
3,000 times in scholarly publicatio ns (aceordi ng to Google Scholar). At TPACK.org, the re
are over 6,000 registe red users with shared interests that have com p iled a bibliog rap hy of
T I'AC K-rclated litera tu re with over 600 art icles (and steadily growi ng). A quick SU T\'ey
of the to pics covered in th is bibliogra phy illustrates the b readth and d epth o f resea rch
using and conceptua lizing the TI'ACK framework. T hat is, resea rch spans m ultiple content
areas includ ing m athem atics, science, social sm dies, m usic, hislOry, physical education. and
more. Also, the TPACK framewo rk eng~s ~ broad spectrum of researchers and education
p rofessionals who are working to unde rstan d its theo ret ical and pract ical implications.
Ma ny factors played a role in bringing TPAC K into the consciousness of the broader
ed ucational tec h no logy com m unity. This includes the publication of the firs t Handbook
of Tedmologi((J/ Pe(/(lgogi((J/ COllUM KllCllv/edge (TPCK) for E(illCllrars in 2008. Under the
aegis of the Innovatio n and Technology Committee o f the Ame rican Associa t ion of Col·
leges of Teacher Ed ucation, the first handbook provided a space for a mo re de tailed articu·
lation of the TPACK framewo rk itself, as in the two in trod uc tory chapters by Koeh ler and
Mishra (2008) and Kelly (2008). Drawing from research from ex perts across the nascent
communit y advanci ng TPACK scholarship, the firs t ha nd book also gro un ded T PAC K in
specific subject areas and in teacher edu cation and pro fessional developmen t sett ings.
Additionally. it focused on defini ng TPACK a nd in tegrating it inlo teacher education and
professional develop me nt.
Ye t, eight years have passed since the pu blication o f the fi rst edition of the HrUJ dbook.
Driven by the growing infl uence of T PAC K o n research and p ractice in both K- 12 and
hig her educat io n, the time is right for a second edition that upda tes current th in king about
theory, resea rch, and practice. It is therefoTe fi u ing th at we introduce this vol ume by fir:st
taking a mome nt to re fl ect back on the his tory of the T PAC K concept, as well as why it has
infl uenced bolh Tesearch and practice in the field of educatio nal tec h nology and teache r
ed ucatio n.

The Challenges of Researching Educational Technology

Much of the educational tech nology resea rch literatu re is conceptually fragme nted and
relics heavily on caSt' stud ies (Ronau & Rakes, 20 12). This is u nderstandable given Ihc
rapid pace al wh ich tech nology e\"ol\"es, where every new 1001 provides new opportunities
for use wi thin ed ucation. It is not surprising Ihal most fra meworks that are used usually
arc ap pro pri ated from outside of the education and teacher education literatu re, stich as

2
 Introduction to the Second Edition

from psychological or sociological theories of learning. As a resu lt, the literature conlains
ma ny studies spanning multiple frameworks and methodologies, making it u nclear how
they fi t within each o ther, and the re is significa nt definitional va rial ion of how constructs
and concepts arc uSt'd and understood with li ttle synthesis across studies and littk pro-
grammatic resea rch. Wri ting of th is in a no ther context, Potter (2008) describes this as the
~ honeyb~ approach to research, descri bing it as follows:

where scholars arc busy bees whose attention is attracted by so many interesting topics
(flowers in bloom). They flit from one topic to another as they make their way across
the fi eld of flowe rs. The positive aspect of this ~ honeyb " nature of the research is
th at many topics get explored. Also, the travels of the bees have an effect o f cross-
pollinati ng top ics with ideas and mel hods from ol her lopics. However, there is a li m i-
ta tion to this honeybee approach. While flowers benefit from the cross-pollination and
can grow on their own, research topics need scholars to stay in one place and build a
system of explanation on each topic to the extent tha t scholars spend time trying out
lOIS of diff(" renttopics, the fi("ld stays th in-that is, there ar(" (("w places whne scholars
conduct programma tic research that huilds dep th.
( Potter, 2008, p. 13)

Thus, Ihe fragmented nature of the field of ed ucational technology research, its everex pand-
ing literature, and the lack of programmatic wo rk alllcad to the need for some approaches
and frameworks that a re "ho me·grown" (fo r want of a better wo rd ). Such home-grown
constr ucts would indud!;' conceptua lizations and dema rcations of th e domain that are
emergent fro m the d emands of the domain itself. 11 is no t surprising that the two frame-
works that have had significant impact in the recelll past in the domain of teacher educa-
tio n and teacher professional development have been Shulman's construct of Pedagogical
Content Know led ge and the TPACK framework (whic h, essentially, is an extension of
Shulman's seminal work ). Both frameworks emerge from withill the discipline of teache r
educatio n and arc not imported (rom a differrnt domai n such as psychology, sociology, or
cognitive science. This is not to say tha t psycho logical, sociological, or cognitive principles
and ideas do no t have a rolr to play in developing our u nde rstand ing of tracher knowl -
edge, but rather that they are subsu med or integrated withill a framework that respects the
contours o( the domai n of practice that constitute teacher educat ion, teacher professional
development, and technology integration.

The Va lue of Framewo rk s

At some level, any framework provides two key fu nctions (Maxwell, 2012). Firsl, it ac ts as
a coat closet-it provides a high-level " big pictu r e~ view for making sense of what you sec.
Particular pieces of d ata, or specific research stud ies, which o the rwise may seem uncon-
ncrted or ir relevant to one ano the r can now be related to each o ther. The abili ty to find
connections between st udies is part icularly important in the fie ld o f educational treh nol-
ogy, where new technologies often lead to studies that appear to be new an d specific to

3
Mary C. Herring et al.

the affo rdances of particular too ls and techno logies. Second , a fra mework can act as a
spotligh t, illuminating what you see, drawing attention to particular events of phenom-
ena, an d shedding ligh t on relations hips that may o the rwise have gone unnoticed or
m isund l."rstood.
In other words, the TPACK fra mework provides a visual or written product that
~explai n s, either graphically or in narra tive form , the main things to be studied- the key
fac tors, concepts, or variables-a nd the presumed relat ionships among them" ( Miles &
Huberman, 1994, p. 18). A framewor k such as thc TPACK framework provid cs a model
or a map of why the world is the way it is (S t rauss, 1995). [t is a simplification of the
world, but a si mplification aimed at clarifying a nd explaining some aspect of how it
works. [t does so by telling an enlightening stor y or providing an explanatio n abou t some
phcnomcnon, onc that gives you ncw insigh ts and broad cns your undcrs tanding of that
phenomenon.
In a similar vein, M ishra and Koeh ler (2006) identified and desc r ibed three key functions
that th ey hoped the T PACK framework would perfo rm- descriptive, ill/ererlcl' generation,
and IIpp/imlioll. [n sho rt, theo ry allows us to describe a phenomenon based on theoreti·
cal constructs-it lets us sec the world through a particular lens. The T PACK framework
provides the structure needed to desc ribe technology integration as the interplay between
technology, pedagogy, and content. Framewo rks also guide ill/l'rellCC making, based on
what we observe or the data we collect. l ike a spotlight, the TPACK framework draws
attention to particular events of phenomena and sheds ligh t on relat ionships that leads to
inferences. And final!y, the TPACK framework can scaffold how fllldings can be (lpplird to
other con texts.
It is important to no te, however, that all th eor ies and frameworks arc abst ractions that
focus attention on the big p icture. Their weakness, however, is that in order to grasp that
bigger picture, they often elide details. By being top·down constructs, frameworks can
sometimes be mistake n for real ity, rather than abstracted representation of reality. Thus,
as empirical scholars, we need to undcrstand the dual nced-to develop theo retical con·
st ruc ts that allow for us to generalize ac ross cases and ret be deeply grounded in the reali ty
of the world. Elbow ( 1973, 2006) suggests tha t one way of keeping ourselves honest, as a
discipline, is to play both the Mbelieving game" and the Mdoubting game." [n the case of the
former, we accept the theory as it is and seek to apply it across contexts, using it to deepen
our understanding of the phenomena under im<estigation. [n the latter, we seek to chal·
lenge the thcory, looking for its flaws and weaknesses, pushing and probing its hidden fault
lines so as to keep it honest, as it were.
The research o n TI'ACK o\'er the past decade has seen both examples o f these Uga mes."
There are scholars who have playcd thc M doubting game" by questioning thc framework
and undcrlying theor y abou t the nature, o rganization, indepcndcnce, and interdcpend.
ence of the u nderlying const ru cts and the important rol e o f context. This has clearly led to
the fl owering of a strong line of tnl."orl."tical work. Othl."rs have gonl." the other route, playing
the " believing game," taking the fra mework as it stands and trying to apply the framework.
Th is appl ication ca n be seen both in n::seareh, as scholars seek to beller measu re TPACK
and its effcctivcness, and in practical applicat ion, as practitioners seek to guide the devel·
opment ofTf'ACK in pre· and in-service teachcrs.

4
 Introduction to the Second Edition

The res l of the handbook ca n be seen as an expansion of a broader sci of ideas. On

one hand we have the theoreticians who are playing the d oubting game, whic h form s
some of Ihe firs t sect ion o f t his handbook. On t he other hand are t he researchers and
practitioners who acce pt the framework as is and seek to cond uct research o r study its
im pac i on practice. Thus, Ihe nexl IwO seclio ns of Ihe handboo k focus on Research ilnd
Practice.

Organization of This Handbook

The handboo k is organized into three se<tions. In the fi rst, theory- how TPACK is con·
ceplUal ized across the authors' sch olarship, as well as the work of o thers-is explored.
Next, in the section on research, the au thors describe studies of TPACK,focusingspecifi-
cally o n methodological and analytic approaches. Finally, on application, we investigate the
challenges of applying T l'ACK theory and research 10 practice.

Section I: Th eory

Section I provides an u pdated unde rstanding of Technological Pedagogical Content

Kn owledge (T PACK ). Authors provide a review of TPACK d evelopment as a construct,
encourage purposeful advances in the developmen t of teachers, and explore it conceptually
th rough the le ns of a 21st-century educator.
Angeli. Valanides, and Christodoulou provide a chronological rev iew of T PAC K as a
valid construct and framework. While educational resea rchers have been and aTe working
toward the same goal of integratin g technological skills into classrooms, these au thors offer
that we m ust, as an inlernational community, narrow the definition an d delermine one
specific framewor k for fu ture work. Of particular sign ificance . according to the authors, is
the issue of whe ther T l'AC K can be seen as being t ra nsformali ve o r integrative in nature.
Yoagt, Fisser, To ndeur, and van Braak seek to d evelop a ~theory of practice» to guide the
development of teachers' T PAC K. Drawi ng on the philosophy of technology, the theory of
situated cognition , and a theory of teaching as design, the au thors focus o n the active and
const ructiv<' role of the teacher, arguing fo r the need for approaches that an.' intentional
and r<,!lective, design.based, and collaborative. Smart, Finger, and Sim reframe Schulman's
famed Nancy, the except ional teacher of the laller 20th cen tu ry, and introduce Carmel-
ina, the exc<'ptional teacher of the 21st ccntury. By cxplori ng the reaso ning of both teac h·
ers, they investigate how pedagogical reasoning has changed since Shulman int roduced
the term. They explore the fi t of a new lerm, utech no logical pedagogical reaso ning,» for
describing teaching in the 21st cen tury.

Sect/on II: Research

The second section of Ihis handbook focuses on resea rch, providing bOlh reviews of the
literature and an array of stud ies aimed at furthering the u nderstanding ofTPACK in prac-
tice. Archambault o ffers a comprehensive review of qua litalive measu res and approaches
that have been developed and used to stud y the development ofTPACK in both pre·service

5
Mary C. Herring e\ a l.

and in-service populations. Chai et aI., in contras t, offer a revicw of studies that employ
quanti tative measures o fT PACK. Bo thArchambaultandChaiandcolleagues notethatthe
complex nature o f TPAC K, the essential subjecti\,ity that lies at the heart of the social sci-
<"nees, demands the need fo r more research around con tent areas, teachcr's thinking, and
desig n processes.
The nex t set of chapters provides a sampling of current research around the TPACK
framewo rk. First is a case study by Schmidt-Crawfo rd, Tai, Wang, and Jin, in which they
observe exceptional educators and their use of TPACK. The next three articles foc us on
developing TPACK. Ja nssen and Lazonder report o n a two-part stud y conducted to deter-
mine how teachers develop TPACK through providing specific support for them in the
lesson-planning process. Niess descri bes the results of a study on the design and imple-
men tation of a learn ing trajectory focused on TPAC K in an online course. Findings indi-
cate that teachers develop TPACK most effectively whe n skills are tau ght and integrated
in classes and opportunities for appl ication arc provided. Benton-Borghi ends the second
section with a study combining TPACK with Universal Design for Learning ( UOL). Com -
bining these two approaches develops thc teachers' skills in the integratio n of technology
for all students in courses wit h and without diversity and disability.

Sect ion 11/: Implications for Pract ice

The grea test value of the TPACK framework has been in its ap plication to practice both
in higher education and K- 12 contexts. This is the focus of th t' third scction. The ch apters
in this section are ti ghtly tied to the context within wh ich learning happens. This can be
seen by a focus on a specific period (p re-sCTvice o r in -service) or specific domains (scienc<",
mathematics, la nguage arts, and fo reign languages).
The fi rst two chapters provide us wi th the broad contours of the literature on the devel-
opment of TPACK among pre-service and in -service teachers. MOll7.a syn thesizes prior
research on the ways in which pre-service te3chers' TPACK has been me3sured in the con -
texts in wh ich they teach and describes the st rategies teacher educators and researchers
have explored to develop thei r T PACK. Harris provides an overview of the ways in which
in-service t<"ach<"rs' T PACK has developed, specifically focusing on 12 d istinct path ways
from the literatu re.
Herring, Meacham, and Mou rl am focus o n T PAC K development among higher edu -
cation facult y and the importance of leadership structures across universities to sup-
port faculty using technology in a comprehensive and le3rner-centered way. Hofer, Lee,
Slykhuis, and Ptaszynski describe their wo rk on a TPACK-based faculty develo pment ini-
tiative enacted and implemented through th<" Microsoft Tech nology Enriched Instruction
Prog ram.
The nex t two chaplers d emonstrate extensions of the TPACK fram ework an d the devel-
opment ofTPACK in new domains. Chandra investigates how t he school leadership affects
the context of tech no logy imeg ration through a year-long case study of a high school prin -
cipal, while Forssell t'xp lores holY desig ners of learni ng tools and tech no logies can utilize
TPACK in their work.

6
 tntroduction to the Second Edition

The last fou r chapters focus on specific domains fo r the application and development of
TPACK, from mllsic to math, sciencr 10 language arts. Polly and Orrill foc us on d esigning
professional developmen t among elementary school mathematics teachers, while Baran,
Ca nbazoglu-Bilici. and Uyg un ex plore continuous in -St'rvice proft'ssio nal development for
science teachers. In contrast, 1...1r07:iak and Bowman investigate the developme nt of mllsic
T PACK in highrr ed ucation to demonstrate how trch nology is integrated into m usical
pra ctice. Wang d iscusses the creation of digital stories by pre-service teachers as a way to
devrlop the T PAC K of teachers who teach English as a foreign language.

Conclusion
The growth and richness ofTPACK resea rch over the past decadr makes it difficult if not
impossible to capture it com pletel y in this handbook. \\'hat we have attempted is to combine
broader reviews o f the literat ure and field with specific studies and research papers. This
way, we believe, wr could at IraSI offer a sampling o f the work that is cllrrently undrrway.
The d iversity o f approaches in th is handbook means that different rea ders ma y usc the
handbook in different ways. Those who are new to TPACK may focus on the first section
(o n theory) . Researchers des igning stud ies or loo kin g to compare th ei r work to rd ated
scholarship may consult the second sect ion (on research) . Finally, those looking to directly
ap ply TPAC K to their work as professional development pro\'iders, administrators, or
teacher ed ucators may fi nd the third seelion (ap plications to practice) most helpful. We
hope thai, as a whole, this handbook provides the reader with a broad overview o f TPACK
wi th specific insights in to the theory, research, and application of the framework across
multiple contexts.

Refe r e n ces
Elbow, I'. ( 197 J). Writ;lIg wi/li oll/ ullclius. New York: Oxford University I'ress.
Elbow, P. (2006). The believing game and how to make ro n tlieting o pinions more fruitful. In C.
W"ber ( Ed. ), Bring;"g lighl inlo llie ,/"rh,esJ: A iluide 10 leaching PNlU, ""'pa/hy, ,,1111 umlers/m,d-
iUil (pp. 16-25). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
lIlieh. I. (1993 ). A "i"<'Yard of tI'e t.,.-d; A co"'me"ta ry til Hug" 's Did"sc"lhw,. Chicago, IL: Uni\·ersity
of Ch icago I'ress.
Kelly, M. A. (200S). Bridging digi tal and cultural divide5: TI' CK (or equity o( access to tech nology. In
AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology ( F..ds. l. Hlllldbook oflecli,rological pcdilgogicill
co"/""' kllo ... /.,,18e (TPCKJ fo r ,",/ura/o.s (pp. 30-60). New York: Routledge.
K~hlcr, 11.1.1., & Mi5hra, 1'. {200S).lntroducing T PCK.ln MCTE Comm in ce on Innovation and
Technology ( Eds. ), HllIrdbook of tU/II,ologicll/ pc,/agogi(lll contell' kltow/edgr. (TPCK ) for r,/rml /o rs
(pp. 3-29). New York: Routledge.
Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogica l content knowledge? COlllem -
pomry Im,es ;n Tech"ology ,,"i1 Tellclie. Edll'lIlioll (CITE), 9( I). 6().-.70.
Mallwell, j.A. (2012 ). QII"/;I"/;,,,, n·S<'llrr/, design: Au illlmlc/;..., "pprOtIC/1. Thousand Oah. CA:
SAG E Publications.
Miles. M.B. , & Huberman, A.M. ( 1994 ). Qu"Jj'oti~e '/11/" Il,r.,/ysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publica tions.

7
Mary C. Herring et al.

Mish ra, 1'.. & Koehler, M.J. (2006 ). 'lechnological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework
for teac her know ledge. T~lchus College Record, 108, 1017-1054. do i:1O.11 I I /j. 1467-9620.
2006.00684.:<
Potter, W. J. (2008 ). A rg"ing/or" g""mll /m",cwo rk for ",IlSS ", ..di" sch&/"rs/rip. Thousan d Odiu, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Ronau. R.N., & Rahs,C. R. (2012). Making the grad e: Reporting educational technology and teacher
knowledge reSC'arch. In R. N. Ronau, C. R. Rakes, & M. L. Niess ( Ed s.), Ed" rtlfiomll rcrhuol"gy,
Icacha knowledge. a"J classroom impact: A rcseaf(h hamlbook 011 frmueworks mill approacllCs
(pp. 323-332). Hcnhcy, PA: Illfor ma tioll Sciellce RcferCIlCC.
Strauss, A. ( ] 995 ). Q"li</' ~ ",mlys.s for soei,,[ uie,,/is/s. Ctmbridge. UK: Ca mbridge University
Press.
Vo-ogt, J., Fisse r, P., P~reja Robl in. N., TOlldeur, j., & van Sraak, J. (20] 3). Tech nological pedagogical
content knowlcdgc-A TCview of the literature. /our"al&/ Computer Assis/..d uam'ng, 29, ] 09-] 2] .