Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in                                              the band room

Overview: 

For this blog post, I am going to focus on classroom applications of the Mishra and Koehler educational model -- itself built on Schulman's pedagogical content knowledge base.

Key issues covered/keywords:  

classroom technology integration, pedagogical best practices, content knowledge, differentiation, music education, 21st century music classroom

Questions:

1.) How can I successfully target the effective integration of technology with best practice tools in the band room?

2.) What pitfalls are likely that would need addressing in adapting this in my classroom?

3.) What is my next step as an educator based on this new knowledge?

Method:

Schulman's original method approached the fusion of two different but equally important aspects of the educated teacher - the satisfactory mastery of the content area and the proficiency of disseminating this knowledge to one's pupils in an efficient and effective manner.  Mishra and Koehler take this one step further with the addition of technological knowledge, treating it as a crucial and equally important piece of the classroom puzzle.  The critical mass zone of where these three areas intersect is the mark where an educator can and should strive to be.

The most critical takeaway of this educational method is the most excellent and expedient use of technology as opposed to the forced and awkward thrusting of it as an afterthought.  The temptation of an educator who is not particularly comfortable with technology is most likely to use it sparingly (if at all), and even then rarely for true pedagogical purposes.  Instead an educator very well might remain in the comfort zone inculcated by their habits - e-mail, gradebook, parent communications and perhaps text messaging.  While there are certainly no inherent evils in the use of a Facebook page or Twitter to communicate the date of the next concert - these uses are fringe and mostly administrative in nature.  The method communicated here demands a more thoughtful and organic execution.  Neither is the method here presenting a end-all, be-all, sure-fire message guaranteed to increase student proficiency; rather, the onus of the method is that the educator should use what they can based on why it is useful to them.  An excellent saw is no good if all one needs a screwdriver.

Therefore it becomes the responsibility of the teacher to sort through the technology based on what their needs are instead of starting with the technology and then seeing how they might integrate it.  Is the latter approach fruitless?  Certainly not- many creative minds can re-purpose a tool to fit their needs -- but the better approach is to use a tool because it IS the tool that best facilitates the desired outcomes at hand.

Reflection and Application:

Since technology has so quickly and thoroughly become an integral part of society, it seems natural that this would have gravitated its way into the educator's toolbox.  However, just taking a cursory look at the typical school handbook would show the avoidance and outright combative nature of technological integration at times.  Even in my rural classroom, I often tire of the daily fight to keep students from "illegal" use of cell phones.  It is comical in some ways how arbitrary the rules are.  After all, many of the students bring more sophisticated and better suited technology for the classroom then what is already there!  The instructor must take the role of facilitator at this juncture.  It is up to us to actively seek the technology out that can help move us to a more integrated technological state in our 21st century classrooms.  Searching out software and apps for existing, accessible hardware is paramount.  Using the tools already at our disposal is perhaps the most critical task set before us.

In application (and to redress my questions from earlier), how can I successfully target the effective integration of technology with best practice tools in the band room?

Answer: I should first seek out the ways in which I can use technology already available to myself and my students.  I should also regularly check for updated and new methods that others have created/discovered and should regularly collaborate and share best practice tools with other educators.

2.) What pitfalls are likely that would need addressing in adapting this in my classroom?

Answer: A hardware to application (i.e. buy device then "figure it out") approach is potentially more costly and less effective than an application to hardware approach  (i.e. "What do I need?" then "How can I get it/make it work?).

Also, different students, parents, community members and staff are likely all on different planes regarding the benefits, drawbacks and effective use of technology.  There will be some "hearts and minds" campaigning and advocacy needed at times.


3.) What is my next step as an educator based on this new knowledge?

Answer: What technology do I, my students, my administrators, my district and my community have at my/their disposal?  How can it be used most effectively and what might be available with a little more investment.  A cost/benefit analysis would also be helpful.  A short term and long term approach would both be excellent tools to help guide my professional practices as well.,


Daniel Lenzer