TPACK and Design Thinking: A Literature Review on Teacher Education

This report provides a comprehensive literature review on the integration of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and design thinking processes in teacher education. It explores the importance of digital pedagogy and technology integration for preparing teachers to meet the needs of the modern learners and develop 21st-century competencies. The study examines current design models like RASE and IELD, while also highlighting the connection between TPACK and design thinking, emphasizing the use of these frameworks in the design of technology-based learning tasks. The report delves into the five elements of design thinking (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, and Test), and their impact on teacher IT integration and learner outcomes. It also discusses the effective application of technology in the implementation process of TPACK, and concludes with a call for the use of digital media in developing 21st-century competencies. The study underscores the need for continuous development of educators’ skills to meet the evolving demands of the contemporary world and the potential of TPACK and design thinking to improve educational practices.

Running head: TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 1
TPACK and Design Thinking
Student’s name
Institution Affiliation(s)
Author Note

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 2
Introduction
The “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge” (TPACK) is an integrated
approach for teachers during pre-service training, which emphasizes on the need for
implementation of both quantitative and quantitative approaches; these approaches are vital in
the dissemination of knowledge to the modern learners (Mouza et al., 2014). The contemporary
world features explosive evolution, and thus, the current generation should be taught through
digital means for their practical lessons. Kivunja (2013) argues that digital pedagogy is necessary
for the preparation of teachers to teach the current digital generation. Dalziel (2015) claims that
digital technologies are bringing new opportunists for the learners as they interact with each
other through an online platform. Furthermore, teachers must design that interaction. Valtonen
and Sointu (2015) assert that 21st-century competencies focus on collaboration, problem-solving,
creativity, critical thinking, and skills with regard to modern technology. For that reason,
teachers must have the ability to apply multiple pedagogical approaches to meet the current
learner's diverse needs. The study is a representation of a literature review on the connection
between teacher’s TPACK and design thinking processes to create technology-based learning
tasks aimed at developing 21st-century competencies.
Current Design Models Helping Educators to Design Technology Integrated Activities
One of the current approaches is the Resource, Activity, Support, and Activity (RASE),
which focuses on how best to integrate or apply technology to advance the learning satisfaction
and outcomes of students (Stoddart, 2015). However, the RASE model has weaknesses due to its
limited scope which emphasizes only the four mentioned elements (Stoddart, 2015). An
Integrated Environment for Learning Design (IELD) is another approach that aims at assisting
practitioners in developing a more effective and innovative technology-oriented learning

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 3
environment (Hernández-Leo et al., 2018). However, there is insufficient research concerning
the impacts of the design’s elements, particularly their effectiveness in promoting student’s
learning (Hernández-Leo et al., 2018).
Educator’s TPACK and Design Thinking
Various studies have expounded on the connection between TPACK and design thinking.
For illustration, Mouza and Karchmer-Klein (2013) established that the program helps pre-
service teachers in combining a variety of knowledge fundamentals besides assisting in
implementing practical lessons. In addition, integration of technology in learning has been
effective in sciences and mathematics, and thus, the practice needs to be implemented in other
areas such as languages and arts curricula (Smith, 2013). In contrast, Koh and Divaharan (2013)
claim that instructional strategies rather than design plans are necessary for the establishment of
comprehensive development of TPACK. Moreover, the researchers claimed that the instructional

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 4
approach is not sufficient by itself, and in consequence, there is a need for further validation of
the claim.
Tokmak and Yelken (2013) stress that the TPACK model is useful in making pre-service
teachers gain necessary proficiencies in the scheming of instructional materials and thereby
assisting them in design thinking. For an intentional application of machinery, TPACK helps in
transforming teachers as well as arranging their contents in ways that relate to design thinking
(Liu 2013). Also, the educational frameworks of the contemporary digital age need to impart
learners with 21st-century competencies, which would be practical in solving ill-structured and
complex challenges by exploitation of technology and, arbitration of a variety of standpoints
(Koh & Chai, 2015).
Design thinking is a powerful tool in an organization when it comes to solving complex
problems. Design thinking does not focus on the problem but rather on the solution and creation
of action programs with an aim of making the future better. Successful innovation is done in

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 5
light of the needs of the people for which the innovation is intended. Design thinkers focus on
solving problems for the benefit of the people. The following are the five elements of design
thinking (Matthews & Wrigley, 2017).
Empathize
It is an attitude and a skill that inform the course of design. It is an attitude that focuses
on understanding human emotions. It is a skill that provides for the inquisitive, nonjudgmental
means to understand the human emotions. Design thinkers use this element to understand
people’s emotions with regard to an innovation Brown, 2009). In light of design challenge, a
design thinker’s role is to understand how people feel; to understand how and why they behave
in certain ways, their emotional and physical needs, their perspective of the world and the things
that matter to them (Elsbach & Stigliani, 2018).
Design thinkers seldom go out to solve their problems but those problems suffered by
other people and in order to design something helpful to them it is important to understand who
they are and the things they consider crucial. The company continuously observes how people
interact with the environment to be able to capture their feelings, values and thoughts. This
understanding also helps the company to know what they need.
Define
Once the design thinker has understood the problem at hand, the next thing is to define
the problem that needs to be solved. It involves making use of the information collected in the
initial element. Define mode leads to the creation of a problem statement that can be put into a
series of actions through the synthesis of the gathered information so as to establish any patterns
and connections.

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 6
This mode is very important because it gives the design thinker a point-of-view which is the
actual manifestation of the challenge or problem at hand. It helps in determining what should be
done in addressing the precise problem after understanding the problem space in a different
perspective (Micheli & Beverland, 2019).
Ideate
This mode is concerned with generating ideas so as to move from identifying problems to
creating their solutions. It requires for creating as many ideas as possible and then selecting those
that maximize the solution desired. Ideating involves the combination of rationale with
imaginations and consciousness with unconsciousness.
Prototype
This element represents the repetitive generation of prior facts that solve questions which
take the design thinker closer to finding the ultimate solution. Prototype can be used to test
alternatives or possibilities. There are many questions that can help the design thinker solve the
problem at hand but the most important thing is to know which questions to take time on and
which ones not to tackle at all. The secret is to allocate time for each prototype while taking care
not to take too much time on any. Also, these questions should be answered with the user in
mind because the ultimate solution is at the benefit of the user (Dunne, 2018).
Test
This is the final element of design thinking and involves seeking feedback from users. It
offers the opportunity to explain the point-of-view to the people that are to benefit from the
design. It can be used to learn more information about a user especially when the information
gathered earlier was not adequate. Testing can be done through showing the users what has been
conceptualized so far. While showing them, it is important not to offer any explanations yet but

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 7
simply allow the user to use (or otherwise) the prototype. Observations of how the user interacts
with the prototype are recorded, including any questions and comments they may have about the
prototype. Also, the design thinker should consider bringing as many prototypes as possible so
that the user can compare them (Dunne, 2018).
Design thinking portrays a repeatable procedure utilizing interesting and innovative
strategies which yield ensured comes about normally results that surpass starting desires.
Extraordinary results that jump the normal. This is the reason it is such an alluring, rapid and
critical philosophy for businesses to grasp today.
Impact on Teacher IT integration and learner outcomes
Incorporation of technology, content, and pedagogical understanding results in an
integration of teacher's forms of knowledge (Koh & Chai, 2015). The kinds of expertise include;
technological and educational content (Koh & Chai, 2015). Agyei & Keengwe (2014) revealed
that the application of multiple evaluation measures facilitated useful knowledge on TPACK
development for pre-service teachers. However, teachers should consider integrating universal
learning design and TPACK to enhance the graduation of educators with skills, dispositions, and
knowledge necessary for teaching the overall spectrum of students (Benton-Borghi, 2013). For
instance, TPACK academic model has been useful in facilitating appropriate educator's views on
content delivered in various environments (Anderson &Barham, 2013). It has also been useful in
guiding training and course design as well as in the selection of the proper technology to promote
student teaching (Anderson &Barham, 2013). Another study by Bate & Day (2013) documented
that the TPACK model is a practical framework that assists educators in teaching complex areas
such as mathematics. Correspondingly, Kereluik & Mishra (2013) claim that a valid educator's
TPACK is operational in imparting competencies to learners for the modern world's needs.

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 8
Some studies confirm that the TPACK framework is valuable in design thinking and talk.
For instance, Boschman and McKenney (2015) underscore the need for the collaborative design
of literacy activities that are rich in technology. Thus, findings from the study affirmed that
design talk relates to instances in which teachers attain higher inquiry levels and that TPACK
links with an expression of practical issues. There are five common aspects of design thinking.
They include; technological, productivity, cognitive, metacognitive, and social-cultural
dimensions (Koh & Chai, 2015). Besides, to design integrated technology activities, the interplay
of various entities is needed (Koh & Chai, 2015). Accordingly, teachers have to advance their
proficiencies to discourse and facilitate design for relevant issues to be converted into chances
for supporting the improvement of pedagogy. Consequently, McKenney and Kali (2015)
recommend an ecological framework, which is useful in evaluating the needs and assets in
delivery and mastery of content. Another study, which explored the analysis of teacher clusters
based on their exposure to TPACK as they engage in activities on lesson design, alluded that
TPACK improves the confidence of in-service teachers and boosts their teaching prowess in
imparting 21st-century competencies to learners (Koh & Chai, 2014).
Other studies have identified the need for advancing the educator's TPACK framework to
realize desirable learner outcomes. For example, Albion &Tondeur (2015) emphasized the need
for using digital technology as a lever for academic innovation and change, together with a study
aiming at imparting skills to the current learners as a means of developing competencies needed
in the modern industries. Also, faculty needs the three forms of understanding which include:
content, technological and pedagogical, to effectively interpret and deliver the educational aims
and make it accessible to their students (Stover & Veres, 2013). Furthermore, ICT should be

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 9
used as an epistemic, cognitive and metacognitive tool to back inventive, creative, and critical
thinking together with realistic problem solving (Koh & Chai, 2015).
Effective Application of Technology in the Implementation Process of TPACK
Lee and Kim (2014) expounds on the combination of technology in the implementation
process of TPACK and asserts that the instructional design model is influential when applied in
the setting of pre-service training of teachers. However, Chai and Koh (2014) proposed the
TPACK theoretical framework for designing new innovative and knowledge-oriented practices
for a combination of technology and education. Similarly, Marin and Hargis (2013) state that
design thinking, the application, is expedient in the development of instructional learning in a
challenging setting. This way, technology use in teaching requires a flexible model that
demonstrates the quick evolution. More so, protean expertise is vital in various content areas and
pedagogical methods. Also, Figg and Jaipal (2013) clarify that TPACK is an efficient and
practical model for involving both candidates and teachers in an enhancement of the tech-
oriented practice of teaching. Another study affirms that Technology should be applied in
imparting competencies for modern learners (Wong & Chai 2015).
Conclusion
The report has revealed that the rapid advancement in the contemporary world compels
the use of digital media in the development of the 21st-century competencies. Among the current
approaches, RASE and IELD are used, but their limitations raise the need for the advancement of
another method. The introduction of TPACK should start with teacher's pre-service training and,
instructional strategies are necessary for the implementation of the comprehensive development
of the TPACK model. However, there is a need for further research on other strategies to
enhance the application of the TPACK model apart from instructional approaches. Another

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 10
prominent gap in the TPACK study is the requirement for a conceptualized framework to
particular pedagogical and content use. The last gap is the existence of insufficient crucial
perceptions of the TPACK model. Design thinking should be the guiding principle of all problem
solving techniques. Companies should use design thinking to streamline their decision making
process and to improve on innovativeness.

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 11
References
Agyei, D. D., & Keengwe, J. (2014). Using technology pedagogical content knowledge
development to enhance learning outcomes. Education and Information Technologies, 19(1),
155-171.
Hernández-Leo, D., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Derntl, M., Pozzi, F., Chacón, J., Prieto, L. P., &
Persico, D. (2018). An Integrated Environment for Learning Design. Frontiers in ICT.
Stoddart, P. (2015). Using educational technology as an institutional teaching and learning
improvement strategy?. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(5), 586-596.
Albion, P. R., Tondeur, J., Forkosh-Baruch, A., & Peeraer, J. (2015). Teachers’ professional
development for ICT integration: Towards a reciprocal relationship between research and
practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 655-673.
Anderson, A., Barham, N., & Northcote, M. (2013). Using the TPACK framework to unite
disciplines in online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(4).
Bate, F. G., Day, L., & Macnish, J. (2013). Conceptualising Changes to Pre-Service Teachers'
Knowledge of How to Best Facilitate Learning in Mathematics: A TPACK Inspired
Initiative. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(5), n5.
Benton-Borghi, B. H. (2013). A Universally Designed for Learning (UDL) infused
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) practitioners' model essential for
teacher preparation in the 21st Century. Journal of educational computing research, 48(2), 245-
265.
Boschman, F., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2015). Exploring teachers' use of TPACK in design
talk: The collaborative design of technology-rich early literacy activities. Computers &
Education, 82, 250-262.
Chai, C. S., Koh, E., Lim, C. P., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Deepening ICT integration through a
multilevel design of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computers in
Education, 1(1), 1-17.
ChanLin, L. J. (2017). Analysis of Teachers' Tablet Teaching Adoption Process. Educational
Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(6).
Dalziel, J. (Ed.). (2015). Learning design: Conceptualising a framework for teaching and
learning online. London: Routledge.
Dunne, D. (2018). Implementing design thinking in organizations: An exploratory study.
Journal of Organization Design, 7(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0040-7
Elsbach, K. D., & Stigliani, I. (2018). Design Thinking and Organizational Culture: A Review
and Framework for Future Research. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2274–2306.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317744252

TPACK AND DESIGN THINKING 12
Figg, C., & Jaipal, K. (2013, March). Using TPACK-in-Practice Workshops to enable teacher
candidates to create professional development workshops that develop tech-enhanced teaching.
In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp.
5040-5047). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth:
Teacher knowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher
Education, 29(4), 127-140.
Kivunja, C., 2013. Embedding digital pedagogy in pre-service higher education to better prepare
teachers for the digital generation. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(4), p.131.
Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2014). Teacher clusters and their perceptions of technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) development through ICT lesson design. Computers
& Education, 70, 222-232.
Koh, J. H. L., & Divaharan, S. (2013). Towards a TPACK-fostering ICT instructional process for
teachers: Lessons from the implementation of interactive whiteboard instruction. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), 233-247.
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lee, M. H. (2015). Technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) for pedagogical improvement: Editorial for a special issue on TPACK.
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lee, M. H. (2015). Technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) for pedagogical improvement: Editorial for a special issue on TPACK. The Asia-
Pacific Education Researcher, 24(3).
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tay, L. Y. (2014). TPACK-in-Action: Unpacking the contextual
influences of teachers' construction of technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK). Computers & Education, 78, 20-29.
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., & Hong, H. Y. (2015). Design thinking and 21st-century
skills. In Design Thinking for Education (pp. 33-46). Springer, Singapore.
Lee, C. J., & Kim, C. (2014). An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design
model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 62(4), 437-460.
Liu, S. H. (2013). Exploring the instructional strategies of elementary school teachers when
developing technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge via a collaborative professional
development program. International Education Studies, 6(11), 58.
Marin, C., Hargis, J., & Cavanaugh, C. (2013). Note for editor: iPad learning ecosystem:
Developing challenge-based learning using design thinking. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 14(2).
Matthews, J., & Wrigley, C. (2017). Design and Design Thinking in Business and Management
Higher Education. Journal of Learning Design, 10(1), 41–54.
https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v9i3.294