Page 13 - gyhjnmk
P. 13

Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 7, No. 3, (2020) pp. 343–360


               offers  an  opportunity  for  teachers  to  replace  traditional  teaching  methods  with  technology
               integrated ones to be able to perform their professions more efficiently and more effectively.

               5. RECOMMENDATIONS
               Future  researchers  should  develop  new  TPACK  instruments  capable  of  measuring  actual
               learning,  performance,  and  real-life  scenario  tasks  apart  from  the  ones  used  to  measure
               perception,  belief  self-efficacy  through  TPACK  instruments.  In  addition  to  the  use  of
               Cronbach's alpha, inter-rater reliability, expert content validity, and factor analysis to ensure
               the reliability and validity of instruments, future researchers should also try using other ways
               of ensuring and increasing reliability and validity of instruments while devising new TPACK
               instruments to measure TPACK of English teachers. Future researchers should meticulously
               look into the ways how multi-method research designs and mixed methods research designs
               could be employed to measure English teachers’ TPACK in further studies. Further researchers
               should also question how data triangulation process in a TPACK-research works in terms of
               reliability and validity and might be applied to better measure pre-service and in-service English
               teachers’ TPACK.
               Limited to investigate reliability and validity issues, this review has made an attempt to discuss
               how the issues of reliability and validity of instruments are addressed by the researchers within
               a limited number of studies in the field of EFL.

               Declaration of Conflicting Interests and Ethics
               The  authors  declare  no  conflict  of  interest.  This  research  study  complies  with  research
               publishing ethics. The scientific and legal responsibility for manuscripts published in IJATE
               belongs to the author(s).

               ORCID
               Abdullah ARSLAN         https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3979-6371

               6. REFERENCES
               Abera,  B.  (2014).  Applying  a  technological  pedagogical  content  knowledge  framework  in
                     Ethiopian  English  language  teacher  education.  In  Multicultural  Awareness  and
                     Technology in Higher Education: Global Perspectives, 286-301. IGI Global.
               Agyei, D. D., &Voogt, J. (2012). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in
                     pre-service mathematics teachers through collaborative design. Australasian journal of
                     educational technology, 28(4), 547-564.
               Alahmari, A. S. (2013). An investigation of Saudi Arabian EFL teachers' engagement with
                     technology. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://monash.figshare
                     .com/ 4701100_monash_120645.pdf
               Alhababi, H. H. (2017). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) effectiveness
                     on English teachers and students in Saudi Arabia. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
                     Retrieved from https://digscholarship.unco.edu/dissertations/456/
               Ansyari,  M.  H.  (2012).  The  development  and  evaluation  of  a  professional  development
                     arrangement for technology integration to enhance communicative approach in English
                     language teaching (unpublished master's thesis). Retrieved from https://essay.utwente.n
                     l/62294/1/MSc_Ansyari_M.F._-_S1084712.pdf
               Ansyari, M. F. (2015). Designing and evaluating a professional development programme for
                     basic  technology  integration  in  English  as  a  foreign  language  (EFL)  classrooms.
                     Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(6), 699-712.







                                                           355
   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18