An exploration of in-service teachers’ framing, instrumental, and core design judgments in dynamic decision-making for technology integration

References

• Beach, L. R. (1993). Broadening the definition of decision making: The role of prechoice screening of options. Psychological Science, 4(4), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00264.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennet, S., Harper, B., & Hedberg, J. (2002). Designing real life cases to support authentic design activities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 18(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1743
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, S., Agostinho, S., & Lockyer, L. (2017). The process of designing for learning: Understanding university teachers’ design work. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(1), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9469-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackwell, S., & Pepper, K. (2008). The effect of concept mapping on preservice teachers’ reflective practices when making pedagogical decisions. Journal of Effective Teaching, 8(2), 77–93.
   Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consoli, T.,Désiron, J., &Cattaneo, A. (2023). What is “technology integration” and how is it measured in K-12 education? A systematic review of survey instruments from 2010 to 2021. Computers & Education, 197, 104742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104742
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cviko, A., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2013). The teacher as re-designer of technology integrated activities for an early literacy curriculum. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.4.c
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demiral-Uzan, M. (2015). Instructional design students’ design judgment in action. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21195
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, R., & Timulak, L. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research. A Handbook of Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology, 1(7), 147–159.
   Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., & Koehler, A. A. (2014). Online case-based discussions: Examining coverage of the afforded problem space. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(5), 617–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9350-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
   Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., Stepich, D. A., York, C. S., Stickman, A., Wu, X. L., Zurek, S., & Goktas, Y. (2008). How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 17–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.20013
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, C. M., Dagli, C., Demiral-Uzan, M., Ergulec, F., Tan, V., Altuwaijri, A. A., Gyabak, K., Hilligoss, M., Kizilboga, R., Tomita, K., & Boling, E. (2015). Judgment and instructional design: How ID practitioners work in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhow, C., Dexter, S., & Hughes, J. E. (2008). Teacher knowledge about technology integration: An examination of inservice and preservice teachers’ instructional decision-making. Science Education International, 19(1), 9–25.
   Google Scholar
• Guzey, S. S., & Roehrig, G. H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science teachers’ development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 25–45. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/29293/
   Google Scholar
• Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers & Education, 101, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1499–1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, R. R., Crandall, B., & Shadbolt, N. (1998). Use of the critical decision method to elicit expert knowledge: A case study in the methodology of cognitive task analysis. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40(2), 254–276. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872098779480442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. (2003). Applications of a case library of technology integration stories for teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(4), 529–548. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/2151/
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (2010). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (2012). Designing for decision making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(2), 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9230-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02818172
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, R. F., Andrews, B. W., Vignola, M. J., Schilz, M. A., & Covert, J. (1999). Towards guidelines for the design of interactive multimedia instruction: Fostering the reflective decision-making of preservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1), 13–31. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8955/
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J., & Ryu, H. (2014). A design thinking rationality framework: Framing and solving design problems in early concept generation. Human–Computer Interaction, 29(5-6), 516–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2014.896706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, G. A. (1998). Recognition-primed decision making. In Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions (pp. 15–30). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1v2xt08
   Google Scholar
• Klein, G. (2000). Analysis of situation awareness from critical incident reports. In Situation Awareness Analysis and Measurement (pp. 51–72). CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, G. (2008). Naturalistic decision making. Human Factors, 50(3), 456–460. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, G. A., Calderwood, R., & Macgregor, D. (1989). Critical decision method for eliciting knowledge. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 19(3), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.31053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.2190/0EW7-01WB-BKHL-QDYV
   Google Scholar
• Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/29544/
   Google Scholar
• Kopcha, T. J., Neumann, K. L., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & Pitman, E. (2020). Process over product: The next evolution of our quest for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 729–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachheb, A., & Boling, E. (2018). Design tools in practice: Instructional designers report which tools they use and why. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9165-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachheb, A., & Boling, E. (2021). The role of design judgment and reflection in instructional design. In J. K. McDonald & R. E. West (Eds.), Design for Learning: Principles, Processes, and Praxis. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/id/design_judgment
   Google Scholar
• Langer, G. M., & Colton, A. B. (1994). Reflective decision making: The cornerstone of school reform. Journal of Staff Development, 15(1), 2–7.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Loveless, A. (2011). Technology, pedagogy and education: Reflections on the accomplishment of what teachers know, do and believe in a digital age. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(3), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2011.610931
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenney, S., Boschman, F., Pieters, J., & Voogt, J. (2016). Collaborative design of technology-enhanced learning: What can we learn from teacher talk? TechTrends, 60(4), 385–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0078-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenney, S., Kali, Y., Markauskaite, L., & Voogt, J. (2015). Teacher design knowledge for technology enhanced learning: An ecological framework for investigating assets and needs. Instructional Science, 43(2), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s111251-014-9337-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, W. A. (2003). Problem solving through design. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2003(95), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.111
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Niess, M. L., &Gillow-Wiles, H. (2017). Expanding teachers’ technological pedagogical reasoning with a systems pedagogical approach. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, S. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problem-based learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 631–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00858.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pella, S. (2015). Pedagogical reasoning and action: Affordances of practice-based. Teacher Education Quarterly, 42(3), 81–101. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/teaceducquar.42.3.81
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, G. (2008). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1992.tb00546.x
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol. 5126). Basic books.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review, 69(4), 493–513. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1808698
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, J. M., & Schuette, M. K. (1988). Strengthening teachers’ reflective decision making. Journal of Staff Development, 9(3), 18–27.
   Google Scholar
• Shafto, P., Goodman, N. D., & Griffiths, T. L. (2014). A rational account of pedagogical reasoning: Teaching by, and learning from, examples. Cognitive Psychology, 71, 55–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.12.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, K. M., & Boling, E. (2009). What do we make of design? Design as a concept in educational technology. Educational Technology, 49(4), 3–17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44429817
   Google Scholar
• Starkey, L. (2010). Teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and action in the digital age. Teachers and Teaching, 16(2), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600903478433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefaniak, J., &Xu, M. (2020). Leveraging dynamic decision-making and environmental analysis to support authentic learning experiences in digital environments. Revista De Educación a Distancia (RED), 20(64). https://doi.org/10.6018/red.412171
   Google Scholar
• Stefaniak, J.,Luo, T., &Xu, M. (2021). Fostering pedagogical reasoning and dynamic decision-making practices: A conceptual framework to support learning design in a digital age. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(4), 2225–2241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09964-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Summerville, J., & Reid-Griffin, A. (2008). Technology integration and instructional design. TechTrends, 52(5), 45–51.
   Google Scholar
• Tracey, M. W. & Hutchinson, A. (2013). Developing designer identity through reflection. Educational Technology, 53(3), 28–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44430149
   Google Scholar
• Tracey, M. W., & Hutchinson, A. (2018). Reflection and professional identity development in design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 263–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9380-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge–a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A review of pedagogy related to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 235–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390400200183
   Google Scholar
• Wendell, K. B.,Wright, C. G., &Paugh, P. (2017). Reflective decision-making in elementary students’ engineering design. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(3), 356–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, M.,Yang, X., &Stefaniak, J. (2022). A design-based research study exploring pre-service teachers’ instructional design decision-making for technology integration. TechTrends, 66(6), 968–979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00785-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates, J. F., & Tschirhart, M. D. (2006). Decision-making expertise. The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance., 421–438 Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, M., Basdogan, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). A case study of the design practices and judgments of novice instructional designers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2) https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7829
   Google Scholar