college & university
music education (Bauer, 2013; Campanini, 2023; Dammers, 2019; Dorfman, 2017; Te- jada & Thayer-Morel, 2019). As Dammers (2019) explains, “The TPACK framework provides a system for situating teach- ers’ technology knowledge within their teaching practice” (p. 367). Thus, in the context of music teaching and learning, the framework helps educators to evaluate to what extent their own practice synthesizes a knowledge of technology, content and pedagogy. In my songwriting class, here’s how some of these examples emerged: See Figure 1 below.
Technological Knowledge: I have ex- perience recording voiceover work with Audacity.
Content Knowledge: I have experience writing songs.
Pedagogical Knowledge: I have experi- ence facilitating a constructivist learning environment.
Technological Content Knowledge: Us- ing my experience recording voiceover work with Audacity and writing songs, I wrote songs using Audacity.
Technological Pedagogical Knowledge: Using my experience recording voiceover work with Audacity, I facilitated a con- structivist learning environment where stu- dents learned how to record with Audacity.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Using my experience with writing songs, I facili- tated a constructivist learning environment where students learned how to write a song.
Figure 1
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Using my experiences writing songs and recording them on Audacity, I facilitated a constructivist learning environ- ment where students learned how to write and record their songs with Audacity.
Reflect on Appropriateness, Equitability and Sustainability
While TPACK provided me with a way to combine technology, pedagogy and con- tent, my later reflections led me to make changes. For example, while the lesson provided students with an opportunity to record their songs, it did not provide them with ways to include modes of musicking, such as loops, MIDI or other software- based instruments. The software was free, but it was not available for download on a phone, which was limiting for some stu- dents who did not have a laptop. Finally, the software projects were all created on separate devices, which meant that students often preferred to record alone rather than staying in the same room to record, thus diminishing the sustainability of the coop- erative learning environment. After taking these three ideas into account, I switched to BandLab the next year. Like Audacity, BandLab allows students to record, and the software is free. However, what makes BandLab different is that it is cloud-based (no download required), it is accessible via internet browsers and/or a phone app, it includes a library of loops and MIDI instruments, and it allows for collaborative work in real time (e.g., while one person is recording from one device, another can record into the same project from another device), thus enhancing a collaborative learning environment.
Ask, Implement, Reflect
Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by
tpack.org
Wisconsin School Musician
As of this writing, the TPACK is the most commonly referenced ICT framework used in both music education and in the 2023 UNESCO report. In this article, I have contended that the TPACK framework is potentially beneficial when using technol- ogy if it is positioned within the sequence of asking questions, implementing the framework, and reflecting on appropri- ateness, equitability and sustainability. Moreover, if we agree with Dammer that
“music education programs need to de- velop student competencies with current technologies” (p. 374), then I would argue that a framework-based approach will provide music teachers and learners with a way to engage with technology both for today and for years to come. Technological competencies may change, but our need to cherish our humanity remains.
References:
Bauer, W. I. (2013). “The Acquisition of Musical Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge.” Journal of Music Teacher Education, 22(2), 51–64.
Campanini, A. (2023). “A Place for TPACK in Popular Music Education: A Review of Existing Literature.” Journal of Popular Music Education. https://doi. org/10.1386/jpme_00108_1
Dammers, R. (2019). “The Role of Technology in Music Teacher Education.” In C. Conway, K. Pellegrino, A. M. Stanley, & C. West (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Preservice Music Teacher Education in the United States (pp. 365–376). Oxford University Press.
Dorfman, J. (2017). “Traditions and Ways Forward in the United States.” In S. A. Ruthman, & R. Mantie (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Technology and Music Education (pp. 323–538). Oxford University Press.
Tejada, J., & Morel, T. T. (2019). “Design and Validation of a Music Technology Course for Initial Music Teacher Education Based on the TPACK Framework and the Project-Based Learning Approach.” Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 12(3), 225– 246.
UNESCO (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in Education – A Tool on Whose Terms? Paris, UNESCO. https://doi. org/10.54676/UZQV8501
David Potter is the assistant professor/ coordinator of music education at UW-Superior.
Email:
dpotter1@uwsuper.edu 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62
