How Instructors’ TPACK Developed During Emergency Remote Teaching: Evidence From Instructors in Faculties of Education

Higher education instructors tried to find best teaching ways during the pandemic. Instructors who were faced with emergency situations used various technologies to deliver their courses. In this study, an online survey was used to ask instructors about their experiences regarding their development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) during emergency remote teaching (ERT); 231 responses were received from instructors from faculties of education. The survey was a five-point Likert-type scale include the dimensions of pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technological knowledge, technological content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. Instructors rated their own non-technological knowledge (pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge) relatively higher than their knowledge including technology (technological knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological content knowledge). The findings indicate that instructors had a consistently high level of perceived knowledge in all TPACK dimensions. Regarding developments in instructors’ TPACK, several suggestions were made, including novel technologies and pedagogies specialized for ERT.


Introduction
The widespread closing of schools due to the COVID-19 outbreak shocked the educational community.
The global pandemic dramatically affected higher education institutions worldwide as campuses around the globe were forced to close their doors.Instructors had to remain at home from the spring of 2020 onward, and a temporary shift from in-person instructional delivery to an alternate delivery mode was required.
Instruction during emergency remote teaching required provision of solutions to the urgent need for online teaching via online teaching tools (Barbour et al., 2020).This situation forced instructors at higher education institutions to find the best way to effectively plan their instruction, deliver courses, and assess students' learning and their teaching (Hodges et al., 2020).This shift of instructional delivery method due to crisis circumstances has involved the use of fully remote teaching solutions for instruction or education (emergency remote teaching [ERT]).Instructors also needed to cope with organizational issues.Many adapted their courses to be delivered via a learning management system (LMS).However, some instructors came across technological and pedagogical challenges during this period (Ferri et al., 2020).Some were caught unprepared for this new form of teaching and learning (Tanak, 2019).Instructors need specific skills to implement pedagogical strategies; they therefore must adopt new technologies and content knowledge to do so.
The challenges of online learning generally originate from instructors' lack of knowledge in regard to technology use as well as their need to learn appropriate pedagogy for technology integration; engage students online via materials such as videos, images, and animations; and assess learning and instruction in an online context (Verawardina et al., 2020).Thomas and Rogers (2020) state that technological challenges result mainly from lack of access to technology, online teaching platforms, and/or the Internet.Instructors' technological knowledge includes efficient use of various digital tools in the online teaching process.In addition to technological knowledge, teachers are also required to master pedagogical and content knowledge to identify, integrate, manage, and evaluate learners' performances during teaching (Valtonen et al., 2017).Social challenges such as peer support and inadequate instructor-student interaction also exist.
In sum, instructors found themselves exposed to these challenging imperative tasks during ERT.The emergency situation required instructors be able to holistically teach, plan, organize, and continue online courses.Thus, during the COVID-19 pandemic, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) became essential to be exhibited in remote teaching to increase instructors' capacity to teach online.This study attempts to understand this complexity, considering the developments of the integration of three areas of knowledge (pedagogical, technological, and content knowledge) in the context of the TPACK framework (Koehler et al., 2013) during the pandemic.

TPACK in Online and Emergency Remote Teaching
TPACK involves an understanding of technology integration in an educational context to help align technology, pedagogy, and content (Giannakos et al., 2015;Harris & Hofer, 2009;Koehler et al., 2013), as well as the complexity of relationships among students, teachers, content, technologies, and practices (Oliver, 2011;Sang et al., 2016;Voogt et al., 2013).Using Shulman's (1986) (computers, the Internet, digital video, etc.), and pedagogical knowledge (practices, processes, strategies, procedures, and methods of teaching and learning), Koehler and Mishra (2009) define TPACK as the connections and interactions between these three types of knowledge (Figure 1).In the model, technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) includes the teacher's knowledge of technologies and their uses in teaching within appropriate pedagogy (Koehler & Mishra, 2009).
Technological content knowledge (TCK) involves understanding affordances of technologies within a subject matter to be taught (Mishra & Koehler, 2009).Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) refers to knowledge of the content to be taught and the pedagogy, including effective teaching strategies to guide instructors (Koehler & Mishra, 2009).
Previous TPACK studies involve investigations of teachers' TPACK by means of observing lesson plans (Canbazoglu Bilici et al., 2016), tasks, and TPACK surveys (Cheng, 2017;Ciptaningrum, 2017;Getenet et al., 2016;Giannakos et al., 2015).Different versions of the TPACK model have been applied to understanding both pre-service and in-service teachers' knowledge of and skills in integrating technology into teaching, which is also used in ERT (Lamminpää, 2021).
During the pandemic, instructors have needed to cope with unforeseen problems to meet students' needs.One of the biggest disruptions faced by instructors was transforming their traditional in-person teaching into remote teaching.However, they started this transformation by devising their own ways of technology integration to deliver their instruction as a result of the emergency (Arcueno et al., 2021).The participants used various LMSs and virtual classrooms as online teaching platforms during the pandemic period.The reported platforms are presented in Table 2.

Data Collection Tools
We used the technological pedagogical content knowledge scale developed by Horzum et al. (2014) to determine the TPACK of the instructors.This is a five-point Likert-type scale with the following ratings: 5 = completely agree; 4 = agree; 3 = undecided; 4 = disagree; 1 = strongly disagree.It has a reliability coefficient of 0.98.The participants' TPACK levels were interpreted according to the scores obtained from the dimensions in the scale.The TPACK scale has 7 subdimensions consisting of 51 items total: 8 items about content knowledge (PK), 7 items about pedagogical knowledge (PK), 6 items about technological knowledge (TK), 6 items about technological content knowledge (TCK), 8 items about pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), 8 items about technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK), and

Data Analysis
The TPACK scale was used to gather data.Cronbach's alpha (α) reliability coefficient of the scale for this study was 0.972.

Results
In presenting our results from the survey, first, the scores from dimensions of TPACK are described, and then relationships between the scores in the dimensions and variables are addressed.In general, instructors were found to have consistently high levels of perceived knowledge in all TPACK domains.

Technological Knowledge
The participant' perspectives regarding TK (arithmetic mean and frequencies) are shown in Table 3.The value for the scores of all TK items is relatively high, with an average value of 4.04.When the responses about this type of knowledge are examined, the level of TK required to access information got the highest score; the item about finding solutions to students' technological problems was scored lower on average than other items.

Pedagogical Knowledge
Table 4 shows the mean values of instructors' responses to PK items.The items on the subject of course management and use of teaching methods and techniques are above average at 4.58.Item 13, "I can make students evaluate each other," has a noteworthy lower-than-average score of 3.74.

1.079
Table 4 shows that the PK items have high average scores between 4.00 and 4.50.It is understood that participants' PK level is considerably higher than their TK level, with an average score of 4.32.

Content Knowledge
The descriptive statistics of the instructor's responses on CK are shown in Table 5.

Technological Content Knowledge
The descriptive statistics of each item regarding 231 participants' responses to items about TCK are provided in Table 6.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge
PCK scores are shown in Table 7.The average score for PCK items is 4.51.Survey item 35, "I can appropriately order the concepts that I will explain," has the highest score (4.60).Items 28 and 32, which point to topics such as shaping the lesson plans and appropriately choosing teaching approaches related to the course, also have higher average scores.Item 31, "I know the misconceptions that students may have about a particular subject and I teach accordingly," has the lowest average score among the PCK items (4.39).

Technological Pedagogical Knowledge
The average score is high (X̄ = 4.17) in the items related to TPK.The mean and standard deviation scores for each item are given in Table 8.

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
The average score in the TPACK dimension was 4.13.The mean scores for each item are shown in Table 9.

Relationships Among TPACK Domains
Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between each component of TPACK, which has previously been tested for reliability and normality.The results of the analysis are shown in Table 10.Table 10 demonstrates that a moderately positive relationship was found between all domains.When the scores in each domain were analysed separately, the highest correlation was found between TPK and TPACK (r = 0.875, p < 0.001), and the lowest correlation was found between PCK and TK (r = 0.311, p < 0.001).

TPACK Developments in Terms of Different Variables
The independent groups t-test was used to determine whether the TPACK levels of the instructors differed according to gender (Table 11).The test result showed that the difference among TPACK scores in terms of gender was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).However, after analysing each TPACK subdimension, we found that PK, content knowledge, and PCK values (p > 0.05) were statistically significant, and technology knowledge in terms of gender was not statistically significant.In addition, ANOVA was applied to determine whether TPACK scores differed significantly according to seniority and age (Table 12).Note.TPACK = technological pedagogical content knowledge.
In addition, ANOVA was applied to determine whether TPACK scores differed significantly by communication type (Table 13).Note.TPACK = technoloical pedagogical content knowledge.
The results showed that the average TPACK scores did not significantly differ depending on the online teaching mode communication type (synchronous, asynchronous, or both synchronous and asynchronous).

Discussion
This study investigated the instructors' TPACK development during the COVID-19 pandemic.The survey data show that while some types of TPACK knowledge was more developed, others were limited.
Data analysis shows that approximately 73% of participating instructors agreed on the positive perspectives about PK.It is remarkable that most of them agreed on their developments in CK and PCK.
These findings indicate that non-technological knowledge was positively developed; 69.2% gave positive scores in regard to TPK, 73% for TCK, and 60% for TPACK.Surprisingly, approximately 58.8% of participants believed their TK had improved during pandemic, whereas the remainder felt their skills had stayed the same.Some researchers suggest that technological knowledge levels also indicate how often teachers keep up with technological developments (Dalal et al., 2017;Holland & Piper, 2016;Koh & Chai, 2016).Some instructors may have found it difficult to search and find appropriate technological tools to deliver their courses.As Li et al. (2015) have suggested, having few opportunities to deal with technological issues might influence knowledge about integrating technology at a limited level.
In order to learn concepts appropriately, instructors need to have PK, including knowledge of different course delivery methods.Thus, instructors can use different methods to design their courses, including collaborative interactive online activities for students' effective learning (Ferdig, 2006).Because this knowledge is a prerequisite for developing TPACK, the instructor must master it (Tanak, 2019).In this study, almost all instructors reported positive experiences about developing their PK and CK.This result was unexpected.There was in fact no change in the curriculum during the pandemic period.CK includes knowledge of concepts, facts, procedures, and theories; knowledge to combine and organize ideas; and knowledge of scientific evidence and facts (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).The majority of the instructors stated that they showed particular improvement in CK.
Therefore, it is assumed that the digital materials in different formats and the contents of the material that the instructors used in their online teaching contributed to the development of their CK beyond content delivery.The fact that the instructors perceived themselves as relatively less developed in TPK, TCK, and TPACK dimensions indicates that they may not have had enough time to learn new technologies or evaluate how they would teach students with these technologies during the two-term teaching process they were exposed to during the pandemic.Another reason might result from the fact that they used their existing technological knowledge, adapting the technologies they already knew or used during their teaching in the pandemic.Hsu et al. (2013) have also suggested that instructors with good training experience use various technologies.Thus, instructors may not have considered their use of these technologies as a development as they already knew how to use them before the pandemic and didn't compare their previous use to their use in a pandemic situation.
Instructors demonstrated positive perspectives, with an average of > 4.00 in all dimensions of TPACK.
PCK had the highest score, with an average of 4.51, and TK had the lowest score, with an average of 4.04.Even though they are in different departments from faculties of education, the positive perspectives of the instructors regarding the pandemic process in terms of preparing and presenting Within the TPACK framework, the instructors' evaluations can help determine the methods and technologies that will enable students to learn effectively and use the technologies where necessary for the planning, practising, and assessment stages of teaching.In general, the development regarding the TPACK framework has been realized at a high level.
On one hand, the fact that instructors needed to rely on such assessments may have prevented them from seeking new ways to improve themselves during the pandemic.On the other hand, responses to the item "I can lead my colleagues in the selection and use of appropriate methods and technologies" scored relatively lower than the other items.Also, the instructors of faculty of education may tend to apply new ways of learning by mixing them with their existing theoretical knowledge.However, an important reason why faculty members did not make positive evaluations about leading their colleagues regarding TPACK may be because they did not have enough time to test their own TPACK levels during this period, and the results of their practices were not yet clear.
Moreover, instructors' positive evaluations of TCK and TPK may be related to their abilities to use existing online teaching technologies knowledge and newly learned technologies to teach relevant content.This can be interpreted that they used technology not only for presenting content but also for building a student-centred environment.As PCK is defined as knowledge of the material, the reasons for choosing the material, and plans to teach the material to students (Dunlosky et al., 2013;Magnusson et al., 1999), in this dimension, there is no direct interaction with technology.Thus, the instructors' previous experiences can be reflected in ERT.At this point, it can be evaluated that during the pandemic period, instructors were able to use the teaching strategies they had already determined regarding many types of knowledge.Due to the static nature of CK, it was likely not easy for the instructors to develop CK in the context of the pandemic.Mourlam et al. (2021) have stated that prior knowledge (PCK) may not adequately meet the needs of a new context; however, instructors who responded to this study may have used available digital materials instead of creating their own digital content to quickly deliver lectures in some cases.Therefore, either the instructors' level of PCK at the time was sufficient to present the relevant content, or it was reconstructed in a positive way during the pandemic.When the content is mostly that of an operational and practising nature, instructors might use various Web 2.0 tools to deliver it.However, when the content is more static and theoretical, the tools for delivering this kind of content are limited.Thus, the type of content may have indirectly affected participants' use of various technologies used to present the content.
In many of the TPACK studies, the subdimensions somehow affect each other or may be a prerequisite for each other.Our findings accord with previous studies in that all components have a moderately positive relationship with each other (Tseng et al., 2022).When the components are examined separately, it can be said that the least significant relationship is between PCK and TK and that teaching  (Akturk & Saka Ozturk, 2019) or negatively (Karakaya & Avgin, 2016) with TPACK.In this study, it is noteworthy that that the seniority of the instructors did not result in significant differences for any component of TPACK.As Archambault and Crippen (2009) have suggested, instructors without online teaching experience were in the process of learning how to teach online.Instructors continued to find what worked best and were determined to keep trying different methods and strategies to do so.One reason for this may be that the higher education institutions' set principles to be followed for the pandemic period improved the instructors' TPACK to some extent.The institutions used different software, such as Blackboard, BigBlueButton, Cisco, and some other generic tools.In addition, there was no significant difference between the TPACK components among the instructors who delivered courses synchronously or asynchronously.In this framework, many institutions determine the LMS and live course environment to be used and developed as a framework for digital materials to be used.Therefore, instructors with low TPACK knowledge may not need to improve themselves, and those who are already at a high level may not need extra development to conduct lessons as there are predetermined frameworks and tools for online teaching.
Some prior studies have focused on the dimension of interaction in online learning and found that instructors should develop knowledge to enhance interaction (Evans & Myrick, 2015;Hew & Cheung, 2014).In this study, it is noteworthy that participants highly and positively evaluated items about technologies that would provide a better understanding of the subject within the framework of TPACK knowledge, the use of technologies suitable for the teaching method, and technologies that would enable students to study more willingly.Considering the interaction between students' understanding and motivation, the positive answers given to these items may also be related to the instructors' thinking that they had made progress in online teaching.These findings concur with results of previous work (Breslow et al., 2013;Koutropoulos et al., 2012;Liu et al., 2005) emphasizing the creation of a supportive online learning environment.Instructors might have mastered basic skills to use an online platform, which mainly focus on teaching knowledge about using all kinds of tools to strengthen instructor-student interactions in order to carry about more diverse online activities (Li et al., 2015).
However, explanations for these different findings might be related to the fact that instructors carried out online teaching freely and personally in the previous studies, while in this study, the pandemic background made teachers to find quick solutions.
Overall, the improvements in TK, CK, PK, and TPK, TCK, and PCK during the pandemic are positively evaluated by the instructors.Positive average mean scores in these dimensions indicate that instructors' knowledge is high related to their abilities to use a variety of teaching strategies, to create materials, and to plan the scope and sequence of topics within their course.This finding of the present study is consistent with the findings reported by Elçi (2020) that the compulsory and urgent transition process does not seem to be much different than other transitions.In this study, among the important reasons for this finding are the results of the instructors' use of online tools, organizational factors, such as the motivation to be successful, as well as students' motivation for learning.Researchers suggest that the instructors became their own champions by developing their TPACK and practice in a limited time (Can & Silman-Karanfil, 2022).
This study helps explain instructors' experiences of a transition in their traditional classrooms to a novel online setting for which they were likely not prepared (Mourlam et al., 2021).An obvious limitation is that the sample size was relatively small.Deeper investigation about the target sample can be done by linking instructors' self-reported knowledge to their recent experiences in the pandemic period.

Figure 2
Figure 2 illustrates the mean and standard deviation scores of the TPACK components regarding technology, pedagogy, and content both solely and combined.
online learning, using technologies for online teaching, and conducting their lessons in this way might result from the fact that they recognized online teaching during the pandemic as an opportunity to deliver teaching in a different way.Different institutions or departments likely had different training.However, instructors' evaluations of themselves as capable of conducting their courses online, even if they did not receive such training, may have resulted from the organizational principles, the internal motivation of the instructors, and the demands of the students.In addition, inservice training that instructors can quickly experience occur on platforms such as Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, Moodle, and Blackboard, and institutions' technological support for online teaching may have played a role in their positive evaluations.

Instructors' TPACK Developed During Emergency Remote Teaching: Evidence From Instructors in Faculties of Education Çakıroğlu, Aydın, Bahadır Kurtoğlu, and Cebeci 164 technological knowledge
pedagogical content knowledge framework and combining the relationships between content knowledge (subject matter),

Table 2
Online Teaching Platforms Used by Institutions During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Table 3
Technological Knowledge Scores

Table 4
Pedagogical Knowledge Scores

Table 5
Content Knowledge Scores

TPACK Developed During Emergency Remote Teaching: Evidence From Instructors in Faculties of Education Çakıroğlu, Aydın, Bahadır Kurtoğlu, and Cebeci 171
All items regarding content knowledge were scored very high: above 4.50.The average of the items about being aware of developments in one's field, knowing sources and concepts, and classifying information was 4.59, which is considerably high compared with all other knowledge domains.

Table 6
Technological Content Knowledge Scores

Table 7
Pedagogical Content Knowledge Scores

Table 8
Technological Pedagogical Knowledge ScoresThe average scores of all items in the TPK dimension are similar.Items 40 and 42, which focus on rich learning environments and using technology, both have an above-average score of 4.26.However, item 38, which expresses how these technologies and environments will affect each other, has the lowest average score (4.13).

Table 9
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Scores

Table 11 TPACK
Scores in Terms of Gender

Table 12 TPACK
Scores in Terms of Seniority and Age

Table 13 TPACK
Scores in Terms of Communication Type

How Instructors' TPACK Developed During Emergency Remote Teaching: Evidence From Instructors in Faculties of Education Çakıroğlu, Aydın, Bahadır Kurtoğlu, and Cebeci 182 content
does not change much with new technologies.In some studies, instructors' seniority is shown to correlate positively