{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023696682464454975, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00315955766192733, 'mean_word_length': 5.703703703703703, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Supporting pre-service teachers in designing technology-infused lesson plans

The present study compared the effectiveness of two types of just-in-time support for lesson planning. Both types contained the same technological information but differed regarding pedagogical and content information. The first type presented this information separately i.e., separate support; the second type presented this information in an integrated way i.e., integrated support. In an experimental design pre-service biology teachers received either the integrated support n=26 or separate support n=27. They were instructed to create a technology-infused lesson plan and justify their design decisions. Results showed that pre-service teachers who used the integrated support had more integrated pedagogical and content-related justifications and higher quality lesson plans than the group who received separate support. Both groups had few technology-related justifications, and technology integration was of low quality. These findings confirm the alleged superiority of integrated support over separate support, and suggest that additional guidance is needed for pre-service teachers to fully integrate technological, pedagogical and content information during lesson planning.