{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022006713912719134, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005967922417008579, 'mean_word_length': 5.738693467336684, '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}}
Science Teacher Pedagogical Design Capacity with Technology in an Integrated Teacher Preparation Program

This study unpacks a set of practices that impact preservice science teachers (PST) ability to incorporate technological resources into their planning in ways that support instructional episodes aligned with the goals and demands of an integrated teacher preparation program. Early results suggest that PSTs are able to develop the ability to plan high demand tasks using technology, pedagogical design capacity for technology, after instructional interventions in their teaching methods course. Major Issues and Potential Significance With more and more teachers turning to non-traditional curriculum materials, such as online simulations, blogs, electronic readings, math games, ...etc., it is important for school administrators and teacher educators to understand how the technological resources teachers find and utilize are impacting the instructional episodes that teachers craft. This is especially true of new or beginning teachers. As others have detailed beginning or inexperienced teachers have a tendency to offload instruction from curriculum materials (Brown & Edelson, 2003; Forbes & Davis, 2010). However, if the materials they do offload to do not align with the instructional practices promoted by district administrators, the possibility for drift from the intended type of instruction are highly likely (Brown, 2009). This project first asks is it possible to train preservice science teachers (PST) to identify the affordances and constraints of technologies for instructional purposes? Second, if this is possible, what impact does this knowledge have on PST’ instructional design choices? In other words, are PST’ design choices resulting in instructional episodes that fit the mold of instruction being presented by their teacher preparation program? Further, this work contributes to our knowledge of how we prepare PST to utilize technology in three ways. First, by developing an understanding of students' ability to evaluate teaching technologies’ instructional constraints and affordances we can better develop opportunities for them to practice working with technology. Second, by developing an understanding of how PST design instructional episodes around technology and how those decisions relate to the constraints and affordances of the technology, we hope to lean how to better support this design process. Finally, this work allows for the development of a way for researchers to code and identify students pedagogical design capacity (Brown, 2009) related to technology, further illuminating how teachers’ instructional planning unfolds.