SIGNIFICANCE OF TPACK AND TEACHER’S ROLE IN PREVENTING ISSUES IN USING
SamSIFL, Master of Foreign Languages and Literature (English)
this article deals with conveying the peculiarities of implementing technologies in the
classroom. On the top of that teacher’s role in avoiding challenges on utilizing gadgets in teaching process.
Forming TPACK and teacher’s accomplishments in the only condition and enhancing the quality of lessons.
TPACK, technology, teachers, PCK, classroom, pedagogy, schedule.
Technology can be used across the curriculum or to supplement a specific lesson. Variations in
technology utilization imply significant disparities in instructors' ideas about technology's utility in the
educational process. “Teachers were able to adopt technology integration strategies that closely fit with their
views,” Ertmer discovered.
The teachers’ thought about how pupils learn has a big effect on these ideas. If the teacher believes
that explicit teacher instruction is the most important factor in student learning, classroom activities will be
guided by the classic chalk-and-talk strategy. Less incorporation of computer-based technologies in schools
has been linked to more conventional educational attitudes
Teachers must undergo a paradigm change from the teacher-centered classroom to the student-
centered classroom in order to effectively employ technology. In this case, educational technologies are
likely to play a more important role since they allow for active student learning activities in which the
instructor serves as a facilitator of the learning process. According to Ravitz, Becker, and Wong, challenges
in satisfying individual student needs, balancing numerous objectives, and responding to external factors and
expectations hampered teacher adoption of constructivist learning settings [6, 45].
Teachers in these scenarios will thus utilize technology more frequently if they think it is closely
related to their specific curriculum areas and/or grade levels, allowing them to more easily fulfill their
The growing adoption of constructivist learning philosophies, along with intelligent learning technology,
provides new opportunities to address individual student differences, which is one of the emphasis of current
educational pedagogy. New technologies, on the other hand, should include student performance
visualization tools that allow teachers to quickly understand student progress on their instructional
objectives. Although technology may be a great tool for improving learning, the teacher remains the most
important component in student achievement and must be kept up to date on student development in order to
intervene directly with his or her pupils.
Teacher Resistance to Classroom Technology
Exploring internet teacher forums reveals that incorporating new technology into lesson planning may be a
tough process. Many teachers are pleased with their present lesson plans, which is perhaps the most
prevalent reason given by teachers for not actively adopting new technology. Classroom instruction is driven
by a teacher's desire for their pupils to learn successfully, and if present lesson plans fulfill the needs of
students, there is little reason for the instructor to change them. Educators spend many hours developing
lesson plans that will keep students' attention and make learning fun. Revising lesson plans requires many
hours of additional work for the instructor, which is difficult given the teacher's already hectic schedule.
Simply rewriting lesson plans can take a long time, but changing lesson plans to integrate technology
is much more time consuming. When implementing new classroom technology, educators confront what is
known as the "double innovation" challenge. Double innovation effectively offers another degree of
preparation for instructors to go through. Before selecting how to integrate technology with classroom
objectives and curriculum, the teacher must first grasp the technology well enough to use it in a classroom
context. While educational tools are becoming more user-friendly, the twofold innovation problem requires
more planning time. A teacher's time is incredibly important, therefore it's no wonder that one of the most
often stated impediments to incorporating new technology is time.
Clearly, there are various reasons for a teacher's aversion to new technology in the classroom, but if
instructors decide to include technology into their lesson plans, they must first pick which technologies to
employ. There are many of internet technologies and tutoring services available.
There are several systems and learning environments available to instructors, making it difficult to
determine which ones will promote student learning and fit with curriculum. Even if instructors discover a
technology that they feel would benefit their kids, it is not always obvious whether or not these programs are
genuinely helpful. Many technologies promise to increase students' academic and cognitive abilities, yet
these claims might be incorrect and are frequently produced for marketing purposes [1, 34]. Verifying the
veracity of these claims adds another load to the educator, who may not have time to hunt for classroom
devices in the first place. As a result, technological decisions are frequently determined by school or district
officials without involvement from teachers. In some respects, this can be beneficial since it saves teachers
the time and effort necessary to evaluate technologies, but it can also have a detrimental influence on an
instructor's opinion of the technology. Teachers may see new technology as an imposition, while in fact it
may improve their teaching experience smoother and more pleasurable.
Because growing acceptance of classroom technology on a wide scale will certainly occur over time,
we propose several measures that educators and researchers alike may use to boost technology integration
now. First and foremost, teachers must have a say in the technology they utilize in their classrooms.
Teaching is a profoundly personal experience, and when educators believe they have lost the capacity to
teach in the way that is most comfortable for them, it may be upsetting and disappointing. No one
educational technology will be ideal for every teacher, and educators should be permitted to choose the
technology with which they are most comfortable. Teachers will retain a vital feeling of classroom control if
they are given more flexibility of choice [3, 379].
While the value of teacher autonomy in educational technology choices cannot be overstated, it does
present the task of filtering through a wide number of accessible technologies. A second strategy for
increasing classroom technology acceptability is to urge for better organizing of existing technologies. While
a normal internet search for educational technology tools yields hundreds of results, there are very few places
that adequately categorize and analyze accessible technologies. Teachers should have easy access to properly
proven technology within a certain learning subject. Indeed, this book might be a great resource for teachers
seeking for such technology. A better arrangement of scientifically tested instructional tools will save time
and reduce the stress on the instructor.
The importance of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in effective teaching has long been
debated. Effective educators must not only be subject specialists, but also understand how to harness the
affordances of various pedagogies to address certain content issues. With the introduction of various unique
technologies over the last few decades, educators now have a plethora of tools to use to improve the
effectiveness of their teaching [4, 1020]. Although the potential benefits are obvious, the sheer number of
conceivable combinations of technology and pedagogies for various activities and students is bewildering.
Educators who are proficient in the three main knowledge kinds will undoubtedly be proficient in the
combined types. However, specialized expertise exists in the merged fields. TPACK necessitates more than
knowledge of good pedagogical approaches and familiarity with technology; it necessitates an awareness of
how specific technologies may assist specific educational tactics or techniques.
For example, when choosing a social networking site for collaborative learning, the affordances of
each platform must be considered (e.g., Twitter may promote a large amount of messages to be sent, but
tracking threads of conversations amongst several students would be challenging). Furthermore,
technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) necessitates a grasp of how technology might
complement pedagogies in certain disciplines.
How can the TPACK framework help? It has been conceived in several ways, but the most pertinent
to our current issue is that it is frequently considered as the entire collection of knowledge required to
educate with technology. Thus, promoting these knowledge domains is a goal; clearly, most of these
knowledge domains are already extensively stressed throughout teacher training and professional growth,
understanding the topic in which a teacher specializes. However, the intersections of technology and
content/pedagogical knowledge are more specialized and less typically taught. Consider the example of
writing teaching. Successful writing teachers teach writing approaches and strategies (requiring content
knowledge) through purposeful writing practice and feedback (requiring pedagogical knowledge), which is
an example of pedagogical content knowledge.
Teachers, educational technology specialists, school administrators, researchers, and educational
software staff will need to work together on a continuous basis to integrate technology in the classroom.
Fortunately, the advantages for schools, teachers, and students will be enormous. To prevent problems that
teachers confronted by there are some possible ways to eliminate them. Provide teacher training that
emphasizes constructivism and student-centered education; direct professional development efforts toward
those that emphasize the use of technology in instruction rather than administrative tasks; include
visualization tools in student tracking technologies that allow teachers to easily interpret student progress;
include teachers in decision-making when adopting new technologies; and provide teachers with training
Adams, M., & Burns, M. (1999). Connecting student learning and technology. Austin, TX:
Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., and Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in U.S.
Public Schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Mandinach, E. B., & Cline, H. F. (2000). It won’t happen soon: Practical, curricular, and
methodological problems in implementing technology-based constructivist approaches in
classrooms. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools. No more walls (pp. 377- 395).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108,
Rakes, G. C., & Casey, H. B. (2002). An analysis of teacher concerns toward instructional
technology. International Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1)
Ravitz, J. L., Becker, H. J., & Wong, Y. T. (2000). Constructivist-compatible beliefs and
practices among U.S. teachers (Report no. 4). Irvine, CA: Teaching, learning and computing
KUSHBAKOVA, M., Zarina, R. U. Z. I. M. U. R. O. D. O. V. A., & Shahram, A. S. L. O. N. O.
V. (2020). Innovative Methods and Ways to Teach and Learn Foreign Language. ECLSS Online
Ахмеджанова, Н., & Аслонов, Ш. (2020). Семантические типы предикатов и фазовая
членимость глагольного действия. Интернаука,(12-1), 27-29.
Yusuf, A. (2022). LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
GASTRONOMIC TERMS IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES. ILM-FAN
TARAQQIYOTIDA ZAMONAVIY QARASHLAR: MUAMMO VA YECHIMLAR, 197-199.
Eshchanov, B., Odilov, B., & Khakimov, O. (2019, October). Residential electricity demand in
Energy Resources of the Caspian and Central Asia: Regional and Global
Outlook, 4th IAEE Eurasian Conference, October 17-19, 2019
. International Association for
sciences, 2(Special Issue 24), 518-531.
XORIJIY TILLARNI O'QITISHDA INNOVATSION TEXNOLOGIYALARNI QO’LLASH
Mamayakubova Shaxlo SamSIFL teacher,
Xushvaqtova Shoxsanam SamSIFL student,
Shodmonova Klara SamSIFL student
Ushbu maqolada Chet tillarini o'qitishda zamonaviy texnologiyalardan foydalanish
o'qitishni qiziqarli qilish va takomillashtirish nuqtai nazaridan samaraliroq qilish kabi ko'plab imkoniyatlarni
taqdim etadi. Bundan tashqari, ushbu zamonaviy texnologik vosita o'quvchilarni qiziqishlariga qarab jalb
qilish va o'rganishga yordam beradigan fikrlar yotitilgan.
Internet, audio va video majmualar, multimedia, o'quv kompyuter dasturlari, axborot
texnologiyalari, oliy o'quv, yurtlari, Chet tillarini o'qitishda, zamonaviy texnologiyalar.
Zamonaviy shart-sharoitlar nafaqat chet tillarini o'qitishda yangi texnologiyalardan foydalanishni,
balki o'qitish metodikasidagi o'zgarishlarni va o'qituvchidan chet tillarini o'rganish jarayonida eng yangi
innovatsion texnologiyalarni joriy etishni talab qiladi. Oliy o'quv yurtlari talabalarning mustaqilligi,
moslashuvchanligi, tanqidiy fikrlashini shakllantirishga yo'naltirilgan o'qitishning faol usullaridan
foydalanishni afzal ko'rishadi. Talabalarning ijodiy qobiliyatini, qiziqishlarini, ko'nikmalarini va boshqa
aqliy xususiyatlarini rivojlantiradigan bilim faoliyatining eng kuchli manbai bu innovatsion
texnologiyalardir. Innovatsion ta'lim texnologiyalari, avvalo, kompyuterlashtirilgan ta'lim bilan chambarchas
bog'liq bo'lgan axborot-kommunikatsiya texnologiyalaridir. Innovatsion texnologiyalarni qo'llashning asosiy
muammolari kompyuterlarni o'qitish dasturlarining tarkibi, ularning mazmuni va Web-muhitni maqbul