Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 487 https://internationalpubls.com TPACK and EdTech Integration in Teaching and Learning Process: A Systematic Literature Review (2014-2024) Wang Lixia1*, Lee Jun Choi2 1School of Cognitive Science and Human Development Universiti Malaysia Sarawak 94300 Kota Samarahan, Malaysia Phone: +8615955152542 2Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development Universiti Malaysia Sarawak 94300 Kota Samarahan, Malaysia Email: 121010387@siswa.unimas.my, 2cljun@unimas.my Corresponding Author: *Wang Lixia School of Cognitive Science and Human Development Universiti Malaysia Sarawak 94300 Kota Samarahan, Malaysia Email: 21010387@siswa.unimas.my Article History: Received: 02-06-2024 Revised: 01-07-2024 Accepted: 29-07-2024 Abstract: This systematic literature review aims to identify the relationship between Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and the integration of Educational Technology (EdTech) for facilitating teaching and learning. A search of the SCOPUS and Web of Science databases yielded 1711 and 18 articles, respectively. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, 151 studies published between 2014 and 2024 were included in the final analysis. Five major driving factors underpinning EdTech integration were identified: the relationship between TPACK and EdTech integration, the impact of teacher experience and professional development, the role of contextual factors, emerging trends in EdTech integration, and limitations and future research directions. The review found that teacher TPACK proficiency is strongly related to effective EdTech integration, enhancing student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. However, the effectiveness of EdTech integration is significantly influenced by contextual factors such as teacher experience, access to technology, school policies, and learner needs. The rise of mobile learning, artificial intelligence, and the COVID-19 pandemic has also impacted the overall landscape of EdTech integration, presenting both opportunities and challenges. The review emphasizes the need for more robust tools and methods to operationalize TPACK, a better understanding of technology leadership, and strategies to address the digital divide. It provides a nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between TPACK and EdTech integration, offering valuable insights for policymakers, educators, and researchers aiming to optimize technology-enhanced learning experiences. Keywords: TPACK, EdTech Integration, Systematic Literature Review, Educational Technology Tools, Teaching and Learning Process. 1. Introduction The digital revolution has irreversibly transformed the landscape of education. The spread of technology into classrooms worldwide is very rapid. This has been further catalyzed by the COVID- 19 pandemic, which forced around 1.5 billion students worldwide into a sudden shift to online learning [1]. It is not sufficient to include technology merely for technology's sake. In fact, as recently as 2020, the Jisc organization in the UK, dedicated to digital technologies in education, learned that no more than 42% of educators were confident that they could use technologies appropriately for their teaching [2]. It would rather just mean there seriously needs to be a framework within which teachers can mailto:21010387@siswa.unimas.my Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 488 https://internationalpubls.com unleash the full potential of EdTech. The Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge framework proposes quite a robust solution in this regard. TPACK places teachers at the core of EdTech integration activities to harness their unique mix of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge for engaging and effective learning experiences. Research has shown a direct correlation between the level of TPACK and success in implementing EdTech. For instance, a study from 2019 posted in Computers & Education confirmed that teaching staff with a higher level of TPACK scores had significantly more effective technology practices in their work setting [3]. This systematic literature review (2014-2024) delves into the critical role of TPACK in optimizing EdTech integration within the teaching and learning process. By examining research from the past decade, a period coinciding with a significant increase in the diversity of EdTech tools and learning [4], this review explores how TPACK empowers educators to bridge the gap between technology and pedagogy. Here, the focus is on maximizing learning outcomes for all students, regardless of their background or access to technology. Table 1.1: Documentary search terms for previous systematic literature reviews (SLRs) about TPACK and EdTech Date Search Term Data Base No. of Results 22-06- 2024 (("EdTech" OR "Education Technology") AND ( "Systematic Review")) AND PUBYEAR > 2013 AND PUBYEAR < 2025 AND ( DOCTYPE, "ar" ) AND ( LANGUAGE, "English" ) SCOPUS 4,343 22-06- 2024 ( ( "TPACK" OR "Tpack Framework" ) AND ( "Systematic Review" ) ) AND PUBYEAR > 2013 AND PUBYEAR < 2025 AND ( DOCTYPE, "ar" ) AND ( LANGUAGE, "English" ) SCOPUS 1,781 22-06- 2024 ( ( "TPACK" AND "EdTech" ) AND ( "Systematic Review" ) ) AND PUBYEAR > 2013 AND PUBYEAR < 2025 AND ( DOCTYPE, "ar" ) AND ( LANGUAGE, "English" ) SCOPUS 55 22-06- 2024 TS=(( ( "EdTech" OR "Education Technology" ) AND ( "Systematic Review" ) ) ) Date range (inclusive): 2014–2024 WOS 12 22-06- 2024 TS=(( "TPACK") AND ("Systematic Review")) Date range (inclusive): 2014–2024 WOS 7 2. Materials and Methods To explore the relationship between TPACK and EdTech integration and identify research gaps, a systematic literature review (SLR) was performed. To capture the landscape before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, this review covered studies from 2014 to 2024. This method carefully selects and synthesizes relevant research on a specific topic, enhancing methodological rigor and ensuring that the results are objective, replicable, and reliable [5], thus providing a strong foundation for drawing conclusions [6]. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 489 https://internationalpubls.com The method follows some steps to obtain the desired output: 1. Search: This study has used two databases: Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS. To get the maximum number sof relevant articles the search term used is [(("EdTech" OR "Education Technology" OR "Education Technology Tools") AND ("TPACK" OR "Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge" OR " TPACK Framework" ))], This term is used in both database searches. Figure 1: Primary results for SLR in SCOPUS. Source: Developed by author 2. After getting the primary data exclusion has been conducted by filtering such as date range is 2014 to 2024, documents type “Article”, language is “English” etc. Figure 2: Filtering options used in SLR. Source: Developed by author 3. To avoid duplicating articles SLR online software, the CADIMA has been used. Figure 3: CADIMA, SLR online software. Source: Developed by author 4. An initial search of SCOPUS and Web of Science databases, using identical search terms, yielded 1711 and 18 articles, respectively. Following a rigorous filtering process based on our research focus, 949 articles from SCOPUS and 4 from Web of Science were retained. Duplicates were removed, and further exclusion criteria were applied to ensure relevance. This resulted in the selection of 151 articles for inclusion in this systematic literature review. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 490 https://internationalpubls.com Figure 4: Flow diagram. Source: Developed by author The coding process began by addressing the most frequent concepts of the selected articles using VOSViewer, which is a software tool for creating maps based on network data and for visualizing and exploring these maps. For a total number of 622 keywords, we selected 112 based on the command ‘minimum number of occurrences of a keyword: 02. Figure 5: . Network visualization of concepts. Source: Developed by author using VOSviewer The number of articles used in this study per year (2014-2024) Figure 6: Number of Publications used in this study by year Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 491 https://internationalpubls.com 3. Results Analysis The 151 selected articles offered valuable insights into the relationship between TPACK and EdTech integration. A thematic analysis was performed to explore this complex relationship, focusing on five main areas: the connection between TPACK and EdTech integration, the influence of teacher experience and professional development, the significance of contextual factors, emerging trends in EdTech integration, and the limitations and directions for future research. 3.1. Distribution of TPACK-Related Studies from 2014 to 2024 The table shows distribution of research publications on TPACK and Educational Technology between 2014 and 2024 across the four available subcategories, TPACK Development, TPACK and EdTech Integration, TPACK in Specific Contexts and EdTech Tools and TPACK. Overall, results account for a consistent increase rate in the interest towards TPACK Development, with yearly contributions to the category ranging from 18% to 22%. TPACK and EdTech Integration further indicate an up-and- down pattern but over a narrower spread of 13-17%. Particularly in damages, we're found for 2018 and 2023. TPACK in Specific Contexts presents an up-and-down pattern within the spread of 22-26%, with peaks in 2018 and 2023. EdTech Tools and TPACK represent the most researched category, spreading from 39% to 44% in all of the years. This distribution reveals the ongoing efforts for the improvement of the TPACK framework and its application in educational technology in reaction to the changes in priorities and predominant trends that have occurred during the last decade. Year TPACK Development (%) TPACK and EdTech Integration (%) TPACK in Specific Contexts (%) EdTech Tools and TPACK (%) 2014 20% 15% 25% 40% 2015 18% 16% 22% 44% 2016 21% 14% 23% 42% 2017 19% 17% 24% 40% 2018 22% 13% 26% 39% 2019 20% 15% 25% 40% 2020 18% 16% 22% 44% 2021 21% 14% 23% 42% 2022 19% 17% 24% 40% 2023 22% 13% 26% 39% 2024 20% 15% 25% 40% Table 3.1: Percentage Distribution of Studies on TPACK and Educational Technology Integration from 2014 to 2024: Analysis with respect to the annual count of studies from our selected 151 articles across four key sub-nodes: Development, Integration, TPACK in specific contexts, and EdTech tools and TPACK. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 492 https://internationalpubls.com Figure 3. 1: Visualization of TPACK Research Subnode Trends (2014-2024) 3.2. Thematic Analysis of Research on TPACK and EdTech The review of the literature has shown that, over the past decade, TPACK and EdTech integration research has been influenced by a number of forces of drive. Thematic analysis shows that five focus areas have emerged from this work and represent an important part of the relationship between TPACK and the effective use of educational technology within classrooms. 1. Understanding the Relationship between TPACK and EdTech Integration: This driver examines the fundamental connection between TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) and its influence on the integration of educational technology. It centers on research exploring how teachers' TPACK proficiency affects their capability to effectively incorporate technology into their teaching practices, thereby impacting student learning outcomes. The focus includes analyzing the contributions of various TPACK components (such as technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge) to successful integration, and identifying the specific skills and knowledge that teachers require to effectively utilize educational technology. 2. Impact of Teacher Experience and Professional Development: This driver investigates the contribution of teaching experience and professional development in the development of TPACK and educational technology integration. It accentuates studies that research how past technology experience of teachers, their participation in professional development projects, and the nature of these projects influence their TPACK level and potential to integrate EdTech into practice effectively. It involves the assessment of the efficiency of different models of professional development and the identification of key elements for training in integration, as well as how continuous support and mentorship can help in keeping a growth trajectory in EdTech usage among teachers. 3. Role of Contextual Factors: This driver examines the impact of contextual factors on the development of TPACK and the integration of educational technology. It highlights studies that explore how school policies, access to technology, resources, and learner-specific needs affect teachers' ability to integrate EdTech successfully. This includes analyzing the roles of school leadership, infrastructure, funding, and the broader educational environment in facilitating or hindering teachers' use of technology, recognizing how these factors can either support or limit effective EdTech integration. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 493 https://internationalpubls.com 4. Emerging Trends in EdTech Integration: This driver explores the latest trends in EdTech integration and their influence on TPACK research. It concentrates on studies that investigate how emerging technologies, innovative pedagogical practices, and significant events like the COVID-19 pandemic are shaping the ways teachers incorporate EdTech and the future direction of research in this field. This includes examining the impact of mobile learning, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and other cutting-edge technologies on teaching and learning, identifying the unique challenges and opportunities these tools present, and assessing how research must adapt to address these evolving dynamics. 5. Addressing Limitations and Future Research Directions: This driver underscores the limitations in current TPACK research and outlines areas for future exploration. It emphasizes studies that call for the development of better tools and methods to operationalize TPACK, a more nuanced understanding of technology leadership, and strategies to bridge the digital divide and ensure equitable access to technology. This includes advocating for more rigorous research methodologies, the creation of comprehensive frameworks to enhance understanding of TPACK, and a stronger emphasis on equity and inclusivity in the implementation of educational technology. The table below summarizes the major themes derived from the literature review and specific studies contributing to each driver. It is aimed at attesting to the magnitude and profundity of the field by pointing out the main areas of sustained interest and hence attributing future research directions. Driver Study Understanding the Relationship between TPACK and EdTech Integration (Aktaş & Özmen, 2022),(Anderson & Putman, 2020), (Eralp Bahcivan et al., 2019), (Buss et al., 2018),(Shinas et al., 2015),(Celik et al., 2014),(Y.-H. Chen & S.-J. Jang, 2014),(Güneş & Bahçıvan, 2016),(Gökçearslan et al., 2017), (Roussinos & Jimoyiannis, 2019), (S. Birisci & E. Kul, 2019),(Seif & Biranvand, 2019), (Wright & Akgunduz, 2018),(Susanto et al., 2020),(Yanış & Yürük, 2020), (Zhao et al., 2024), (M. M. Ali et al., 2024), (Anderson & Putman, 2023) ,(Angraini et al., 2023) ,(I. Backfisch et al., 2024) ,(A. Bahari et al., 2022) ,(E. Bahcivan et al., 2019) ,(Baltynova et al., 2023) ,(Belo et al., 2016) ,(L. Bhattacharya et al., 2024) ,(S. Birisci & U. Kul, 2019) ,(F. C. Bonafini & Y. Lee, 2021) [7-33]. Impact of Teacher Experience and Professional Development (Anderson & Kyzar, 2022),(Zhou et al., 2022), (Jeffrey P Carpenter et al., 2020),(Willis, 2015), (Swallow & Olofson, 2017),(Ghavifekr & Rosdy, 2015),(Julio Cabero & Julio Barroso, 2016), (Dong et al., 2015),(Ginting et al., 2022), (Gonzalez & Mohamad, 2022), (Huang et al., 2022),(Polly et al., 2020),(Hall et al., 2020), (Voithofer & Nelson, 2021),(Woodlands & Dart, 2023), (Aktaş & Özmen, 2022), (E. C. Bouck & S. Flanagan, 2014), (A. C. Burrows et al., 2021), (J. Cabero & J. Barroso, 2016) ,(Cagiltay et al., 2019), (J. P. Carpenter et al., 2020), (Çebi, 2018) ,(Cekerol & Ozen, 2021), (H. Cha et al., 2020), (Chaaban Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 494 https://internationalpubls.com & Ellili-Cherif, 2017) ,(Y. H. Chen & S. J. Jang, 2014) ,(Y. J. Chen & R. L. W. Hsu, 2021) ,(J. Cheng et al., 2024)[7, 34-60]. Role of Contextual Factors (Swallow & Olofson, 2017),(Ruggiero & Mong, 2015),(Emily C Bouck & Sara Flanagan, 2014), (Chaaban & Moloney, 2016),(Çekerol & Ozen, 2020),(Dinc, 2019),(Raman et al., 2019),(Chou & Block, 2019), (Cagıltay et al., 2019),(Tinmaz & Ozturk, 2019),(Ifinedo & Kankaanranta, 2021),(Phua et al., 2022),(Warioba et al., 2022),(Peled & Perzon, 2022),(Starks & Reich, 2023),(Leena Bhattacharya et al., 2024),(Fikri, 2024),(Vilarinho-Pereira et al., 2024),(Witherspoon et al., 2024), (Schmid et al., 2024), (T. Cherner & C. Mitchell, 2021) ,(Chiu & Lim, 2020) ,(A. Christodoulou & C. Angeli, 2022) (Cindrić & Gregurić, 2019) ,(C. D. Ciriza-Mendívil et al., 2022) ,(Clark-Wilson et al., 2020) ,(Colvin & Bullock, 2014) ,(Courduff et al., 2016) ,(Crompton, 2017) ,(Daniela, 2020) ,(Dewi et al., 2019) ,(S. Dexter, 2023) ,(M. Dindar et al., 2021), (S. Dogan et al., 2021) ,(B. Doherty, 2021)[38, 61-94]. Emerging Trends in EdTech Integration (Muhammad Mooneeb Ali et al., 2024),(Yue et al., 2024),(Fuad et al., 2020),(Y.-J. Chen & R. L.-W. Hsu, 2021),(Peñarrubia-Lozano et al., 2021),(Hosseini et al., 2021),(Galanti et al., 2021), (Fernanda Cesar Bonafini & Younhee Lee, 2021),(Andrea C Burrows et al., 2021), (Yanuarto et al., 2023),(Yildiz Durak, 2021),(Todd Cherner & Chyrstine Mitchell, 2021),(Torrato et al., 2021),(Drugova et al., 2021),(Lai Wah & Hashim, 2021),(Chieng & Tan, 2021),(Brian Doherty, 2021),(Rapanta et al., 2021),(Reddy et al., 2021),(Wang & Lu, 2021),(Muhterem Dindar et al., 2021),(Selcuk Dogan et al., 2021),(Santos & Castro, 2021), (Gupta & Bhaskar, 2023),(Casey et al., 2023),(Wolak & Kim, 2023),(De León et al., 2023),(Setyo et al., 2023), (Chugh et al., 2023),(Yuebo et al., 2023),(Woodlands & Dart, 2023),(Polly et al., 2023),(Hershkovitz et al., 2023),(Helsa & Juandi, 2023),(Gómez-Trigueros et al., 2024),(Iris Backfisch et al., 2024),(Sim et al., 2024),(Jiaming Cheng et al., 2024), (Durham, 2024)[48, 95-132]. Addressing Limitations and Future Research Directions (Schmid et al., 2024),(Jeffrey P Carpenter et al., 2020),(Atabek, 2020),(Hyunjin Cha et al., 2020),(Emily C Bouck & Sara Flanagan, 2014),(Peters & Fàbregues, 2023),(Fegely et al., 2023),(Starks & Reich, 2023),(Sara Dexter, 2023),(Chugh et al., 2023),(Yuebo et al., 2023),(Woodlands & Dart, 2023),(Gupta & Bhaskar, 2023),(Polly et al., 2023), (Hershkovitz et al., 2023),(Helsa & Juandi, 2023), (Sintawati et al., 2022),(Dikmen & Demirer, 2022), (Phua et al., 2022),(Rakes et al., 2022),(Gomez et al., 2022),(Akbar Bahari et al., 2022),(Tare et al., 2022),(Stafford, 2022),(Aquino et al., 2022),(Andri Christodoulou & Charoula Angeli, 2022),(Stringer et al., 2022),(Gaganao et al., 2022),(Ginting et al., 2022),(Gong et al., 2022),(Gonzalez & Mohamad, 2022),(Huang et al., 2022),(Carlos D Ciriza-Mendívil et al., Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 495 https://internationalpubls.com 2022),(Zhang et al., 2022), (Saputra & Chaeruman, 2022),(Zhang & Fang, 2022), (Wiyono et al., 2022),(Warioba et al., 2022),(Hou et al., 2022),(Peled & Perzon, 2022), (Haryani & Hamidah, 2022), (Aslam et al., 2021)[36, 48, 62, 74, 79, 118, 123-127, 133-139] [42-44, 71-73, 140- 157]. Table 3.2: Thematic Analysis of Research on TPACK and EdTech Integration: A Summary of Drivers and Studies (2014-2024). 3.2.1. Map of Term Occurrences Map of terms concurrence. Source: Authors’ own elaboration using VOSviewer. The minimum number of occurrences of a term has been set to 15. Figure 3.2: Map of term occurrence 3. 3. Challenges and Barriers to Technology Integration Figure 3.2 highlights the most frequently cited challenges to technology integration in education, with lack of teacher training emerging as the most prevalent barrier. Insufficient resources, lack of technology infrastructure, and teacher resistance also pose significant obstacles, indicating a need for systemic support and targeted professional development to overcome these challenges. Figure 3.2: Challenges and Barriers to Technology Integration in Education Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 496 https://internationalpubls.com 3.4. Key Findings: A Systematic Overview (2014-2024) After analyzing 151 article we have found these key factors. Theme Key Findings TPACK and EdTech Integration Strong positive correlation between teacher TPACK and effective EdTech integration practices, leading to improved student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. Influence of Context Teacher experience, access to technology, school policies, and individual learner needs significantly impact the effectiveness of EdTech integration. Emerging Trends Mobile learning, artificial intelligence, and the COVID-19 pandemic are shaping the landscape of EdTech integration, presenting opportunities and challenges. Limitations and Future Directions Research needs to address inconsistencies in TPACK operationalization, the role of technology leadership, and strategies for addressing the digital divide and ensuring equitable access to technology. 4. Discussion Our systematic literature review, spanning a decade from 2014 to 2024, provides a comprehensive overview of research exploring the intersection of TPACK and EdTech integration in education. The analysis of over 100 studies reveals a dynamic and multifaceted relationship, highlighting both the potential and complexities of harnessing technology for enhanced teaching and learning. Our findings point to a robust connection between teacher TPACK proficiency and effective EdTech integration. Consistently, research shows that teachers with a strong grasp of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge exhibit more effective technology integration practices, resulting in improved student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. However, the review also emphasizes the critical role of context in successful EdTech integration. Factors like teacher experience, technology access, school policies, and individual learner needs significantly influence how teachers utilize EdTech and the impact it has on student learning. Simply equipping teachers with technology is not enough; rather, a tailored approach to TPACK development and implementation, addressing individual and contextual needs, is crucial. Further, the review identifies key emerging trends shaping the landscape of EdTech integration. The rise of mobile learning presents both opportunities and challenges, demanding teachers be trained in effective m-learning strategies. The increasing integration of artificial intelligence in education necessitates a focus on developing teacher knowledge and skills in AI applications and ethical considerations. Notably, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly accelerated the shift towards online and blended learning, highlighting the critical role of TPACK in navigating this transition. However, it also reveals challenges like the digital divide, teacher anxieties, and the need for robust support to adapt to this new learning landscape. Finally, the review points to limitations in the current research and identifies key areas for future focus. These include the need for improved tools and methods to operationalize TPACK for more consistent and meaningful measurement, a deeper understanding of the role of technology leadership in supporting teachers' TPACK development, and a concerted effort to address the digital divide and ensure equitable access to technology and digital literacy for all learners. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 497 https://internationalpubls.com References [1] UNESCO. "COVID-19 educational disruption and response." UNESCO. https://geo.uis.unesco.org/covid-19 (accessed 22-06-2024, 2024). [2] Jisc. " Digital capabilities in the UK FE and HE workforce: An exploration of staff confidence and practice. ." Jisc. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/student-digital-experience-insights-survey-2020-uk-higher-education-findings (accessed. [3] T. Ayala-Perez and J. Joo-Nagata, "The digital culture of students of pedagogy specialising in the humanities in Santiago de Chile," Computers & Education, vol. 133, pp. 1-12, 2019. [4] T. Bates, "Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. BCcampus Open Education," ed, 2015. [5] D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D. G. Altman, and t. PRISMA Group*, "Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement," Annals of internal medicine, vol. 151, no. 4, pp. 264-269, 2009. [6] D. Tranfield, D. Denyer, and P. Smart, "Towards a methodology for developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic review," British journal of management, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 207-222, 2003. [7] İ. Aktaş and H. Özmen, "Assessing the performance of Turkish science pre-service teachers in a TPACK-practical course," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 3495-3528, 2022/04/01 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10757-z. [8] S. E. Anderson and R. S. Putman, "Special education teachers’ experience, confidence, beliefs, and knowledge about integrating technology," Journal of Special Education Technology, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 37-50, 2020. [9] E. Bahcivan, M. D. Gurer, N. Yavuzalp, and S. Akayoglu, "Investigating the relations among pre-service teachers’ teaching/learning beliefs and educational technology integration competencies: A structural equation modeling study," Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 28, pp. 579-588, 2019. [10] R. R. Buss, T. S. Foulger, K. Wetzel, and L. Lindsey, "Preparing teachers to integrate technology into K–12 instruction II: Examining the effects of technology-infused methods courses and student teaching," Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 134-150, 2018. [11] V. H. Shinas, R. Karchmer-Klein, C. Mouza, S. Yilmaz-Ozden, and J. J. Glutting, "Analyzing preservice teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge development in the context of a multidimensional teacher preparation program," Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 47-55, 2015. [12] I. Celik, I. Sahin, and A. O. Akturk, "Analysis of the relations among the components of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK): A structural equation model," Journal of educational computing research, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 1-22, 2014. [13] Y.-H. Chen and S.-J. Jang, "Interrelationship between stages of concern and technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge: A study on Taiwanese senior high school in-service teachers," Computers in human behavior, vol. 32, pp. 79-91, 2014. [14] E. Güneş and E. Bahçıvan, "A multiple case study of preservice science teachers’ TPACK: Embedded in a comprehensive belief system," 2016. [15] Ş. Gökçearslan, T. Karademir, and A. T. Korucu, "Preservice teachers’ level of web pedagogical content knowledge: Assessment by individual innovativeness," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 70-94, 2017. [16] D. Roussinos and A. Jimoyiannis, "Examining primary education teachers’ perceptions of TPACK and the related educational context factors," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 377-397, 2019. [17] S. Birisci and E. Kul, "Predictors of technology integration self-efficacy beliefs of preservice teachers," Contemporary educational technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 75-93, 2019. [18] M. H. Seif and A. Biranvand, "Examining the factors influencing technology integration in the teaching-learning process: A case study," Library Philosophy and Practice, pp. 1-17, 2019. https://geo.uis.unesco.org/covid-19 https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/student-digital-experience-insights-survey-2020-uk-higher-education-findings Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 498 https://internationalpubls.com [19] B. Wright and D. Akgunduz, "The relationship between technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) self-efficacy belief levels and the usage of Web 2.0 applications of pre-service science teachers," World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 52-69, 2018. [20] R. Susanto, R. Rachmadtullah, and W. Rachbini, "Technological and Pedagogical models," Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1-14, 2020. [21] H. Yanış and N. Yürük, "Development, validity, and reliability of an educational robotics based technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy scale," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 375-403, 2020. [22] W. Zhao, S. B. Baharom, and N. Abd Razak, "Factors Impacting Teachers’ Behavioral Intention to Use the Interactive Whiteboard in Hebei, China," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 14, no. 4, 2024. [23] M. M. Ali, A. M. Alaa, and A. Shahnaz, "The impact of mobile learning in English language classrooms in Pakistan," Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, vol. 9, no. 1, 2024 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40862- 024-00274-0. [24] S. E. Anderson and R. S. Putman, "Elementary special education teachers’ thinking while planning and implementing technology-integrated lessons," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 9459- 9481, 2023 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11358-0. [25] E. Angraini, S. Zubaidah, and H. Susanto, "TPACK-based Active Learning to Promote Digital and Scientific Literacy in Genetics," Pegem Egit. Ogr. Dergisi, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 50-61, 2023 2023, doi: 10.47750/pegegog.13.02.07. [26] I. Backfisch, L. Sibley, A. Lachner, K. T. Kirchner, C. Hische, and K. Scheiter, "Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): Utility-value interventions support knowledge integration," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 142, 2024 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2024.104532. [27] A. Bahari, J. S. Barrot, and M. Sarkhosh, "Current state of research on the use of technology in language teacher education and professional development," TESOL Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, 2022 2022, doi: 10.1002/tesj.672. [28] E. Bahcivan, M. D. Gurer, N. Yavuzalp, and S. Akayoglu, "Investigating the Relations Among Pre-Service Teachers’ Teaching/Learning Beliefs and Educational Technology Integration Competencies: a Structural Equation Modeling Study," Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 579-588, 2019 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10956- 019-09788-6. [29] A. Baltynova et al., "Pedagogical Conditions for the Training of Future Teachers Based on Digital Educational Technologies," International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 18, no. 18, pp. 121-137, 2023 2023, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v18i18.43209. [30] N. Belo, S. McKenney, J. Voogt, and B. Bradley, "Teacher knowledge for using technology to foster early literacy: A literature review," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 60, pp. 372-383, 2016 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.053. [31] L. Bhattacharya, M. Nandakumar, C. Dasgupta, and S. Murthy, "Shaping the Discourse around Quality EdTech in India: Including Contextualized and Evidence-Based Solutions in the Ecosystem," Education Sciences, vol. 14, no. 5, 2024 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14050481. [32] S. Birisci and U. Kul, "Predictors of technology integration self-efficacy beliefs of preservice teachers," Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 75-93, 2019 2019, doi: 10.30935/cet.512537. [33] F. C. Bonafini and Y. Lee, "Portraying Mathematics Pre-service Teachers’ Experience of Creating Video Lessons with Portable Interactive Whiteboards through the TPACK," New Educ., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 327-352, 2021 2021, doi: 10.1080/1547688X.2021.1980167. [34] S. E. Anderson and K. B. Kyzar, "Between school and home: TPACK-in-practice in elementary special education contexts," Computers in the Schools, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 323-341, 2022. [35] X. Zhou, Y. Padron, and H. Waxman, "Exploring the Relationship between Professional Development Experience and Skills in Educational Technology Integration among Primary EFL Teacher," Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 14, no. 1, 2022. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 499 https://internationalpubls.com [36] J. P. Carpenter et al., "What should teacher educators know about technology? Perspectives and self-assessments," Teaching and teacher education, vol. 95, p. 103124, 2020. [37] J. M. Willis, "Examining technology and teaching efficacy of preservice teacher candidates: A deliberate course design model," Current Issues in Education, vol. 18, no. 3, 2015. [38] M. J. Swallow and M. W. Olofson, "Contextual understandings in the TPACK framework," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 49, no. 3-4, pp. 228-244, 2017. [39] S. Ghavifekr and W. A. W. Rosdy, "Teaching and learning with technology: Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools," International journal of research in education and science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 175-191, 2015. [40] J. Cabero and J. Barroso, "ICT teacher training: a view of the TPACK model/Formación del profesorado en TIC: una visión del modelo TPACK," Culture and Education, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 633-663, 2016. [41] Y. Dong, C. S. Chai, G.-Y. Sang, J. H. L. Koh, and C.-C. Tsai, "Exploring the profiles and interplays of pre-service and in-service teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in China," Journal of Educational Technology & Society, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 158-169, 2015. [42] D. Ginting et al., "Students’ perception on TPACK practices on online language classes in the midst of pandemic," International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1995-2009, 2022. [43] M. Gonzalez and G. A. Mohamad, "Virtual literacy instruction: An investigation of how elementary educators exhibited TPACK during COVID-19 school closures," Journal of Pedagogical Research, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 54-88, 2022. [44] K.-Y. Huang, Y.-H. Chen, and S.-J. Jang, "TPACK in special education schools for SVI: A comparative study between Taiwanese and Chinese in-service teachers," International journal of disability, development and education, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 435-450, 2022. [45] D. Polly, E. J. Byker, S. M. Putman, and L. K. Handler, "Preparing elementary education teacher candidates to teach with technology: The role of modeling," Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 250- 265, 2020. [46] J. A. Hall, J. Lei, and Q. Wang, "The first principles of instruction: An examination of their impact on preservice teachers’ TPACK," Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 68, pp. 3115-3142, 2020. [47] R. Voithofer and M. J. Nelson, "Teacher educator technology integration preparation practices around TPACK in the United States," Journal of teacher education, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 314-328, 2021. [48] L. Woodlands and S. Dart, "Enhancing novice educator confidence to teach synchronously online during the COVID-19 pandemic," Student Success, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 18-28, 2023. [49] E. C. Bouck and S. Flanagan, "Technological advances in special education," Adv. Spec. Educ., vol. 27, pp. 209- 235, 2014 2014, doi: 10.1108/S0270-401320140000027007. [50] A. C. Burrows et al., "Finding spaces: Teacher education technology competencies (tetcs)," Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 11, 2021 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11110733. [51] J. Cabero and J. Barroso, "ICT teacher training: A view of the TPACK model," Cultura y Educacion, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 633-663, 2016 2016, doi: 10.1080/11356405.2016.1203526. [52] K. Cagiltay, H. Cakir, N. Karasu, O. F. Islim, and F. Cicek, "Use of educational technology in special education: Perceptions of teachers," Participatory Educational Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 189-205, 2019 2019, doi: 10.17275/per.19.21.6.2. [53] J. P. Carpenter et al., "What should teacher educators know about technology? Perspectives and self-assessments," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 95, 2020 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103124. [54] A. Çebi, "Teachers' perceptions toward technology integration into the language teaching practices," Journal of Narrative and Language Studies, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 150-177, 2018 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0- 85064279427&partnerID=40&md5=6cdf358c7425d546e5e79ab8fba939da. [55] K. Cekerol and E. Ozen, "Evaluation Of Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Within The Framework Of educational Information Network And Other Variables," Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, vol. 21, pp. 61-78, 2021 2021, doi: 10.17718/TOJDE.770914. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85064279427&partnerID=40&md5=6cdf358c7425d546e5e79ab8fba939da https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85064279427&partnerID=40&md5=6cdf358c7425d546e5e79ab8fba939da Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 500 https://internationalpubls.com [56] H. Cha, T. Park, and J. Seo, "What should be considered when developing ICT-integrated classroom models for a developing country?," Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 7, 2020 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12072967. [57] Y. Chaaban and M. Ellili-Cherif, "Technology integration in EFL classrooms: A study of Qatari independent schools," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 2433-2454, 2017 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10639- 016-9552-3. [58] Y. H. Chen and S. J. Jang, "Interrelationship between Stages of Concern and Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge: A study on Taiwanese senior high school in-service teachers," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 32, pp. 79-91, 2014 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.011. [59] Y. J. Chen and R. L. W. Hsu, "Understanding the difference of teachers’ TLPACK before and during the COVID- 19 pandemic: Evidence from two groups of teachers," Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 16, 2021 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13168827. [60] J. Cheng, J. A. Hall, Q. Wang, and J. Lei, "More than high, medium, and low: Pre-service teacher TPACK profiles and intentions to teach with technology," Education and Information Technologies, 2024 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-12793-x. [61] D. Ruggiero and C. J. Mong, "The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom," Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, vol. 14, 2015. [62] E. C. Bouck and S. Flanagan, "Technological advances in special education," Special Education International Perspectives: Biopsychosocial, Cultural, and Disability Aspects, vol. 27, pp. 209-235, 2014. [63] Y. Chaaban and R. Moloney, "An Exploratory study of the factors associated with literacy teachers' integration of technology: a study of Lebanese schools," Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 128- 139, 2016. [64] K. Çekerol and E. Ozen, "EVALUATION OF TEACHERS’TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION NETWORK AND OTHER VARIABLES," Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, vol. 21, no. Special Issue-IODL, pp. 61-78, 2020. [65] E. Dinc, "Prospective teachers’ perceptions of barriers to technology integration in education," Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 381-398, 2019. [66] A. Raman, R. Thannimalai, and S. N. Ismail, "Principals' Technology Leadership and Its Effect on Teachers' Technology Integration in 21st Century Classrooms," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 423- 442, 2019. [67] C. C. Chou and L. Block, "The mismatched expectations of iPad integration between teachers and students in secondary schools," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 1281-1302, 2019. [68] K. Cagıltay, H. Cakır, N. Karasu, O. F. Islım, and F. Cıcek, "Use of educational technology in special education: Perceptions of teachers," Participatory Educational Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 189-205, 2019. [69] H. Tinmaz and Y. E. Ozturk, "ICT integration into education: A comparison of South Korea and Turkey," Perspectives on global development and technology, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 422-456, 2019. [70] E. Ifinedo and M. Kankaanranta, "Understanding the influence of context in technology integration from teacher educators’ perspective," Technology, Pedagogy and education, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 201-215, 2021. [71] C. Y. Phua, K. H. Chua, and W. K. Bong, "Experiences of parents and teachers with virtual classrooms during the COVID-19 restrictions: A study focusing on inclusive education in Malaysia," Education Sciences, vol. 12, no. 12, p. 884, 2022. [72] M. M. Warioba, H. Machumu, K. Kulunga, and L. Mtweve, "Adoption of ICT as a pedagogical tool in community secondary schools in Tanzania: Possibilities and Constraints," Education and Information Technologies, pp. 1-24, 2022. [73] Y. Peled and S. Perzon, "Systemic model for technology integration in teaching," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 2661-2675, 2022. [74] A. C. Starks and S. M. Reich, "“What about special ed?“: Barriers and enablers for teaching with technology in special education," Computers & Education, vol. 193, p. 104665, 2023. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 501 https://internationalpubls.com [75] L. Bhattacharya, M. Nandakumar, C. Dasgupta, and S. Murthy, "Shaping the Discourse around Quality EdTech in India: Including Contextualized and Evidence-Based Solutions in the Ecosystem," Education Sciences, vol. 14, no. 5, p. 481, 2024. [76] M. S. Fikri, Sin,T.H., "Technology pedagogy content knowledge framework to prepare Indonesian career counselors," International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 2024 2024, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v13i2.25860. [77] D. R. Vilarinho-Pereira, A. A. Koehler, and Y. Long, "Investigating Preservice Teachers’ Educational Technology Skills: A Problem-Solving Process," TechTrends, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 223-242, 2024. [78] E. B. Witherspoon et al., "Teacher Use of an Online Platform to Support Independent Practice in Middle School Mathematics During COVID-19 Disruptions," AERA Open, vol. 10, p. 23328584241230054, 2024. [79] M. Schmid, E. Brianza, S. Y. Mok, and D. Petko, "Running in circles: A systematic review of reviews on technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)," Computers & Education, p. 105024, 2024. [80] T. Cherner and C. Mitchell, "Deconstructing EdTech frameworks based on their creators, features, and usefulness," LEARNING MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 91-116, 2021 2021, doi: 10.1080/17439884.2020.1773852. [81] T. K. F. Chiu and C. P. Lim, "Strategic Use of Technology for Inclusive Education in Hong Kong: A Content-Level Perspective," ECNU Review of Education, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 715-734, 2020 2020, doi: 10.1177/2096531120930861. [82] A. Christodoulou and C. Angeli, "Adaptive Learning Techniques for a Personalized Educational Software in Developing Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge," Front. Educ., vol. 7, 2022 2022, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.789397. [83] I. Cindrić and M. Gregurić, "The audacity to teach with technology – a case of integrating technology in pre-service language teacher education," Croat. J. Educ., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 157-188, 2019 2019, doi: 10.15516/cje.v21i1.3339. [84] C. D. Ciriza-Mendívil, A. M. Lacambra, and J. M. Hernández de la Cruz, "Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Implementation of a Didactic Proposal for Preservice History Teachers," Front. Educ., vol. 7, 2022 2022, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.852801. [85] [A. Clark-Wilson, O. Robutti, and M. Thomas, "Teaching with digital technology," ZDM Math. Edu., vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 1223-1242, 2020 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11858-020-01196-0. [86] A. D. Colvin and A. N. Bullock, "Technology Acceptance in Social Work Education: Implications for the Field Practicum," Journal of Teaching in Social Work, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 496-513, 2014 2014, doi: 10.1080/08841233.2014.952869. [87] J. Courduff, A. Szapkiw, and J. L. Wendt, "Grounded in What Works: Exemplary Practice in Special Education Teachers’ Technology Integration," Journal of Special Education Technology, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 26-38, 2016 2016, doi: 10.1177/0162643416633333. [88] H. Crompton, "Moving toward a mobile learning landscape: presenting a mlearning integration framework," Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 97-109, 2017 2017, doi: 10.1108/ITSE-02-2017- 0018. [89] L. Daniela, "Virtual museums as learning agents," Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 7, 2020 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12072698. [90] F. Dewi, N. S. Lengkanawati, and P. Purnawarman, "Teachers’ Consideration in Technology-Integrated Lesson Design; A Case of Indonesian EFL Teachers," International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 14, no. 18, pp. 92-107, 2019 2019, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v14i18.9806. [91] S. Dexter, "Developing faculty EdTech instructional decision-making competence with principles for the integration of EdTech," ETR&D-EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 163-179, 2023 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11423-023-10198-0. [92] M. Dindar, A. Suorsa, J. Hermes, P. Karppinen, and P. Näykki, "Comparing technology acceptance of K-12 teachers with and without prior experience of learning management systems: A Covid-19 pandemic study," Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 1553-1565, 2021 2021, doi: 10.1111/jcal.12552. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 502 https://internationalpubls.com [93] S. Dogan, N. A. Dogan, and I. Celik, "Teachers’ skills to integrate technology in education: Two path models explaining instructional and application software use," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1311-1332, 2021 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10310-4. [94] B. Doherty, "Technology in the classroom and music teachers’ self-efficacy," J. Music Technol. Educ., vol. 14, no. 2-3, pp. 141-155, 2021 2021, doi: 10.1386/JMTE_00038_1. [95] M. M. Ali, A. M. Alaa, and A. Shahnaz, "The impact of mobile learning in English language classrooms in Pakistan," Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 62, 2024/05/22 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40862-024-00274-0. [96] M. Yue, M. S.-Y. Jong, and D. T. K. Ng, "Understanding K–12 teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge readiness and attitudes toward artificial intelligence education," Education and Information Technologies, pp. 1-32, 2024. [97] M. Fuad, F. Ariyani, E. Suyanto, and A. S. Shidiq, "Exploring Teachers' TPCK: Are Indonesian Language Teachers Ready for Online Learning during the COVID-19 Outbreak?," Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 11B, pp. 6091-6102, 2020. [98] Y.-J. Chen and R. L.-W. Hsu, "Understanding the difference of teachers’ TLPACK before and during the COVID- 19 pandemic: Evidence from two groups of teachers," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 16, p. 8827, 2021. [99] C. Peñarrubia-Lozano, M. Segura-Berges, M. Lizalde-Gil, and J. C. Bustamante, "A qualitative analysis of implementing e-learning during the COVID-19 lockdown," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 6, p. 3317, 2021. [100] Z. Hosseini, K. Hytönen, and J. Kinnunen, "Introducing technological pedagogical content design: A model for transforming knowledge into practice," 2021. [101] T. M. Galanti, C. K. Baker, K. Morrow-Leong, and T. Kraft, "Enriching TPACK in mathematics education: using digital interactive notebooks in synchronous online learning environments," Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 345-361, 2021. [102] F. C. Bonafini and Y. Lee, "Portraying Mathematics Pre-service Teachers’ Experience of Creating Video Lessons with Portable Interactive Whiteboards through the TPACK," The New Educator, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 327-352, 2021. [103] A. C. Burrows et al., "Finding spaces: Teacher education technology competencies (TETCs)," Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 11, p. 733, 2021. [104] W. N. Yanuarto, S. M. Maat, E. Setyanigsih, M. G. Isnawan, and M. I. Zakaria, "The Moderating Model of Teaching Anxiety on Teaching Beliefs and TPACK Effect to ICT Literacy among Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers," Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 50-72, 2023. [105] H. Yildiz Durak, "Modeling of relations between K-12 teachers’ TPACK levels and their technology integration self-efficacy, technology literacy levels, attitudes toward technology and usage objectives of social networks," Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1136-1162, 2021. [106] T. Cherner and C. Mitchell, "Deconstructing EdTech frameworks based on their creators, features, and usefulness," Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 91-116, 2021. [107] J. B. Torrato, S. E. Aguja, and M. S. Prudente, "Using web video conferencing to conduct a program as a proposed model toward teacher leadership and academic vitality in the Philippines," Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 11, p. 658, 2021. [108] E. Drugova, I. Zhuravleva, M. Aiusheeva, and D. Grits, "Toward a model of learning innovation integration: TPACK-SAMR based analysis of the introduction of a digital learning environment in three Russian universities," Education and information technologies, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 4925-4942, 2021. [109] L. Lai Wah and H. Hashim, "Determining pre-service teachers’ intention of using technology for teaching english as a second language (Esl)," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 14, p. 7568, 2021. [110] Y. E. Chieng and C. K. Tan, "A sequential explanatory investigation of TPACK: Malaysian science teachers’ survey and perspective," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 235-241, 2021. [111] B. Doherty, "Technology in the classroom and music teachers’ self-efficacy," Journal of Music, Technology & Education, vol. 14, no. 2-3, pp. 141-155, 2021. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 503 https://internationalpubls.com [112] C. Rapanta, L. Botturi, P. Goodyear, L. Guàrdia, and M. Koole, "Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education," Postdigital Science and Education, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 715- 742, 2021. [113] P. Reddy, K. Chaudhary, B. Sharma, and R. Chand, "The two perfect scorers for technology acceptance," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 26, pp. 1505-1526, 2021. [114] Y. Wang and H. Lu, "Validating items of different modalities to assess the educational technology competency of pre-service teachers," Computers & Education, vol. 162, p. 104081, 2021. [115] M. Dindar, A. Suorsa, J. Hermes, P. Karppinen, and P. Näykki, "Comparing technology acceptance of K‐12 teachers with and without prior experience of learning management systems: A Covid‐19 pandemic study," Journal of computer assisted learning, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 1553-1565, 2021. [116] S. Dogan, N. A. Dogan, and I. Celik, "Teachers’ skills to integrate technology in education: Two path models explaining instructional and application software use," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 26, pp. 1311- 1332, 2021. [117] J. M. Santos and R. D. Castro, "Technological Pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: Application of learning in the classroom by pre-service teachers (PST)," Social Sciences & Humanities Open, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 100110, 2021. [118] K. P. Gupta and P. Bhaskar, "Teachers' intention to adopt virtual reality technology in management education," International Journal of Learning and Change, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 28-50, 2023. [119] J. E. Casey, J. Kirk, K. Kuklies, and S. V. Mireles, "Using the technology acceptance model to assess how preservice teachers’ view educational technology in middle and high school classrooms," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 2361-2382, 2023. [120] M. Wolak and M. S. Kim, "A Case study of virtual kindergarten teachers in technology-enhanced classrooms," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 82, 2023. [121] L. De León, R. Corbeil, and M. E. Corbeil, "The development and validation of a teacher education digital literacy and digital pedagogy evaluation," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 477-489, 2023. [122] A. A. Setyo, S. W. Pomalato, E. P. Hulukati, T. Machmud, and N. Djafri, "Effectiveness of TPACK-Based Multimodal Digital Teaching Materials for Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 1604-1608, 2023. [123] R. Chugh, D. Turnbull, M. A. Cowling, R. Vanderburg, and M. A. Vanderburg, "Implementing educational technology in Higher Education Institutions: A review of technologies, stakeholder perceptions, frameworks and metrics," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 16403-16429, 2023. [124] L. Yuebo, S. H. Halili, and R. A. Razak, "Factors Influencing the Online Learning Success of Adults in Open and Distance Education in Southwest China," Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol, vol. 13, pp. 1615-1624, 2023. [125] D. Polly, F. Martin, and E. Byker, "Examining pre-service and in-service teachers’ perceptions of their readiness to use digital technologies for teaching and learning," Computers in the Schools, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 22-55, 2023. [126] A. Hershkovitz, E. Daniel, Y. Klein, and M. Shacham, "Technology integration in emergency remote teaching: teachers’ self-efficacy and sense of success," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 12433- 12464, 2023. [127] Y. Helsa and D. Juandi, "TPACK-based hybrid learning model design for computational thinking skills achievement in mathematics," Journal on Mathematics Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 225-252, 2023. [128] I. M. Gómez-Trigueros, M. Ruiz-Bañuls, J. M. Esteve-Faubel, and F. Mareque León, "Teacher Motivation: Exploring the Integration of Technology and Didactics in the Narratives of Future Teachers," Social Sciences, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 217, 2024. [129] I. Backfisch, L. Sibley, A. Lachner, K. T. Kirchner, C. Hische, and K. Scheiter, "Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): Utility-value interventions support knowledge integration," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 142, p. 104532, 2024. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 504 https://internationalpubls.com [130] J. Sim, S. Ha, and K. Jo, "Korean Elementary English Teachers' Professionalism Development in Using EdTech: A Grounded Theory Study," English Teaching, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 93-120, 2024. [131] J. Cheng, J. A. Hall, Q. Wang, and J. Lei, "More than high, medium, and low: Pre-service teacher TPACK profiles and intentions to teach with technology," Education and Information Technologies, pp. 1-27, 2024. [132] C. Durham, "Centering Equity for Multilingual Learners in Preservice Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)," Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 347-360, 2024. [133] O. Atabek, "Experienced educators’ suggestions for solutions to the challenges to technology integration," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 5669-5685, 2020. [134] H. Cha, T. Park, and J. Seo, "What should be considered when developing ICT-integrated classroom models for a developing country?," Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 7, p. 2967, 2020. [135] M. Peters and S. Fàbregues, "Missed opportunities in mixed methods EdTech research? Visual joint display development as an analytical strategy for achieving integration in mixed methods studies," Educational technology research and development, pp. 1-21, 2023. [136] A. Fegely, J. Winslow, C.-Y. Lee, and A. P. Setari, "EdTech Align: a Valid and Reliable Instrument for Measuring Teachers’ EdTech Competencies Aligned to Professional Standards," TechTrends, pp. 1-14, 2023. [137] S. Dexter, "Developing faculty EdTech instructional decision-making competence with principles for the integration of EdTech," Educational technology research and development, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 163-179, 2023. [138] M. Sintawati, V. Y. Erviana, E. Bhattacharyya, H. Habil, and L. Fatmawati, "The effect of Project-Based Learning on technological pedagogical content knowledge among elementary school pre-service teacher," Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 151-156, 2022. [139] C. H. Dikmen and V. Demirer, "The role of technological pedagogical content knowledge and social cognitive variables in teachers’ technology integration behaviors," Participatory Educational Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 398- 415, 2022. [140] C. R. Rakes et al., "Teaching mathematics with technology: TPACK and effective teaching practices," Education Sciences, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 133, 2022. [141] F. C. Gomez, J. Trespalacios, Y.-C. Hsu, and D. Yang, "Exploring teachers’ technology integration self-efficacy through the 2017 ISTE Standards," TechTrends, pp. 1-13, 2022. [142] A. Bahari, J. S. Barrot, and M. Sarkhosh, "Current state of research on the use of technology in language teacher education and professional development," TESOL Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, p. e672, 2022. [143] M. Tare, A. R. Shell, and S. R. Jackson, "Student engagement with evidence-based supports for literacy on a digital platform," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 177-187, 2022. [144] V. Stafford, "Using Google Jamboard in teacher training and student learning contexts," Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 181-185, 2022. [145] A. B. Aquino, A. A. Dadayan, M. E. Rosel, and M. J. V. Francisco, "Development of a TPACK-Based Professional Development Framework for the New Normal in Education," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1012-1016, 2022. [146] A. Christodoulou and C. Angeli, "Adaptive learning techniques for a personalized educational software in developing teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge," in Frontiers in Education, 2022, vol. 7: Frontiers Media SA, p. 789397. [147] L. R. Stringer, K. M. Lee, S. Sturm, and N. Giacaman, "A systematic review of primary school teachers’ experiences with digital technologies curricula," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 12585-12607, 2022. [148] R. D. Gaganao, R. N. Discar, and I. N. L. Fabillar, "E-learning readiness of teachers in the new normal education: The case of national high schools in Eastern Samar," Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN, vol. 2252, no. 8822, p. 1041, 2022. [149] X. Gong, B. Wei, B. W. Bergey, and E. T. Shockley, "Unpacking chemistry teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and decisions for a PhET simulation: a TPACK perspective," Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 34-44, 2022. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 31 No. 7s (2024) 505 https://internationalpubls.com [150] C. D. Ciriza-Mendívil, A. M. Lacambra, and J. M. Hernández de la Cruz, "Technological pedagogical content knowledge: Implementation of a didactic proposal for preservice history teachers," in Frontiers in Education, 2022, vol. 7: Frontiers Media SA, p. 852801. [151] J. Zhang, B. Wang, H. H. Yang, Z. Chen, W. Gao, and Z. Liu, "Assessing quality of online learning platforms for in-service teachers’ professional development: The development and application of an instrument," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, p. 998196, 2022. [152] B. Saputra and U. A. Chaeruman, "Technological pedagogical and content knowledge (tpack): analysis in design selection and data analysis techniques in high school," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 777- 796, 2022. [153] M. Zhang and X. Fang, "Exploring university EFL Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and teacher efficacy in technology-integrated flipped classroom," Sage Open, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 21582440221116105, 2022. [154] B. B. Wiyono, Samsudin, A. Imron, and I. Arifin, "The Effectiveness of Utilizing Information and Communication Technology in Instructional Supervision with Collegial Discussion Techniques for the Teacher’s Instructional Process and the Student’s Learning Outcomes," Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 9, p. 4865, 2022. [155] M. Hou, Y. Lin, Y. Shen, and H. Zhou, "Explaining pre-service teachers’ intentions to use technology-enabled learning: An extended model of the theory of planned behavior," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, p. 900806, 2022. [156] F. Haryani and A. S. Hamidah, "Exploring the Impact of Technology-Integrated Mathematics Worksheet in the Teaching and Learning during COVID-19 Pandemic," Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 39-59, 2022. [157] R. Aslam, N. Khan, M. M. Asad, and U. Ahmed, "Impact of technological pedagogical content knowledge on teachers’ digital proficiency at classroom in higher education institution of Pakistan," Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 119-130, 2021.