Mapping Knowledge Bases and Structural Isolation in Mathematics Teachers’ TPACK: A Network Perspective

Subir Sen¹ and Birbal Saha^2,

¹Associate Professor, Department of Education, Sidho-Kanho-Birsha University, Purulia, West Bengal, India

²Professor, Department of Education, Sidho-Kanho-Birsha University, Purulia, West Bengal, India

Cite this paper:
Subir Sen and Birbal Saha. Mapping Knowledge Bases and Structural Isolation in Mathematics Teachers’ TPACK: A Network Perspective. American Journal of Educational Research. 2026; 14(7):220-227. doi: 10.12691/education-14-7-3

Abstract

This study employs Network Analysis to examine the cognitive structure of teacher knowledge within the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework among 600 pre-service mathematics teachers in West Bengal. Utilizing the TPACK-Math Scale by Önal [1], the research explores the integration of eight knowledge domains: Content (CK), Pedagogical (PK), Technological (TK), and Contextual Knowledge (CNTK), along with their intersections. The network is remarkably dense, with a sparsity value of 0.143, indicating that 86% of theoretical relationships are empirically present. Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) emerged as the primary functional hub, showing the highest closeness (1.237) and strength (1.135). Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) acts as a critical bridge (betweenness = 0.917) connecting content mastery to technology. Both TK and CNTK exhibit negative centrality, suggesting these domains remain isolated from the broader pedagogical reasoning. Furthermore, Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) forms a siloed, redundant module with exceptionally high clustering coefficients (e.g., Zhang = 2.193). A negative correlation exists between TK and PCK (-0.071), suggesting that excessive focus on pure technology can inhibit the development of situated pedagogical expertise. The PK-CK axis remains the strongest relationship (weight = 0.480), serving as the framework’s foundational ‘spine’. The study concludes that while teachers have synthesized pedagogical and technological processes, professional development must transition from general technology training to network-rebalancing approaches. Recommendations include anchoring technology use in content-specific pedagogical goals and strengthening the links between technical skills and local classroom contexts to foster a more resilient and adaptive teaching expertise.

Keywords:
Network TPACK Mathematics Trainee Teachers Cluster

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Önal, N. (2016). Development, validity and reliability of TPACK scale with pre-service Mathematics teachers. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8 (2), 93-107.
[2]	Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
[3]	Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
[4]	Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
[5]	Groth, R., Spickler, D., Bergner, J., &Bardzell, M. (2009). A qualitative approach to assessing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 9(4), 392-411. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss4/mathematics/article1.cfm.
[6]	Guerrero, S. (2010). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the Mathematics classroom. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 26(4), 132-139.
[7]	Niess, M. L., van Zee, E. H., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2010). Knowledge growth in teaching Mathematics/science with spread sheets: Moving PCK to TPACK through online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(2), 42-52.
[8]	Özgün-Koca, A. A., Meagher, M., & Edwards, M. T. (2009; 2010). Pre-service teachers’ emerging TPACK in a technology-rich methods class. The Mathematics Educator, 19(2), 10-20. Retrieved from http://math.coe. uga.edu/ TME/issues/ v19n2/ v19n2_OzgunKoca,%20Meagher,%20&%20Edwards.pdf.
[9]	Gupta, S. & Jan, A. (2013). Attitude of B. Ed. pupil-teachers of science and arts stream towards creative teaching: A study. International Journal of Advancement in Education and Social Science, 1(1), 36 -11.
[10]	Kumar, S. (2013). Attitude of B. Ed. student-towards creative teaching: A study of science and arts stream teachers. Review of research. Retrieve from https://www.semanticscholar.org/.
[11]	Mahato, R. C., & Sen, S. (2023a). Relationship among Contexts Knowledge (CK1), Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) and Attitude towards Creative Teaching for pre-service trainee teachers: A study on Mathematics method subject. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), 11(4), d301 – d314.
[12]	Mahato, R. C., & Sen, S. (2023b). A study of Contexts Knowledge (CK1), Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) and Attitude towards Creative Teaching (ACT) among the pre-service Mathematics trainee teachers in West Bengal, India. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (JETIR), 10(4), h35-h43.
[13]	Sen, S. (2016). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the tenth grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. International Journal of Advanced Education and Research, 1(10), 11-17.
[14]	Sen, S. (2022). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the unit graph of ninth grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 3(1), 877-883.
[15]	Sen, S. & Samanta, S. (2015a). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in thesixth grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, 4(5(3)), 221-231.
[16]	Sen, S. & Samanta, S. (2015b). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the seventh grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(9), 36-40.
[17]	Sen, S. & Samanta, S. (2015c). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the eighth grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. Scholarly Research Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(19), 619-629.
[18]	Sen, S. & Samanta, S. (2015d). Content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the ninth grade Mathematics Textbook of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(11), 228-232.
[19]	Schmidt, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2021). Self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers in relation to digital technology use in lesson plans. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106586.
[20]	Gayen, P., & Sen, S. (2021). A study on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service language trainee teachers of Bankura and Purulia district of West Bengal. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), 9(4), 106-109.
[21]	Chieng, Y. E., & Tan, C. K. (2021). A sequential explanatory investigation of TPACK: Malaysian science teachers’ survey and perspective. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 11(5), 235–241.
[22]	Bulut, A., & Isiksal-Bostan, M. (2019). Perceptions of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers on their technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) regarding geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 38(2), 153-176.
[23]	Ozudogru, M. & Ozudorgu, F. (2019). Technological pedagogical content knowledge of mathematics teachers and the effect of demographic variables. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(1), 1-24.
[24]	Hsu, L., & Chen, Y. J. (2018). Teachers’ knowledge and competence in the digital age: Descriptive research within the TPACK framework. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 8(6), 455–458.
[25]	Sen, S., & Saha, B. (2026). TPCK of mathematics trainee teachers: A comparison using Mahalanobis distance. Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 3(1), 51–65.
[26]	Hevey, D. (2018). Network analysis: a brief overview and tutorial, Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine, 6(1), 301–328.
[27]	Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.
[28]	Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27, 55–71.
[29]	Opsahl, T., Agneessens, F., & Skvoretz, J. (2010). Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Networks, 32(3), 245–251.
[30]	Saramäki, J., Kivelä, M., Onnela, J., Kaski, K., & Kertész, J. (2007). Generalizations of the clustering coefficient to weighted complex networks. Physical Review E, 75(2), 27–105.
[31]	Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature, 393 (6684), 440–442.
[32]	Bullmore, E., & Sporns, O. (2009). Complex brain networks: Graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(3), 186-198.
[33]	Fried, E. I. (2016). R tutorial: how to identify communities of items in networks. Retrieved from http://psych-networks.com/r-tutorial-identify-communities-items-networks/.
[34]	Blanken, T. F., Deserno, M. K., Dalege, J., Borsboom, D., Blanken, P., Kerkhof, G. A., & Cramer, A. O. (2018). The role of stabilizing and communicating symptoms given overlapping communities in psychopathology networks. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–8.
[35]	Zhang, W. J., Qi, Y. H., & Zhang, Z.G. (2004). An algorithm and network software used to detect homogeneity of ecological habitat and its randomization statistic test. Computer Applications and Software, 21(11), 66-69.