Teacher Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills (TPCK-S) and Student Cognitive Agency: Determinants of Deep Learning Outcomes in Immersive Geometry Instruction

Authors

  • Salmawati Universitas Lakidende Unaaha, Indonesia
  • Andi Kaharuddin Universitas Lakidende Unaaha, Indonesia
  • Nurfaidah Syam Universitas Lakidende Unaaha, Indonesia
  • Vishal Gupta University of Oxford, United Kingdom

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33394/jk.v12i1.19264

Keywords:

Cognitive Agency, Deep Learning, Flywheel Mechanism, Hologram Geometry, Teacher TPCK-S

Abstract

This study aims to investigates the determinants of student success in hologram-enhanced geometry classrooms by examining the mediating role of teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills (TPCK-S). Employing a Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Design, this research analyzed data from 12 secondary mathematics teachers (purposively sampled) and 248 Grade 8 students from four public schools implementing the national 'Kurikulum Merdeka' in a provincial capital city in Indonesia. Quantitative analysis utilizing Spearman’s rank-order correlation revealed a robust positive revealed a robust positive relationship (r = 0.78, p = 0.002) between teacher performative skills and student deep learning achievement. To explain this statistical link, a qualitative phase involving classroom observations and semi-structured interviews was conducted with four teachers selected through extreme case sampling. The findings illuminate a "Flywheel Mechanism," demonstrating that high-TPCK-S teachers act as "Pedagogical Orchestrators" who effectively transfer "Cognitive Agency" to students. This agency characterized by student-led hypothesis testing and spatial reasoning is identified as the primary driver of deep conceptual understanding. Conversely, low TPCK-S results in passive student observation. These results suggest that educational development must shift focus from mere technology procurement to the cultivation of teachers' orchestration skills.

References

Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670

Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners' and teachers' gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 247-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611446

Avila-Garzon, C., Bacca-Acosta, J., Duarte, J., & Betancourt, J. (2021). Augmented Reality in Education: An Overview of Twenty-Five Years of Research. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/10865

Bandura, A. (1997). Bandura (Vol. 2). FrancoAngeli.

Biggs, J., Tang, C., & Kennedy, G. (2022). Teaching for quality learning at university (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. SAGE Publications.

Chai, C. S., Rahmawati, Y., & Jong, M. S. Y. (2020). Indonesian science, mathematics, and engineering preservice teachers experiences in STEM-TPACK design-based learning. Sustainability, 12(21), 9050. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219050

Chen, J., Fu, Z., Liu, H., & Wang, J. (2024). Effectiveness of virtual reality on learning engagement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 19(1), 1-14.

Cheng, Y. L., & Mix, K. S. (2014). Spatial training improves children's mathematics ability. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(1), 2-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.725186

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.

Danker, B. (2015). Using the flipped classroom approach to explore deep learning in large classrooms. IAFOR Journal of Education, 3(1), 171-186.

Downie, S., Gao, X., Bedford, S., Bell, K., & Kuit, T. (2021). Technology-enhanced learning environments in higher education: A cross-discipline study on teacher and student perceptions. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 18(4), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.18.4.12

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143

Fernandes, F. A., Rodrigues, C. S. C., Teixeira, E. N., & Werner, C. M. (2023). Immersive learning frameworks: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 16(5), 736-747. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3242553

Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., & García-Martínez, I. (2022). Digital competences for teacher professional development. Systematic review. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(4), 513-531. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1827389

Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953-1960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.010

Harriman, C. S. (2011). The impact of TPACK and digital storytelling as a learning experience for pre-service teachers in a learning-by-designing project.

Harris, J. B., Phillips, M., Koehler, M. J., & Rosenberg, J. M. (2017). Editorial 33 (3): TPCK/TPACK research and development: Past, present, and future directions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3907

Joshi, S. C. (2023). TPACK and teachers’ self-efficacy: A systematic review. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 49(2), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28280

Kaharuddin, A., Arsyad, N., & Asdar, M. P. (2023). Media Hologram 3D dalam Pembelajaran Geometri untuk meningkatkan keterampilan proses sains. Pustaka Learning.

Kaharuddin, A., García, J. G., Magfirah, I., & Yulismayanti, Y. (2025). Validating a TPCK-S Instrument for Hologram-Based Mathematics Teaching. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE). https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v7i3.12119

Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2016). Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 102, 244-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.003

Lampropoulos, G., Keramopoulos, E., Diamantaras, K., & Evangelidis, G. (2022). Augmented reality and gamification in education: A systematic literature review of research, applications, and empirical studies. Applied Sciences, 12(13), 6809. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136809

Leijen, A., Slof, B., van Tartwijk, J. W. F., & van der Schaaf, M. F. (2017). Performance-based competency requirements for student teachers and how to assess them. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(3), 190-194. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2017.7.3.864

Li, M., Vale, C., Tan, H., & Blannin, J. (2024). A systematic review of TPACK research in primary mathematics education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00491-3

Lu, X., Leung, F. K. S., & Li, N. (2021). Teacher agency for integrating history into teaching mathematics in a performance-driven context: A case study of a beginning teacher in China. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106(1), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10006-z

Matsumoto-Royo, K., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2021). Core practices in practice-based teacher education: A systematic literature review of its teaching and assessment process. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101047

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

Mozammel, J., Hamid, A. H. A., Alkashami, M., & Shehabat, A. (2024). The Role of Technology Integration and Teacher Support in Enhancing Student Engagement: Exploring the Mediation of Self-Directed Learning. Foro de Educacion, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.14201/r2z0ee09

Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2017). TIMSS 2019 Assessment Frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. PISA.

Orhani, S. (2024). Deep learning in math education. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(4), 270-278. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.804022

Panigrahi, R., Srivastava, P. R., & Panigrahi, P. K. (2021). Effectiveness of e-learning: the mediating role of student engagement on perceived learning effectiveness. Information Technology & People, 34(7), 1840-1862. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2019-0380

Peters, M., Ejjaberi, A. E., Martínez, M. J., & Fàbregues, S. (2022). Teacher digital competence development in higher education: Overview of systematic reviews. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7543

Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

Ravenscroft, A., & Boyle, T. (2010). Deep Learning Design for Technology-Enhanced Learning. International Conference on Educational Media (Ed-Media).

Roschelle, J., Dimitriadis, Y., & Hoppe, U. (2013). Classroom orchestration: synthesis. Computers & Education, 69, 523-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.010

Ruthven, K. (2009). Towards a naturalistic conceptualisation of technology integration in classroom practice: The example of school mathematics. Education et Didactique, 3(1), 131-159. https://doi.org/10.4000/educationdidactique.434

Salloum, S. A., Alhumaid, K., Alfaisal, A. M., Aljanada, R. A., & Alfaisal, R. (2024). Adoption of 3D Holograms in Science Education: Transforming Learning Environments. IEEE Access, 12, 70984-70998. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3402549

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) the development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544

Sinclair, N., Bartolini Bussi, M. G., de Villiers, M., Jones, K., Kortenkamp, U., Leung, A., & Owens, K. (2016). Recent research on geometry education: An ICME-13 survey team report. ZDM, 48(5), 691-719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0796-6

Tian, X., Zhao, J., & Nguyen, K. T. (2022). Practical research on primary mathematics teaching based on deep learning. Scientific Programming, 2022(1), 7899180. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7899180

Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2

Tseng, J. J., Chai, C. S., Tan, L., & Park, M. (2022). A critical review of research on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in language teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 948-971. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1868531

Van der Spoel, I., Noroozi, O., Schuurink, E., & Van Ginkel, S. (2020). Teachers online teaching expectations and experiences during the Covid19-pandemic in the Netherlands. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 623-638. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821185

Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x

Wang, L., Zhang, Q., & Sun, D. (2025). Exploring the impact of an augmented reality-integrated mathematics curriculum on students spatial skills in elementary school. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23(2), 387-414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10473-3

Wu, J., Jiang, H., Long, L., & Zhang, X. (2024). Effects of AR mathematical picture books on primary school students' geometric thinking, cognitive load and flow experience. Education and Information Technologies, 29(18), 24627-24652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12768-y

Yoo, H., Jang, J., Oh, H., & Park, I. (2022). The potentials and trends of holography in education: A scoping review. Computers & Education, 186, 104533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104533

Yoon, S. A., & Wang, J. (2014). Making the invisible visible in science museums through augmented reality devices. TechTrends, 58(1), 49-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0720-7

Zeng, Y., Wang, Y., & Li, S. (2022). The relationship between teachers' information technology integration self-efficacy and TPACK: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1091017. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1091017

Downloads

Published

2026-03-14

How to Cite

Salmawati, Kaharuddin, A., Syam, N., & Gupta, V. (2026). Teacher Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills (TPCK-S) and Student Cognitive Agency: Determinants of Deep Learning Outcomes in Immersive Geometry Instruction. Jurnal Kependidikan : Jurnal Hasil Penelitian Dan Kajian Kepustakaan Di Bidang Pendidikan, Pengajaran, Dan Pembelajaran, 12(1), 62–73. https://doi.org/10.33394/jk.v12i1.19264

Issue

Vol. 12 No. 1 (2026): March

Section

Articles

Citation Check

License

Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

License and Publishing Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities tacitly or explicitly of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and publishing agreement.

Copyright
Authors who publish with JK agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Licensing for Data Publication

JK use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:
Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.