**3. Result and discussion**

This section is about the results and discussion. **Table 1** presents the responses of the randomly sampled lecturers in the three public Colleges of Education to the TPACK questionnaire. The 29 items in the questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale were analysed and summarised in **Table 1**.

#### **3.1 Results**

**Table 2** shows technologies frequently used by lecturers in Colleges of Education. However, respondents show that these technologies were not possessed by 62% of the lecturers.


**Research question 1:** *Do lecturers have knowledge of the technology required for their professional assignments*?


**Table 1.** *TPACK domains.* *Lecturers' Perception of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Nigerian Colleges… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108678*

From **Table 1**, items 3–7 show lecturers have knowledge of technology (T.K.) with means above 3.0.

**Research question 2:** *Do lecturers have knowledge of using technology that is suitable for teaching pedagogies?*

**Table 1** shows that lecturers have technological pedagogical knowledge. Items 19–23 offer a means of above 4.0. The table indicates that the lecturers have proper pedagogical knowledge with a mean value above 4.1413.

**Research question 3:** *Do lecturers have the knowledge to select and integrate technologies in teaching content using appropriate teaching methods?*

**Table 1** indicates that Colleges of Education lecturers use appropriate teaching methods to select and integrate technologies in their teaching. From **Table 1**, items 25–29 have a mean above 4.0.

**Q04:** *What are the frequently used technologies by Lecturers in Colleges of Education?*

**Table 2** shows that teachers frequently used laptops, desktops, projectors, mobile phones, auto cards, Smartboards, digital cameras, tablets, whiteboards and calculators. The table also indicates that 38% of the lecturers possessed these technologies, suggesting that 68% may not have technologies for teaching. It shows that the lecturers used hardware technologies only and are indigent with relevant technologies for education.

#### **3.2 Discussion**

Technology is critical in any nation's education, making it mandatory for teachers at all levels to have adequate knowledge of it. Scholars advocated for digital literacy of the twenty-first-century teachers, which according to Ortega-Sánchez, Gómez-Trigueros, Trestini and Pérez-González [20], could be achieved if universities' teachers have digital teaching repertoire.

The outcome of this study is not consistence with Ifinedo, Saarela and Hämälänen [21]. Ifinedo et al., in their study, faulted the weak pre-service teachers'


understanding of I.C.T. in Nigerian Colleges of Education. The finding of this study regarding adequate knowledge of technologies by the teachers has divergent research perspectives across African schools. Aina and Ogundele [22] opined that Nigerian Colleges of Education lecturers had an inadequate understanding of the technologies required for teaching. Adeoye and Ojo [23] argued that teachers' knowledge of technology is insufficient in Nigerian schools. Umugiraneza, Bansilal and North [24] submitted that teachers' I.C.T. knowledge in Kwazulu-Natal schools in South Africa is based on demographic factors such as experience and gender. Similarly, Makgato [25] once queried that teachers in rural South Africa have challenges with school technology. Hennessy, Harrison and Wamakote [26] have related results with the present finding that teachers in Sub-Saharan Africa are I.C.T. literates. Similarly, Bingimilas [27] submitted that many Saudi Arabian teachers have average knowledge of technology and confidence in its uses. The outcome of this study may not be on the same page as Opoku, Pobee and Okyireh [28] that many West African countries have insufficient knowledge of technologies.

The knowledge of using technologies appropriately in the classroom is critical in this age. The finding of the current study on technological pedagogical knowledge is inspiring. This result is consistent with Harris and Hofer's [29] previous study where teachers' T.P.K. enhances authentic assessment of students' learning. Kurt, Mishra and Kocoglu [30] observed that English teachers have a high level of T.P.K. in a Turkish University. However, the current study is not on the same page as Hosseini and Kamal [4]. The authors observed that the pre-service teacher in a university showed inadequate knowledge of using technology for instructional purposes. In a related perspective, Heitink, Voogt, Fisser and van Braak [31] argued that teachers sparingly use T.P.K. to promote teaching-learning strategies but primarily for classroom management and others.

The present study's finding on the TPACK has some variances with the existing literature and is parallel with many. Tseng [11] shows that teachers in Taiwan have adequate knowledge of content than TPACK. Kafyulilo, Fisser, Pieters and Voogt [3] observed poor teachers' understanding of integrating technology among Tanzania teachers. According to Bingimilas [27], there are differences in teacher TPACK in Saudi Arabian schools based on gender, experience and teaching. Hosseini and Kamal [4] observed that teachers integrating technologies into their teaching is low in a university. Kirikçilar and Yildiz [32] said teachers have difficulty integrating pedagogical knowledge into technologies. Omoso and Odindo [15] found that teachers already know TPACK in a Kenyan public university but show concern for technological knowledge and technological content knowledge. Surahman, Thaariq, Qolbi and Setiawan's [33] findings showed that teachers in Indonesian schools had adequate TPACK.

The outcome of this study on the frequently used technologies in schools is problematic because the technologies used in Colleges are too small and inadequate. Numerous I.C.T. tools could be employed in classroom teaching [1] far beyond the result of this study. Similarly, Aina and Ogundele [22] listed technologies such as Twitter, virtual interactive classroom, course management software, etc. used for teaching that is missing here. The finding is consistent with Oyediran and Dick [34] that teachers do not possess laptops for teaching in a Nigerian Federal College of Education. In related research, Tella [17] observed the non-availability of I.C.T. tools for teaching at Southwest Colleges of Education in Nigeria. The study's findings revealed that these teachers have a long way to go regarding using technologies in Colleges of Education.

Technologies have occupied a critical position in our global educational system [35]. To succeed in the profession, every institution must have adequate knowledge of technology [8, 36]. A proper understanding of technologies is not enough, but

#### *Lecturers' Perception of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Nigerian Colleges… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108678*

integrating them into teaching is critical to teachers (Agormedah, Henaku, Ayite, & Ansah [37]. Due to this, Abdalla and Ali [38] opined that teachers should integrate technologies into their teaching because of their numerous benefits. According to Gur and Karamete [39], the integration of technology into education has many advantages, such as creating learning interest for learners [40] and changing the ways teachers think in teaching [39].

The current study's findings suggest that teachers in these Colleges have adequate knowledge of pedagogy, content and technology because, according to Abdalla and Ali [38], these are the three components of the TPACK. The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework is critical because of its various features, as shown in **Figure 1**. According to Koehler [10], the TPACK framework has a focal point where T.K., P.K. and C.K. intercept, suggesting their critical positions in TPACK. The implication is that no teacher can have adequate TPACK when a teacher is deficient in T.K., P.K. or C.K.

Given this, the present study indicates that teachers in the sampled schools are perceived to be adequate in T.K., P.K. and C.K., as **Table 1** reveals. Several studies documented the critical position of technology in teaching and learning in schools globally [41]. Therefore, teachers in all levels of education must possess adequate T.K., as recorded in this study. Technological knowledge makes problem-solving seamlessly accessible, and teachers impart knowledge to students instantly and effectively using appropriate strategies [42]. However, teachers' P.K. and C.K. are essential, but it is more critical to be adequate in P.C.K. [43]. P.C.K. is a unique feature of teaching the subject matter [44]. Aina and Olanipekun [9] argued that P.C.K. is essential for all teachers because content knowledge alone is insufficient, except the teacher has proper strategies for students' understanding. The current study shows that teachers have adequate P.C.K., as shown in **Table 1**.

Teachers in this study employing limited technologies for teaching might be due to their capability of using some I.C.T., which is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is a belief in an individual ability to perform a particular task [45]. Scholars averred that selfefficacy correlates to the P.C.K. [9]. For instance, Pendergast, [46] argue in linked research that a high self-efficacy teacher would be resilient and be able to handle difficult situations, which is a direct effect of the P.C.K. According to de Oliveira, Ferreira, Souza, Furtado and Ramos [47], teachers with high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to use active teaching techniques that help students become more problemsolving adept. Using or integrating technologies limits teachers' I.C.T. use in classes [48]. The use of technology increases teacher self-efficacy [49]. TPACK strengthens and is a source of teacher I.C.T. self-efficacy [49, 50].

In light of the above, the summary of the findings of this study are as follows:

