Department of Foreign Languages Education 

English Language Teaching Program 

 

 

 

 

INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRE-SERVICE EFL TEACHERS’ 

TPACK AND TEACHING MOTIVATION 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reyyan Zülal YÖNEY 

 

 

 

 

Ph.D. Dissertation 

 

 

Ankara, 2024 



 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With leadership, research, innovation, high quality education and change, 

 



i 
 

 

 

Department of Foreign Languages Education 

English Language Teaching Program 

 

 

 

 

INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRE-SERVICE EFL TEACHERS’ 

TPACK AND TEACHING MOTIVATION 

 

İNGİLİZCE ÖĞRETMENİ ADAYLARININ TPAB VE ÖĞRETME MOTİVASYONLARI 

ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN İNCELENMESİ 

 

 

 

 

Reyyan Zülal YÖNEY 

 

 

 

 

Ph.D. Dissertation 

 

 

Ankara, 2024



ii 
 

 

Acceptance and Approval 

To the Graduate School of Educational Sciences, 

This thesis / dissertation, prepared by REYYAN ZÜLAL YÖNEY and entitled “Title of the 

Thesis” has been approved as a thesis for the Degree of Ph.D. in the Program of Program 

of English Language Education in the Department of Foreign Language Education by 

the members of the Examining Committee.  

Chair 

Prof. Dr. Gonca YANGIN 

EKŞİ Signature 

Member (Supervisor) 

Prof. Dr. İsmail Hakkı 

MİRİCİ Signature 

Member 

Prof. Dr. Elena 

ANTONOVA-ÜNLÜ Signature 

Member 

Doç. Dr. İsmail Fırat 

ALTAY Signature 

Member 

Doç. Dr. Zekiye Müge 

TAVİL Signature 

 

This is to certify that this dissertation has been approved by the aforementioned examining 

committee members on 05/12/2024 in accordance with the relevant articles of the Rules 

and Regulations of Hacettepe University Graduate School of Educational Sciences, and 

was accepted as a Ph.D. Dissertation in the Program of English Language Education 

by the Board of Directors of the Graduate School of Educational Sciences from ...../...../........ 

  

Prof. Dr. İsmail Hakkı MİRİCİ 

 Director of Graduate School of Educational Sciences 



iii 
 

 

Abstract 

This study aimed to reveal the relationship between technological pedagogical content 

knowledge (TPACK) and teaching motivation of fourth year students studying in Teaching 

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) programs in Türkiye in order to reveal whether and 

how the two phenomena are related to each other. The study also aimed to explore the 

perceptions of pre-service EFL teachers and academics regarding the TPACK and teaching 

motivation of pre-service EFL teachers. The participants in the study consisted of 4th year 

students in the EFL programs of sixteen state universities in seven geographical regions of 

Türkiye and academics working in these departments. Participants were determined 

through the stratified sampling method. 377 fourth-year EFL students and 9 academics took 

part in the study. The study followed a mixed-method research design. The findings of the 

study indicated that pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK and motivation to teach had a 

positive correlation. While they had minimal predictive power over each other, the impact of 

motivation to teach over TPACK was statistically higher than the impact of TPACK over 

motivation to teach. The perceptions of pre-service teachers and academics also indicated 

a relation between TPACK and motivation to teach. The study revealed the TPACK and 

teaching motivation levels of pre-service teachers as well as the perceptions of pre-service 

teachers and academics on these. The study also provided pedagogical implications on the 

development of EFL teacher education programs as well as the TPACK and teaching 

motivation of pre-service EFL teachers. 

 

Keywords: TPACK, motivation to teach, teacher training, English as a foreign language 

 

 

  



iv 
 

 

Öz 

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye'de İngilizce Öğretmenliği programlarında öğrenim gören 

dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi (TPAB) ve öğretim 

motivasyonu arasındaki ilişkiyi ortaya koymak ve bu iki olgunun birbiriyle ilişkili olup 

olmadığını ve nasıl ilişkili olduğunu açığa çıkarmaktır. Çalışma ayrıca, öğretmen adaylarının 

TPAB ve öğretme motivasyonuna ilişkin olarak İngilizce öğretmen adaylarının ve 

akademisyenlerin algılarını ortaya koymayı amaçlamıştır. Çalışmanın katılımcıları, 

Türkiye'nin yedi coğrafi bölgesindeki on altı devlet üniversitesinin İngilizce öğretmenliği 

programlarındaki 4. sınıf öğrencilerinden ve bu bölümlerde çalışan akademisyenlerden 

oluşmaktadır. Katılımcılar tabakalı örnekleme yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Çalışmaya 377 

İngilizce Öğretmenliği dördüncü sınıf öğrencisi ve 9 akademisyen katılmıştır. Çalışmada 

karma yöntem araştırma deseni izlenmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları, İngilizce öğretmen 

adaylarının TPAB ve öğretme motivasyonunun pozitif bir korelasyona sahip olduğunu 

göstermiştir. Birbirleri üzerinde minimum yordama gücüne sahip olsalar da öğretme 

motivasyonunun TPAB üzerindeki etkisi TPAB'ın öğretme motivasyonu üzerindeki 

etkisinden istatistiksel olarak daha yüksektir. Öğretmen adayları ve akademisyenlerin 

algıları da TPAB ile öğretme motivasyonu arasında bir ilişki olduğunu göstermiştir. Çalışma 

öğretmen adaylarının TPAB ve öğretim motivasyonu düzeylerinin yanı sıra öğretmen 

adaylarının ve akademisyenlerin bunlara ilişkin algılarını da ortaya koymuştur. Çalışma 

ayrıca, EFL öğretmen eğitimi programlarının geliştirilmesinin yanı sıra EFL öğretmen 

adaylarının TPAB ve öğretim motivasyonu üzerine pedagojik çıkarımlar sunmaktadır. 

 

Anahtar sözcükler: TPAB, öğretme motivasyonu, öğretmen eğitimi, İngilizce Öğretmenliği 

 

  



v 
 

 

Acknowledgements 

This dissertation is not only the end point of my PhD journey, but also a testament 

to the unwavering support, guidance and encouragement I have received along the way. I 

would like to express my sincere appreciation to the many individuals who have contributed 

to my journey and success with heartfelt gratitude. 

First and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr. 

İsmail Hakkı MİRİCİ for his invaluable support, feedback and guidance throughout my PhD. 

This dissertation would not have been completed without his efforts and encouragement at 

every step of this journey.  

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to Prof. Dr. Gonca YANGIN EKŞİ, 

Prof. Dr. Elena ANTONOVA-ÜNLÜ, Assoc. Prof. İsmail Fırat ALTAY, and Assoc. Prof. 

Zekiye Müge TAVİL for their valuable and constructive remarks, their support and insights, 

as well as for being part of my Supervising Committee. 

In this process, I would like to thank the countless academics who supported my 

data collection process. I would like to offer my thanks to Prof. Dr. Banu İNAN-KARAGÜL, 

Assoc. Prof. Mehmet ALTAY, Assoc. Prof. Doğan YÜKSEL, Assoc. Prof. Deniz 

ORTAÇTEPE HART, and Assoc. Prof. Adnan YILMAZ for their support and feedback. 

I need to extend my thanks to all my dear friends who encouraged, supported and 

cheered me on this journey. I feel very fortunate to have so many great friends who support 

me incredibly at every stage and share all my joys and sorrows with me. 

I would like to especially thank my dear friend Lerzan YILMAZ, who supported me 

at every stage of this process and stood by me in every difficulty. I know I wouldn't have 

been able to go through this process so easily without your presence and your support. I 

would also like to thank my dear friend Cansu AYKUT KOLAY, with whom we overcame 

difficulties, made this journey easier for each other and completed our PhD process at the 

same time. It has been a joy to embark on this path side by side with you. 



vi 
 

 

My deepest, sincerest, and most heartfelt gratitude and appreciation go to my dear 

Mom and Dad, Naile and İzzet, and my dear brother Ahmet Berk. This dissertation and 

everything I have achieved have been possible with their endless support, love, and 

patience. I am grateful that they have always been there for me unconditionally. I love you 

dearly.  

Finally, I would like to thank my twelve-year-old self, who loved spending time 

among encyclopedias and was always happy to read and research, who made the decision 

to embark on this journey and did not give up on doing her best to make it happen despite 

all the struggles she has been through. Thank you, little one. 

     To my dearest family. 

 

 

 

 

  



vii 
 

 

Table of Contents 

Acceptance and Approval ...................................................................................... ii 

Abstract ................................................................................................................. iii 

Öz ......................................................................................................................... iv 

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ v 

List of Tables.......................................................................................................... x 

List of Figures ...................................................................................................... xii 

Symbols and Abbreviations ................................................................................. xiii 

Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 

Statement of the Problem ................................................................................... 1 

Aim and Significance of the Study....................................................................... 2 

Research Questions ........................................................................................... 5 

Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 6 

Limitations .......................................................................................................... 6 

Definitions ........................................................................................................... 7 

Chapter 2 Theoretical Basis of Research and Literature Review ............................ 9 

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) .................................. 9 

Assessment of TPACK ..................................................................................... 12 

TPACK in Foreign Language Teaching ............................................................. 14 

Theories of Motivation ....................................................................................... 23 

Motivation to Teach .......................................................................................... 26 

Teacher Identity ................................................................................................ 32 

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 34 

Chapter 3 Methodology ........................................................................................ 35 

Type of Research ............................................................................................. 35 

Research Population and Participants .............................................................. 36 

Data Collection ................................................................................................. 43 



viii 
 

 

Instruments ....................................................................................................... 44 

Piloting of the Research Instruments ................................................................ 46 

Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 53 

Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................... 61 

Chapter 4 Findings, Comments and Discussion ................................................... 62 

Findings of the Data Analysis ............................................................................ 62 

Research Question 1: What is the relation between pre-service EFL teachers’ 

TPACK and their motivation to teach? .............................................................. 63 

Research Question 2: What is pre-service EFL teachers’ level of motivation to 

teach? ............................................................................................................... 78 

Research Question 3: What is pre-service EFL teachers’ level of technological 

pedagogical content knowledge? ...................................................................... 84 

Research Question 4: What are the views of pre-service EFL teachers regarding 

their TPACK and their motivation to teach? ...................................................... 93 

Research Question 5: What are the views of the academics in EFL departments 

about their students’ TPACK and their motivation to teach? ........................... 114 

Discussion of the Findings .............................................................................. 126 

Discussion of the Findings of Research Question 1: The Relationship Between 

Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ TPACK and Their Motivation to Teach................. 127 

Discussion of the Findings of Research Question 2: Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ 

Levels of Motivation to Teach ......................................................................... 130 

Discussion of the Findings of Research Question 3: Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ 

Levels of TPACK ............................................................................................ 132 

Discussion of the Findings of Research Question 4: Perceptions of Pre-Service 

EFL Teachers Regarding Their TPACK and Their Motivation to Teach .......... 134 

Discussion of the Findings of Research Question 5: Perceptions of the Academics 

in the EFL Departments Regarding Their Students’ TPACK and Their Motivation 

to Teach .......................................................................................................... 139 

Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 141 



ix 
 

 

Chapter 5 Conclusion and Suggestions ............................................................. 142 

Introduction ..................................................................................................... 142 

Summary of the Study .................................................................................... 142 

Pedagogical Implications ................................................................................ 145 

Limitations of the Study ................................................................................... 148 

Suggestions for Further Research .................................................................. 149 

References ........................................................................................................ 151 

APPENDIX-A: Informed Consent Form for the Scale Implementation with Pre-

Service Teachers ............................................................................................... 172 

APPENDIX-B: Informed Consent Form for the Semi-Structured Interviews with Pre-

Service Teachers ............................................................................................... 173 

APPENDIX-C: Informed Consent Form for the Semi-Structured Interviews with 

Academics ......................................................................................................... 174 

APPENDIX-D: Motivation to Teach Scale .......................................................... 175 

APPENDIX-E: EFL-TPACK Scale ...................................................................... 176 

APPENDIX-F: Semi-Structured Interview Form for Pre-Service Teachers ......... 180 

APPENDIX-G: Semi-Structured Interview Form for Academics .......................... 181 

APPENDIX-H: Permission of Use for the Motivation to Teach Scale .................. 182 

APPENDIX-I: Permission of Use for the EFL-TPACK Scale ............................... 183 

APPENDIX-J: Ethics Committee Approval ......................................................... 184 

APPENDIX-K: Declaration of Ethical Conduct .................................................... 185 

APPENDIX-L: Thesis/Dissertation Originality Report ......................................... 186 

APPENDIX-M: Yayımlama ve Fikrî Mülkiyet Hakları Beyanı .............................. 187 

  



x 
 

 

List of Tables 

Table 1 Number of EFL Departments in Turkish Universities ............................... 37 

Table 2 Data Collection Settings by Instrument ................................................... 39 

Table 3 Total Estimated Number of 4th-year EFL Students .................................. 41 

Table 4 Distribution of Data Collected from Regions ............................................ 42 

Table 5 Descriptives for the Scales in Piloting ..................................................... 46 

Table 6 Tests of Normality for the Scales in Piloting ............................................ 47 

Table 7 Reliability Analysis for the Scales in Piloting ........................................... 48 

Table 8 Reliability Analysis for the Subscales in Piloting ...................................... 49 

Table 9 Inter-Item Correlations Mean for the Extrinsic Motivation Subscale ......... 49 

Table 10 Data Analysis Based on Research Questions ....................................... 53 

Table 11 Normality Test for the Motivation to Teach Scale before Treating Missing 

Data ..................................................................................................................... 55 

Table 12 Descriptives for the Motivation to Teach Scale before Treating Missing 

Data ..................................................................................................................... 55 

Table 13 Normality Test for the EFL-TPACK Scale before Treating Missing Data

............................................................................................................................. 56 

Table 14 Descriptives for the EFL-TPACK Scale before Treating Missing Data ... 56 

Table 15 Normality Test for the Scales after Treating Missing Data ..................... 57 

Table 16 Descriptives for the Scales after Treating Missing Data ........................ 58 

Table 17 Residual Values for the Regression Model (Dependent: Motivation to 

Teach Scale) ........................................................................................................ 66 

Table 18 Residual Values for the Regression Model (Dependent: EFL-TPACK 

Scale)................................................................................................................... 66 

Table 19 Coefficients for the Regression Model (Dependent: Motivation to Teach 

Scale)................................................................................................................... 68 

Table 20 Coefficients for the Regression Model (Dependent: EFL-TPACK Scale)

............................................................................................................................. 69 

Table 21 Regression Model (Dependent: Motivation to Teach Scale) .................. 70 

Table 22 Regression Model (Dependent: EFL-TPACK) ....................................... 70 

Table 23 Correlation Coefficient for EFL-TPACK and Motivation to Teach .......... 71 

Table 24 Normality Tests for Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Subscales ........... 79 

Table 25 Descriptive Statistics for Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Subscales ... 79 



xi 
 

 

Table 26 Mean Values and Range of Pre-Service Teachers’ Scores on the 

Motivation to Teach Scale .................................................................................... 81 

Table 27 Percentages of the Scores against the Total Possible Scores on the 

Motivation to Teach Scale .................................................................................... 81 

Table 28 Paired Samples Statistics for Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Means . 82 

Table 29 Paired Samples Test for Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Means ......... 82 

Table 30 Kruskal Wallis Test for the Motivation to Teach Score Distribution by 

Geographical Region ........................................................................................... 83 

Table 31 Tests of Normality for PCK and TPCK Subscales ................................. 85 

Table 32 Descriptive Statistics for PCK and TPCK Subscales ............................. 85 

Table 33 Mean Values and Range of Pre-Service Teachers’ Total Scores in the 

EFL-TPACK Scale ............................................................................................... 86 

Table 34 Percentages of the Scores against the Total Possible Scores for the EFL-

TPACK Scale ....................................................................................................... 87 

Table 35 Paired Samples Statistics for PCK and TPCK Means ........................... 88 

Table 36 Paired Samples Test for PCK and TPCK Means................................... 88 

Table 37 Paired Samples Test Effect Size for PCK and TPCK Means ................. 88 

Table 38 Descriptive Statistics for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region

............................................................................................................................. 89 

Table 39 Tests of Normality for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region

............................................................................................................................. 90 

Table 40 Tests of Homogeneity for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region

............................................................................................................................. 91 

Table 41 ANOVA for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region ............... 91 

Table 42 ANOVA Effect Sizes for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region

............................................................................................................................. 92 

Table 43 Gabriel’s Test for the EFL-TPACK Scores by Geographical Region ..... 92 

 

 

 

  



xii 
 

 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 The TPCK Model ................................................................................... 10 

Figure 2 Linearity of the Data for Regression Analysis ........................................ 64 

Figure 3 Histograms for the Distribution of Residuals .......................................... 67 

Figure 4 Normal P-P Plots of Regression Standardized Residuals ...................... 67 

Figure 5 Scatterplots of Regression Standardized Residuals .............................. 69 

Figure 6 Themes for the Seventh Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ..................................................................................................... 73 

Figure 7 Themes for the Sixth Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

............................................................................................................................. 76 

Figure 8 Themes for the First Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ..................................................................................................... 95 

Figure 9 Themes for the Second Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ..................................................................................................... 98 

Figure 10 Themes for the Third Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ................................................................................................... 102 

Figure 11 Themes for the Fourth Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ................................................................................................... 105 

Figure 12 Themes for the Fifth Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ................................................................................................... 108 

Figure 13 Themes for the Sixth Interview Question on Pre-Service Teachers’ 

Interview Form ................................................................................................... 112 

Figure 14 Themes for the First Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

........................................................................................................................... 116 

Figure 15 Themes for the Second Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

........................................................................................................................... 118 

Figure 16 Themes for the Third Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

........................................................................................................................... 121 

Figure 17 Themes for the Fourth Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

........................................................................................................................... 122 

Figure 18 Themes for the Fifth Interview Question on Academics’ Interview Form

........................................................................................................................... 124 

  



xiii 
 

 

Symbols and Abbreviations 

EFL: English as a foreign language 

ELT: English Language Teaching 

PCK: pedagogical content knowledge 

TPCK: technology, pedagogy and content knowledge 

TPACK: technological pedagogical content knowledge 

 

 



1 
 

 

Chapter 1 

Introduction 

This chapter begins by providing a statement of the problem in relation to the study, 

which is followed by the aim and significance of the study. Then, the assumptions and 

limitations of the study are presented. Finally, the definitions in relation to the key terms, 

phrases and acronyms are provided in this section. 

Statement of the Problem 

The rapid advancement of technology brought about a different take on the 

knowledge bases of the individuals in a diverse array of professional sectors. This is also 

true for the knowledge base of teacher candidates as well as in-service teachers and 

teacher educators. This change in the understanding of the necessary components that the 

knowledge base of a teacher should include has influenced the requirements of a teacher 

candidate who is expected to become a member of the teaching community upon 

graduation. The paradigm shift in the understanding of teacher knowledge is not limited to 

the knowledge base of teachers in terms of technology but also in terms of their knowledge 

in relation to pedagogy and content. Thus, the complex structure of knowledge that 

technological pedagogical content knowledge constitutes holds an important place in the 

qualifications of pre-service teachers for them to effectively become part of the teaching 

force. 

Motivation constitutes one of the primary traits of one’s personality that determines 

the likelihood of pursuing a career or carrying out a role in a specific field. This notion applies 

to the field of the teaching profession. The motivation of individuals who are candidates to 

become professional in any given field of work is just as important as the motivation of the 

individuals who are part of the profession. The motivation of pre-service teachers is 

important in that their future careers as educators depend on many factors involving their 

motivation. Motivation to teach, in this aspect, is a specific facet of the construct of 



2 
 

 

motivation, which is specifically about the motivation in relation to the act of teaching and 

the teaching profession.   

Technological pedagogical content knowledge is significant for the reorganization of 

teacher education (Baran & Canbazoğlu Bilici, 2015). This places it as a commonly 

investigated research subject. Although technological pedagogical content knowledge 

(TPACK) of teachers has been investigated in many contexts, the investigation of this factor 

in relation to teachers’ motivation to teach has been limited. In terms of pre-service teacher 

education, the impact relation between English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers’ 

technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and their motivation to teach has 

not been extensively investigated in Turkish pre-service teacher education contexts in 

relation to fourth-year pre-service EFL teachers, which constitutes a gap in the literature on 

pre-service teacher education, TPACK, and teaching motivation. 

Looking into their technological pedagogical content knowledge in the final year of 

their pre-service teacher education is important in terms of determining the status quo of 

pre-service teachers who are about to graduate and who are expected to become part of 

the teaching force of the country in the following teaching terms. Investigating pre-service 

teachers’ TPACK in relation to their motivation to teach is necessary for the purpose of 

finding the gaps in their knowledge bases as well as their motivation levels. 

Aim and Significance of the Study 

Teachers constitute the most fundamental element in an education system and the 

successful operation of any education system is dependent on the attributes and qualities 

of teachers (Gök & Atalay Kabasakal, 2019). Considering the fact that teachers assume 

such a critical role in the overall efficiency of the educational system they are a part of, it is 

essential to investigate the knowledge bases and teaching motivations of pre-service  

teachers who are about to begin their professional careers in the field of education so that 



3 
 

 

informed predictions can be made about their abilities to adequately fulfill the requirements 

of their role in the education system in which they will soon be involved. 

There is a crucial role that teachers play in influencing the motivation of their 

students through their own enthusiasm and dedication, which are essential components 

that can affect students’ participation and engagement in learning (Dörnyei, 1998; 

Ghenghesh, 2013). In light of this substantial influence, it is necessary to pay regard to the 

knowledge bases and motivation dispositions of teachers in relation to teaching and the 

teaching profession since these can have a profound effect on their overall pedagogical 

effectiveness as well as their professional productivity. The significance of understanding 

teachers’ knowledge bases in relation to technology, pedagogy, and content and the various 

factors impacting their motivation to teach need to be taken seriously and not neglected by 

educational institutions and policymakers who are actively involved in the ongoing 

enhancement of the educational system as well as the education and development of 

teachers.  

In order to achieve effective teaching, teachers require pedagogic and content 

knowledge together (Shulman, 1986) and TPACK framework is significant for research as 

it has an important place in how teacher education is restructured (Baran & Canbazoğlu 

Bilici, 2015). On the other hand, motivation is one of the affective factors involved in 

language teaching as in all teaching professions. Motivation of pre-service teachers is 

significant for research in that “teacher motivations are influential from the outset of their 

entry to teacher education, are formed and fashioned through the course of their teacher 

education studies and continue to play out across their teaching careers” (Watt & 

Richardson, 2008a, p. 407). It constitutes one of the elements that determines appeal 

towards teaching (Sinclair, 2008).  

Teacher education research plays an important role in how teaching and teacher 

education practices can be improved. In the context of equipping students for a future that 

is technologically advanced, the facilitation of pre-service teachers’ acquisition of 



4 
 

 

technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) has emerged as a critical focus 

within pre-service teacher education (Lachner et al., 2021). Schmidt et al. (2009) stated that 

utilizing TPACK for evaluating teacher knowledge may impact teacher training and 

professional development and that it is necessary to continually reconsider implementations 

in teacher education for introducing strategies preparing teachers for effective technology 

integration into their teaching (p. 125-126). In a similar vein, the teaching motivation of pre-

service teachers during their teacher education process plays a crucial role in determining 

the likelihood of pre-service teachers’ effectiveness in the profession. Thus, investigating 

the relation between two essential factors such as pre-service teachers’ TPACK and their 

motivation to teach can provide important insights into how teacher education and teacher 

performance may be improved. 

In light of this stated importance of TPACK and motivation to teach, the aim of this 

study is to investigate the relationship between the TPACK levels and teaching motivation 

of pre-service EFL teachers in Turkish universities in order to reveal whether and how the 

two phenomena are related to each other. Pre-service teachers are expected to have 

adequate technological pedagogical content knowledge when they complete their pre-

service teacher education. In addition to this, their motivation to teach is an essential factor 

that impacts their teaching practices in their profession. The investigation of pre-service 

teachers’ TPACK and motivation to teach has the potential to assist teacher education 

institutions in the improvement of pre-service teacher training in order to foster their 

development.  

Another aspect of the importance of this study is with regards to its focus on 4th-

year pre-service EFL teachers. The 4th-year pre-service teachers in Turkish faculties of 

education participate in systematic classroom observation as well as teaching practice, 

which are referred to as practicum courses. These courses are integrated into their curricula 

during the final two semesters of their pre-service teacher education, which afford them 

hands-on experience and foster their engagement with the teaching profession that they do 



5 
 

 

not have the opportunity to experience in the initial three years of their training and which 

may significantly influence their perspectives regarding the teaching profession as well as 

impacting their motivation and technological pedagogical content knowledge. Thus, 

investigating the TPACK and teaching motivation of 4th-year pre-service EFL teachers can 

possibly yield critical insights into the conditions and status quo of teacher candidates who 

are anticipated to transition into the EFL teaching community immediately following their 

graduation. 

Research Questions 

The present study aimed to investigate the relation between pre-service EFL 

teachers’ TPACK and motivation to teach as well as the perceptions of them and of the 

academics in EFL departments in relation to pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK and 

motivation to this. In light of this, the research questions that this study aimed to answer 

were as follows: 

Main Research Question 

1. What is the relation between pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK and their motivation 

to teach? 

Sub Research Questions 

2. What is pre-service EFL teachers’ level of motivation to teach? 

3. What is pre-service EFL teachers’ level of technological pedagogical content 

knowledge (TPACK)? 

4. What are the views of pre-service EFL teachers regarding their TPACK and their 

motivation to teach? 

5. What are the views of the academics in EFL departments about their students’ 

TPACK and their motivation to teach? 



6 
 

 

Assumptions 

In this study, it is assumed that: 

1. The sample chosen for the collection of the data is representative of the population. 

2. The responses that the pre-service teachers give to the scale items will be sincere. 

3. The pre-service teachers and academics participating in the semi-structured 

interviews will give sincere responses to the questions. 

4. The analysis methods adopted for this study are ideal for analyzing the data from 

the scales and semi-structured interviews used in this study. 

5. The data collection tools in the study are reliable and valid enough for this study. 

6. The pre-service teachers and academics participate in the research voluntarily since 

they all have signed consent forms. 

Limitations 

One limitation of this study was that the results to be obtained from the participants 

in this research are based on the participants’ self-reported declarations in the data 

collection process through scales and semi-structured interviews. This meant that the 

results obtained were limited to the declarations made by the participants and that any 

interpretation of the data was based on these self-reports. 

Another limitation of the study was that most pre-service EFL teachers were not 

expected to be familiar with the term technological pedagogical content knowledge 

(TPACK) prior to the study. This did not constitute a problem for the data to be collected 

through the scales as the pre-service teachers were not expected to provide responses 

based on their understanding of this term and there were not any scale items that involved 

the term technological pedagogical content knowledge. However, they were expected to 

answer some questions during the semi-structured interviews in relation to their 

technological pedagogical content knowledge. In order to overcome this problem, the 



7 
 

 

researcher provided an approximately ten-minutes long presentation that explained the 

term technological pedagogical content knowledge, its components, its usage, and the term 

motivation to teach. 

Finally, the study intended to look into the 4th-year pre-service EFL teachers’ 

TPACK and motivation to teach in a manner that could facilitate the generalizability of the 

results to the whole 4th-year pre-service EFL teachers in Türkiye. However, the distribution 

of the universities with EFL departments revealed that the majority of the geographical 

regions did not involve any private universities with EFL departments. Thus, the study’s 

scope was limited to public universities as the stratified sampling method was more 

applicable through limiting the scope to one category of universities. Another reason for 

opting for leaving out private universities was that the curriculum design and instruction in 

public universities were believed to be similar to each other compared to private universities. 

Definitions 

Important terminologies used in this thesis are defined in this section. 

Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): Refers to the 

technological pedagogical and content knowledge in relation to teachers and pre-service 

teachers. The basis of this term was introduced by Shulman (1986) in the ‘‘pedagogical 

content knowledge” framework and was expanded by Mishra and Koehler (2006) through 

the integration of technological knowledge into their framework. In terms of the use of the 

acronym TPCK in the sub-scale of the EFL-TPACK scale by Wang (2022) and TPACK, the 

former refers to the “the synthesized knowledge base” (p. 9937) of technology, pedagogy 

and content whereas the latter is described as the overall teacher knowledge that includes 

the component knowledge bases (Wang, 2022).   

Pedagogical content knowledge: Refers to the unique professional knowledge of 

teachers that is formed through a combination of content and pedagogy (Shulman, 1987). 



8 
 

 

Pedagogical content knowledge involves the representation and adaptation of subject 

matter for teaching (Koehler et al., 2017). 

Motivation to teach: Refers to the motivation that teachers, teacher candidates, 

and pre-service teachers have for the act of teaching and for the teaching profession. 

Intrinsic motivation: Refers to the pursuit of an activity for the enjoyment of the 

action itself rather than any external source of gratification (Ryan and Deci, 2000). 

Extrinsic motivation: Refers to the pursuit of an activity with the purpose of 

achieving a result separable from the activity itself (Ryan and Deci, 2000). 

  



9 
 

 

Chapter 2 

Theoretical Basis of Research and Literature Review 

This chapter is going to provide the theoretical basis of research and literature 

review in relation to technological pedagogical content knowledge and motivation to teach. 

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) 

The origins of the modern technological pedagogical content knowledge framework 

can be traced back to Shulman’s (1986) 'pedagogical content knowledge'. Shulman's 

concept of pedagogical content knowledge emphasized that successful teaching 

necessitates a thorough and extensive grasp of not only the subject being taught (content 

knowledge) but also the most efficient methods for imparting that content (pedagogical 

knowledge). Shulman criticized the dichotomy of content and pedagogy, questioning the 

idea that pedagogy should be considered as secondary (Shulman, 1986). His stance on 

pedagogical content knowledge related content knowledge to teaching and teachability 

(Shulman, 1986; 1987). He expressed that it was another type of content knowledge 

(Shulman, 1986, p. 9). Pedagogical content knowledge refers to “that special amalgam of 

content and pedagogy that is uniquely the province of teachers, their own special form of 

professional understanding” (Shulman, 1987, p. 9), which is in and on itself regarded as 

one of the core competences of teachers in terms of knowledge and understanding of their 

field of expertise (European Commission, 2013).  

Shulman's concept laid the foundation for further exploration and development of 

the TPACK framework. The TPACK framework expands upon Shulman's concept by adding 

the dimension of technology knowledge to the equation (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Koehler 

& Mishra, 2008; Koehler & Mishra, 2009). Shulman’s (1986) framework was expanded by 

Mishra and Koehler (2006), who integrated technological knowledge into their framework 

(Figure 1) through a design experiment that focused on teachers’ use of technology in 

teaching. The TPCK framework is based on the understanding of teaching as a practice 



10 
 

 

that requires a combination of different types of knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). 

However, the TPACK framework not only stresses the importance of the three components 

of technology, pedagogy, and content on their own but also highlights the complex interplay 

among these components. Technological pedagogical content knowledge is defined as “an 

emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all three components” (Mishra & Koehler, 

2006, p. 1028).  

Figure 1 

The TPCK Model 

 

Reprinted from “Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for 

teacher knowledge ,”  by P. Mishra, & M. J. Koehler, 2006, The Teachers College 

Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. Copyright 2006 by Teachers College, Columbia 

University. 

As is seen in the framework, technology, pedagogy and content form the three basic 

components of TPACK. Based on the intersections of these three basic components, 

different knowledge types emerge within the framework, which are named as pedagogical 

content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, technological content 



11 
 

 

knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge, which is at the center of the 

framework. 

The component of content knowledge (CK) in the TPACK framework refers to the 

knowledge of the subject knowledge itself (Koehler & Mishra, 2005), which, in the case of 

EFL, corresponds to the knowledge of the English language itself. Pedagogical knowledge 

(PK) component of the framework entails knowledge in relation to the practices, processes, 

and methods of both teaching and learning (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Koehler & Mishra, 

2008; 2009). Technological knowledge (TK), on the other hand, is harder to define unlike 

the other two basic components of the framework and more elusive as it is in a constant 

state of change (Koehler & Mishra, 2008; 2009). It refers to the knowledge of standard and 

advanced technologies as well as the knowledge of operating these technologies (Mishra 

& Koehler, 2006).  

In terms of the knowledge types that emerge at the intersections of the basic 

components, technological content knowledge (TCK) involves the reciprocal relationship 

between technology and content that necessitates teachers to have the knowledge of the 

subject matter as well as the knowledge of how subject matter can be transformed by using 

technology (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) refers 

to the knowledge of transformation of teaching and learning by the use of technology in 

specific manners (Koehler & Mishra, 2008; 2009). Pedagogical content knowledge, similar 

to Shulman’s (1986) model, is described as the knowledge of pedagogy with regards to its 

application to the teaching of particular content (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Koehler & Mishra, 

2008; 2009). 

Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) forms the central 

component of the framework through the accumulation of the types of knowledge that are 

described above. Technological pedagogical content knowledge involves the interaction of 

the central components of the framework while diverging from the independent knowledge 



12 
 

 

of the components (Koehler & Mishra, 2008). It is the central, comprehensive component 

of the framework where all the other components intersect (Kabakci Yurdakul et al., 2012). 

The TPACK framework has emerged as a techno-pedagogical integration, which is 

based on pedagogical considerations and involves the practical implementation of both 

pedagogical and technological factors in the technology integration process into education 

(Kabakci Yurdakul et al., 2012). The framework recognizes that in order to effectively teach 

with technology, teachers must possess not only content knowledge and pedagogical 

knowledge, but also a deep understanding of how to integrate technology into their teaching 

practices (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). TPACK has been utilized more and more to 

characterize the knowledge teachers require for successful technology integration into their 

teaching (Schmidt et al., 2009). As the presence of technology use is ever-expanding within 

classrooms, frameworks such as TPACK are necessary in order to underpin teachers’ 

expertise of technology use in education (Baser et al., 2016). 

Assessment of TPACK  

One line of research regarding assessment of TPACK involves the endeavors in 

instrument development for measuring competence regarding the domains of the 

framework. TPACK as a construct is a comprehensive concept in nature. Thus, it does not 

come as a surprise that assessment of TPACK has been a central subject within the field 

of TPACK research. Assessment or measurement of TPACK has been attempted with a 

variety of data collection tools while scale and survey tools predominantly constitute the 

tools developed for this purpose. The development of such tools requires extensive trial and 

error processes as the elements of such instruments need testing and reviewing in order to 

be classified as effective and correct mediums for assessment. In the scope of the research 

on developing measurement tools for TPACK, various instruments intended to measure the 

TPACK of in-service as well as pre-service teachers. Assessment tools for measuring 

teachers’ TPACK have been utilized to investigate the competence and needs of teachers. 



13 
 

 

One of the primary methods used for measuring teachers’ TPACK is the self-assessment 

instruments that reveal teachers’ perceived TPACK competences. 

Among these assessment tool development studies, some concentrated on 

developing a self-assessment instrument for teachers in order to measure TPACK 

holistically. For instance, Kabakci Yurdakul et al. (2012) developed the TPACK-deep scale 

for the purpose of measuring pre-service teachers’ overall TPACK with a focus on the 

central component, TPCK, of the TPACK model. Other studies involved assessment tools 

that included sub-sections with items on the specific domains of the TPACK model 

alongside the central TPACK domain (Schmidt et al., 2009; Canbazoğlu Bilici et al., 2013; 

Pamuk et al., 2015; Akyuz, 2018; Bostancıoğlu & Handley, 2018; Kaplon‑Schilis & 

Lyublinskaya, 2020; Prasojo et al., 2020).  

The self-assessment tools designed for assessing the TPACK of pre-service 

teachers include instruments developed to measure the TPACK of pre-service teachers 

without differentiating their fields of education (Kabakci Yurdakul et al., 2012; Pamuk et al., 

2015) as well as instruments aiming to measure the TPACK of pre-service teachers 

majoring in specific disciplines (Schmidt et al., 2009; Canbazoğlu Bilici et al., 2013; Baser 

et al., 2016; Akyuz, 2018; Kaplon‑Schilis & Lyublinskaya, 2020; Wang, 2022).  

Some assessment tools that were developed for measuring TPACK were 

specifically designed for measuring TPACK in relation to EFL. One of the prominent 

examples of such assessment tools is the self-assessment survey tool develop by Baser et 

al. (2016). Their TPACK-EFL tool had survey items on all sub-sections of the TPACK model 

and was designed to be used with pre-service EFL teachers with subject specific survey 

items on language teaching. Similarly, Bostancıoğlu and Handley (2018) developed the EFL 

Total PACKage questionnaire, which is a self-report tool with items on the distinct domains 

of the TPACK model that aimed at measuring EFL teachers’ TPACK.  Prasojo et al. (2020) 

also developed a survey tool that was specifically designed for the assessment of EFL 

teachers’ TPACK with items on the domains of the model. Likewise, The EFL-TPACK scale 



14 
 

 

developed by Wang (2022) focuses on the TPACK levels of EFL in-service and pre-service 

teachers in line with the requirements of the 21st century competences. However, this two-

dimensional scale has sub-sections for pedagogical content knowledge and technological 

pedagogical content knowledge dimensions in order to assess and provide an 

understanding of technology integration of teachers into their teaching.  

Among the self-assessment tools developed for measuring teachers’ TPACK, Akyuz 

(2018) designed a performance assessment instrument supported by a self-assessment 

tool. This format was unlike many other studies on instrument development for pre-service 

teachers’ TPACK assessment as it enabled the comparison of two different assessment 

instruments. Apart from self-assessment, other assessment tools employing various 

methods have been developed in order to measure teachers’ TPACK. Tseng (2016) 

developed one such tool which aims to investigate student perspectives regarding their 

perception of their teachers’ TPACK. This study suggested that students’ perceptions may 

shed light on the practice of teachers regarding technology integration and may enhance 

the understanding of their TPACK. 

The review of literature showed that TPACK assessment tools that are discipline 

specific as well as interdisciplinary (applicable to different fields of teaching) exist in the 

field. These assessment tools are designed to measure the knowledge requirements and 

knowledge needs of teachers in relation to their technological pedagogical content 

knowledge. The specialized assessments tools designed for TPACK provide not only 

researchers but also teacher educators with opportunities for more comprehensive 

understanding of teachers' technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge within the 

context of their chosen teaching fields, which, in turn, can inform teacher education. 

TPACK in Foreign Language Teaching 

Advancements within the domain of educational technology have stimulated 

investigations concerning Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (Çelik & 



15 
 

 

Mirici, 2024). Scholarly research into technological pedagogical content knowledge in the 

field of language education has predominantly focused its efforts and attention on foreign 

language instruction and foreign language teachers. Though studies on teachers’ TPACK 

in native language teaching exist, they are limited in number within the literature. The review 

of literature revealed only one study directly exploring the TPACK of native language 

teachers. In this study, Cheng (2017) explored the perceptions of native language teachers’ 

TPACK in Taiwan with a focus on the native language of Hakka. On the other hand, the 

majority of the related literature on language teaching and TPACK focused on foreign or 

second language teaching when investigating language teachers’ TPACK.  

Within literature, TPACK of foreign language teachers have been investigated in 

various contexts. Bustamente and Moeller (2013) carried out a case study on an online 

professional development program using Web 2.0 technologies for teachers of German as 

a foreign language adopting the TPACK model as a theoretical framework in order to foster 

technology literacy and expand German language proficiency among other objectives. 

Tseng et al. (2016) explored Mandarin as a foreign language teachers’ TPACK 

development in their study that aimed to support teachers’ TPACK in relation to web 

conferencing teaching. In another study, Bustamente (2020) investigated the TPACK-based 

professional development on Web 2.0 based technologies in her study involving Spanish 

as a foreign language teachers in the United States. Likewise, Li and Tseng (2022) 

conducted a study involving the TPACK of foreign language teachers participating in a 

training course on robot-assisted language learning in a Chinese as a second language 

context in Taiwan. Qiu et al. (2022) investigated TPACK with a focus on pre-service 

teachers of Chinese as a second language in China. 

While TPACK of foreign language teachers have been investigated in a variety of 

language contexts, English language teachers’ TPACK has received substantial attention 

in the related literature (Cheng, 2017; Qiu et al., 2022). One of the primary incentives for 

the exploration of TPACK in EFL settings more extensively can be stated as the fact that 



16 
 

 

English has become a lingua franca (Seidlhofer, 2001; 2005), adopted as a crucial medium 

of instruction across a wide variety of teaching settings where it is accepted as a foreign 

language. The review of literature revealed that research on the TPACK of EFL teachers 

has been explored in contexts involving in-service teachers as well as pre-service teachers. 

A substantial number of these studies have tended to show special interest towards TPACK 

of teachers in terms of their self-efficacy in technology use, their beliefs and perceptions 

regarding their TPACK levels or the development of their TPACK over time. Other studies 

have focused on measuring the technological pedagogical content knowledge of teachers 

and teacher candidates. 

Technology use and technology integration abilities of teachers have been a notable 

part of research on TPACK in foreign language teaching, which have received increasing 

attention within the current literature. In their mixed-method research study, Liu and 

Kleinsasser (2015) looked into six EFL high school teachers’ perceptions of their computer-

assisted language learning knowledge as well as their TPACK development in a year-long 

professional development program. The study reported that all EFL teachers involved in the 

study demonstrated improvement in their survey results, as well as in the interviews 

conducted towards the end of the study, regarding their self-efficacy for technology 

integration compared to their self-efficacy prior to their participation in the technology-

enhanced professional development program in which they received training on computer-

assisted language learning. This study also reported that the EFL teachers’ improvement 

and participation also had positive impacts on their students’ learning experiences. In a 

more comprehensive study involving 150 teachers, Yang (2018) looked into the TPACK 

and technology integration self-efficacy through a quantitative research design. The study 

concluded that, though the EFL teachers had moderate self-efficacy in technology 

integration, their technological knowledge as well as their confidence in technology 

integration were not sufficient. On the other hand, Yang (2018) also stated that TPACK and 

technology integration self-efficacy were positively related, with TPACK having substantial 



17 
 

 

impact over the latter. It was signified that teachers need to continually improve their 

knowledge base in order to promote technology integration into teaching. 

Lai et al. (2022) investigated EFL teachers’ technology use in relation to TPACK as 

well as school culture, teacher beliefs, and professional development. Analyzing the survey 

results of 280 EFL teachers, they explore EFL teachers’ technology use for content delivery, 

for learning enrichment, and for transformation in education towards students’ self-directed 

learning. The study put forth two important impacts of TPACK. It was found that TPACK 

functioned as a direct predictor of the aforementioned three forms of technology use of 

teachers as well as a mediating factor for facilitating the impacts of school culture and 

professional development. The study also revealed stronger predictive power for TPACK in 

relation to teachers’ technology use for learning enrichment and for transformation, which 

entails student involvement to a greater extent, compared to technology use for content 

delivery, which is more teacher centered. Through a qualitative research design, Zhang and 

Fang (2022) investigated the TPACK and teacher efficacy of 12 university EFL teachers in 

relation to their implementation of technology-integrated flipped classrooms. With its 

formulation of flipped classroom-situated TPACK, this study illustrated a novel 

understanding of TPACK that can enhance our understanding of teaching with technology-

integrated flipped classroom by incorporating elements such as the teachers’ viewpoints 

and convictions of TPACK constructs as well as the pedagogical design of flipped 

classrooms (p. 12). Raygan and Moradkhani (2022) looked into the interaction of school 

climate, attitudes, and TPACK with technology integration success of 209 EFL teachers. 

Their study reported that technology integration was substantially predicted by the TPACK 

and attitudes of EFL teachers in a direct and positive manner. The study suggested that 

teachers may perceive themselves as more equipped and assured regarding the utilization 

of digital technologies when they possess literacy in technology use. 

Teachers’ own perceptions on their own TPACK levels have been another aspect of 

the research on TPACK.  Nazari et al. (2019) looked into the difference in the perceived 



18 
 

 

TPACK of novice and experienced EFL teachers with a purpose to uncover the impact of 

the difference in their perceptions on their professional development. Their research 

indicated that novice and experienced teachers opted for different training courses on 

professional development in relation to their own needs regarding their technological 

pedagogical content knowledge. The study of Huang et al. (2022) on the TPACK of Chinese 

EFL teachers revealed that teachers’ perceptions in relation to their TPACK was that they 

generally perceived themselves as competent in TPACK, with their content knowledge 

being the area where they were most confident based on the results.  

The development of EFL teachers’ TPACK and their competencies in technology 

use and technology has been another field of research in relation to TPACK in foreign 

language teaching. In one such study on the exploration of the development of language 

teachers’ computer-assisted language learning (CALL) competency, Tai (2015) reported 

that teachers demonstrated development in their competencies in technology use and in 

their technology integration into their teaching due to the result of the impact of a teacher 

education workshop specifically designed for CALL. Cindrić and Gregurić (2019) carried out 

an action research study on technology integration in pre-service English language teacher 

education. The results of their study indicated that technology integration into pre-service 

teacher education can be successful through careful planning and that pre-service teachers’ 

awareness on technology integration improved through the intervention process carried out 

in this study. Chen et al.’s (2022) study involved college EFL teachers’ TPACK in China 

during online teaching of English. Their study revealed that teachers’ TPACK development 

is a dynamic cognitive process and that their TPACK developed through situating the 

learning process in interactive activity systems. 

As the review of literature has revealed, the TPACK of foreign language teachers in 

different contexts has been investigated with studies on EFL teachers forming a prominent 

field of investigation within the research on foreign language teachers’ TPACK. Research 

on EFL teachers’ TPACK focused on a variety of aspects of EFL teachers’ as well as EFL 



19 
 

 

pre-service teachers' TPACK. These aspects involved measuring TPACK, self-efficacy of 

teachers in technology use and technology integration, their beliefs and perceptions in 

relation to their TPACK and the development of TPACK in in-service and pre-service EFL 

teachers. TPACK of pre-service EFL teachers in Turkish contexts has also received 

significant attention from researchers in this field. 

Research on Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ TPACK in Türkiye 

TPACK research in Turkish contexts have been carried out involving in-service as 

well as pre-service teachers of a variety of subject fields. In-service teachers' TPACK 

exploration involved aspects of teachers’ knowledge such as the relationship between their 

TPACK and technology integration (Çelik, 2022; Dikmen & Demirer, 2022), their TPACK 

development (Canbazoğlu Bilici & Baran, 2015), and the practical implementation of their 

TPACK knowledge (Yapıcı & Mirici, 2023). Likewise, pre-service teachers of different 

subject fields have been studied in terms of their TPACK competency and technology use 

or technology integration (Kabakçı Yurdakul, 2011; 2018; Pamuk, 2012; Kabakci Yurdakul, 

& Coklar, 2014; Keser et al., 2015; Çelik et al., 2016) along with the development of their 

TPACK (Kartal & Dilek, 2021). In relation to EFL, technological pedagogical content 

knowledge of pre-service EFL teachers in Turkish contexts have also been investigated 

with a focus on different aspects of their knowledge bases. 

Pre-service teachers’ competence in TPACK is one of the main focuses of research 

on pre-service EFL teachers and TPACK in the Turkish contexts. Solak and Çakır (2014) 

investigated pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK competency levels in relation to the factors 

of gender and academic achievement in a public university with 137 pre-service EFL 

teachers. They found that TPACK and academic achievement were not significantly 

correlated while the technological knowledge and pedagogical knowledge levels differed 

between males and females. Pre-service teachers’ content and technology knowledge were 

found to be at medium level in their study. Öz (2015) also looked into the TPACK of pre-

service EFL teachers in a public university for the purpose of assessing their knowledge. 



20 
 

 

He concluded that pre-service teachers had high levels of TPACK competence while female 

pre-service teachers were revealed to have higher TPACK development. Atar et al.’s (2019) 

investigation involved 182 pre-service EFL teachers in two public universities whose 

technopedagogical content knowledge levels were investigated by taking into account a 

variety of variables. Their investigation indicated that pre-service teachers’ TPACK level 

was high in general. Another finding of their study was that the variables involved (grade, 

gender, daily use of internet and social media) did not have a significant effect on their 

general TPACK. In their study, Sarıçoban et al. (2019) investigated pre-service EFL 

teachers’ TPACK levels by exploring all sub-components of their technological pedagogical 

content knowledge. The results of their study indicated pre-service EFL teachers’ 

competence in TPACK was satisfactory with their levels of competence being moderate to 

high, while there was room for development. Farhadi and Göktürk’s (2023) investigation of 

pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK not only focused on their competence levels but also 

their TPACK needs. Their findings also indicated high levels of TPACK competence in pre-

service EFL teachers. In terms of the TPACK needs of pre-service teachers, they concluded 

that the needs were mostly on the technology related knowledge bases of pre-service 

teachers. 

In her exceptional research study, Turgut (2017a) explored the TPACK of pre-

service EFL teachers in a public university in comparison with the TPACK of in-service EFL 

teachers and teacher candidates in the formation program of their department. The study 

reported a significant difference among the levels of technological pedagogical content 

knowledge of the three groups of teachers in terms of all domains of the model with the 

exception of the TPACK sub-domain. In terms of technology knowledge, pedagogy 

knowledge, content knowledge, and technological pedagogical knowledge, teacher 

candidates in the formation programs and pre-service teachers were found to have higher 

self-efficacy compared to in-service teachers. The findings from the qualitative data of the 



21 
 

 

study also indicated that pre-service teachers’ TPACK was more sophisticated compared 

to that of candidate and in-service teachers. 

The TPACK competence of pre-service EFL teachers was explored through pre-

service teachers’ lesson planning and lesson implementation practices as well. In their 

study on pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK in relation to their technology integration into 

their lesson planning and their implementations, Kurt et al. (2014) implemented a course 

that was designed for the study. Pre-service teachers’ lesson planning process was 

followed through the course and their lesson implementations were observed. The results 

of the study indicated that pre-service teachers endeavored to enhance the quality of their 

teaching through effective integration of technology, taking into account the relationship 

between content, pedagogy and technology. 

When the studies in the above literature review that investigated the TPACK levels 

of pre-service EFL teachers are taken into consideration, it was observed that the findings 

of the studies indicate pre-service EFL teachers to have either high or moderate levels of 

technological pedagogical knowledge, though they may or may not have varying levels of 

competence in different aspects of their TPACK. These studies involved senior students as 

well as pre-service teachers in their earlier years of teacher education in their 

undergraduate programs. Based on the related literature, the pre-service EFL teachers in 

Turkish EFL teacher education contexts are considered to be generally competent in 

technological pedagogical content knowledge. 

The development of pre-service teachers’ TPACK is another field of research within 

EFL studies in Turkish contexts. The development of pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK 

through the process of the compulsory computer-assisted language learning course in the 

EFL department of a Turkish university by Koçoğlu (2009). Her study showed that the 

computer-assisted language learning course facilitated pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK 

development and enabled them to practice their TPACK. The findings of the study also 

pointed out the impact of pre-service teachers’ instructors on inspiring them to integrate 



22 
 

 

technology through modeling the use of technology in class. Similarly, Kurt et al. (2013) 

looked into the development of pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK development in a 12-

week study in which pre-service teachers received theoretical instruction as well as 

conducting hands-on practice. Their study revealed that pre-service teachers’ scores in 

several domains of their TPACK showed significant increase at the end of the study. 

Turgut’s (2017b) study on the perceived development of TPACK involved sophomore, 

junior, and senior pre-service EFL teachers. Her study showed that the development of 

TPACK over time demonstrated a nonlinear pattern.  

Self-confidence and beliefs about TPACK have been investigated in relation to pre-

service EFL teachers in Turkish contexts as well. Sancar-Tokmak and Yanpar-Yelken 

(2015) investigated pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK self-confidence with regards to the 

impact of creating digital stories in their experimental research. Their investigation revealed 

that pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK self-confidence in their TPACK demonstrated 

significant difference before and after creating digital stories. Likewise, İşler and Yıldırım 

(2018) explored pre-service EFL teachers’ perceptions of their TPACK as well as the factors 

that influence their perceptions. They concluded that pre-service teachers’ perceptions of 

their TPACK were high. In terms of the factors that influence TPACK, they reported that 

pre-service teachers stressed the place of factors such as their interest and experience as 

well as highlighting the support they received from their instructors regarding their TPACK 

development. 

The review of the literature indicated that pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK has 

been investigated with a focus on different aspects and different parameters not only in 

Türkiye but also in international contexts within the existing literature. The research 

executed in this area has investigated the TPACK competence levels presented by pre-

service EFL teachers. The primary aim of the current study is to further explore the TPACK 

of pre-service EFL teachers by investigating their TPACK in relation to their motivation to 



23 
 

 

teach with a special focus on 4th-year pre-service EFL teachers in teacher education 

programs at Turkish universities. 

Theories of Motivation 

 Motivation plays an important role in education as in different fields since it is “the 

driving force behind all actions performed” (Ghenghesh, 2013, p. 457). Schunk and 

DiBenedetto (2020) articulated that motivation concerns processes that initiate goal-

directed activities and that these processes are factors that result in outcomes including 

achievement and environmental regulation (p. 1). A variety of theories regarding the nature 

and structure of motivation have appeared in the last century, which provide diverse 

definitions regarding motivation and its components. Among the essential theories on 

motivation, the primary and prominent ones could be listed as attribution theory (Weiner, 

1985; 1986), expectancy-value theory (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), social 

cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986; 1989), achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1984; Dweck, 

1986; Elliot & McGregor, 2001), and self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000; 

Deci et al., 1991). 

 The origins of attribution theory can be traced back to the 1950s and 1960s (Harvey 

& Weary, 1984; Weiner, 1995). Though it was primarily adopted into the study of psychology 

(Weiner, 1995), attribution theory has been shown to be a valuable conceptual framework 

for research into motivation in pedagogical contexts (Graham, 1991). Attribution theory 

centers upon the relation of causality, that is, the reasons behind the occurrence of a 

particular event and this attribution of responsibility are believed to shape the later behavior 

(Weiner, 1972). From the perspective of attribution theory, achievement motivation is 

observed to be a determinant of how success and failure is perceived in that individuals 

with high achievement motivation may attribute failure or success in attaining a goal to effort 

whereas individuals low in achievement motivation are more likely to attribute their failure 

or success in attaining a goal to ability (Weiner, 1972).  



24 
 

 

Expectancy-value theory has also been one of the prominent theories on motivation. 

The foundations of this theory are rooted in Atkinson’s (1957) work (Wigfield, 1994; Loh, 

2019). From the perspective of this theory, significant predictors of motivation to pursue 

achievement are regarded to be expectancy for success and the value attributed to 

succeeding (Wigfield, 1994). Other factors such as goals, self-schema, perceptions on the 

difficulty of tasks, and beliefs about ability influence the expectancies and values in relation 

to achievement (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Task values are argued to be subjective since 

tasks and task difficulty are perceived and valued differently by different individuals (Eccles 

& Wigfield, 2020). The value of a task is determined based on four main constructs, which 

are intrinsic value (also, interest value), utility value, attainment value, and cost (Eccles, 

1984, as cited in Eccles & Wigfield, 2020). In the field of education, the expectancy-value 

theory is utilized for explaining and predicting not only learning performance but also 

persistence and ambitions of learners (Loh, 2019).  

 Social cognitive theory focuses on learning from social environment (Schunk & 

Usher, 2012). From a social cognitive point of view, behavior is believed to be influenced 

by the reciprocal interactions among personal, behavioral, and social/environmental factors 

(Schunk & Usher, 2012). Behavior is viewed to be motivated by self-regulative mechanisms, 

which include self-monitoring, judgment of one’s behavior, affective self-reflection, and self-

efficacy mechanisms (Bandura, 1991). The self-regulatory system and how it operates are 

believed to be impacted by social factors according to the social cognitive theory's 

interactionist perspective (Bandura, 1991). Motivation itself is also guided by the operations 

of self-regulatory mechanisms such as self-efficacy (Wood & Bandura, 1989). From earlier 

research to modern concepts involving agency, motivation has constituted a crucial place 

within the social cognitive theory and the vital role of motivation alongside social factors in 

shaping human behavior was highlighted even in the initial stances of social cognitive theory 

(Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020).  



25 
 

 

Achievement goal theory emerged in the 1970s and became one of the prominent 

theoretical frameworks in the field of motivation research (Urdan & Kaplan, 2020). One of 

the prominent hypotheses that is frequently examined in research on achievement-goal 

theory is the connection between goal orientation and the learning strategies adopted for 

goal achievement (Wolters, 2004). Achievement goals, as represented by goal orientation, 

are not just simple target goals or more general goals, but rather a general orientation to 

the task which includes a number of related beliefs (Pintrich, 2000). Achievement goal 

theory especially concentrates on student motivation and asserts that the reasons and 

objectives that students have for engaging in academic tasks need to be taken into 

consideration in order to understand their motivation and their achievement-related 

behavior (Wolters, 2004; Zusho & Clayton, 2011). Harackiewicz et al. (2022) stated that it 

is probable that a variety of achievement goals could be more effective in particular 

contexts, while different achievement goals might be more effective for different people. 

Wolters (2004) articulated that the environment of a goal structure can potentially affect 

students’ motivation as well as their cognitive engagement and their achievement. 

As defined by Deci and Ryan (2008), self-determination theory is “an empirically 

based theory of human motivation, development, and wellness” (p. 182). Instead of focusing 

on the amount of motivation that individuals possess, self-determination theory focuses on 

different types of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2008). This aspect of self-determination theory 

separates it from the majority of historical and contemporary frameworks focusing on human 

motivation which views motivation as a concept that is unitary (Ryan & Deci, 2022). A 

distinction between autonomous and controlled motivations is made in self-determination 

theory (Ryan & Deci, 2022). It is highlighted that autonomous motivation, which involves 

extrinsic motivation or well-internalized extrinsic motivation, allows people to exhibit higher 

levels of interest and excitement as well as vitality and confidence, which result in better 

performance (Ryan & Deci, 2017, as cited in Ryan & Deci, 2022). Ryan and Deci (2000) 

define intrinsic motivation as “doing an activity for the inherent satisfaction of the activity 



26 
 

 

itself” while they describe extrinsic motivation as “the performance of an activity in order to 

attain some separable outcome” (p. 71) through the perspective of self-determination theory 

(SDT). The importance of feeling a sense of freedom and independence is highlighted by 

self-determination theory as a vital element in fostering self-determined motivation (Legault 

et al., 2007). From the perspective of self-determination theory, the greater the 

internalization or sense of self-determination regarding a particular goal or value, the greater 

the consistency in behavior reflecting that goal or value (Legault et al., 2007). 

Current theories on motivation provide extensive theoretical frameworks that can be 

utilized to address the inquiries with regards to the navigation of individuals through the 

intricacies as well as the incentives associated with the profession of teaching (Watt & 

Richardson, 2008a). The prominent theories in relation to motivation have not only shaped 

motivation but also informed research on motivation within the field of educational research 

(Koenka, 2020; Urhahne & Wijnia, 2023). 

Motivation to Teach 

The discipline concerned with the study of motivation within the field of education is 

a dynamic area of scientific enquiry which incorporates a variety of methodologies and 

conceptual frameworks transcending the limitations of conventional theoretical paradigms 

(Urhahne & Wijnia, 2023). Motivation has been acknowledged in the field of education as 

an important parameter and an expanding body of scholarly inquiry has denoted its effect 

on a myriad of different variables like the efficacy of teaching (Han & Yin, 2016). Research 

on teacher motivation especially started to expand towards the end of the 20th century and 

teaching motivation of initial teachers has been a focal research area, while in-service 

teachers’ motivation to teach has also started receiving more attention in recent years (Han 

& Yin, 2016). The past several decades have witnessed research into the phenomenon of 

motivation within the field of education predominantly with regards to student motivation; 

however, simultaneously, there has been a lack of systematic and theoretically grounded 



27 
 

 

exploration into the motivational factors influencing teachers, though some attention has 

been directed towards this area of study (Richardson & Watt, 2010).  

This neglected issue is a critical oversight considering the fact that teacher 

motivation has a profound impact on teachers’ professional objectives, underlying beliefs, 

cognitive insights, personal ambitions, and corresponding actions, which therefore plays a 

crucial role in shaping not only the motivational levels of their students but also the overall 

learning outcomes achieved by those students (Richardson & Watt, 2010, p. 139). Within 

the research dedicated to understanding the various factors that affect teacher motivation, 

several aspects of the construct of motivation have been explored through empirical 

research. One area of inquiry that has appeared focuses specifically on the motivation that 

teachers have for the act of teaching and the teaching profession itself. When considered 

from the perspective of educational research, motivation constitutes one of the numerous 

interrelated elements that connect with the self-conceptual frameworks of in-service 

teachers as well as those of prospective teacher candidates.  

Motivation to Teach and Pre-Service Teachers  

Pre-service teachers’ motivation to teach is of significance within the research on 

the exploration of motivation since a better understanding of the motivations of individuals 

in pursuing teaching as a profession is needed (Richardson & Watt, 2010). The 

understanding of motivation levels of pre-service teachers can reveal their forthcoming 

levels of engagement and overall effectiveness within the classroom environment (Watt & 

Richardson, 2008a). Sinclair (2008) expressed that motivation may be regarded as the 

attraction that draws individuals towards teaching and the teaching profession, while 

emphasizing that investigations into the motivational factors influencing pre-service 

teachers' aspirations to teach could yield valuable insights into the recruiting process of new 

teachers and support the sustained retention of these individuals within the teaching 

profession. The motivation that pre-service teachers have for the act of teaching and for 



28 
 

 

becoming a teacher has been explored and analyzed from the vantage points of a variety 

of theoretical frameworks involving motivation.  

One prominent methodology in the exploration of motivation involved the FIT-Choice 

model (Watt & Richardson, 2007; Richardson & Watt, 2014). Richardson and Watt (2006) 

explored the teaching motivations and characteristics of pre-service teachers from different 

majors in three Australian universities. They adopted the FIT-Choice Scale developed by 

Watt & Richardson (2007), which is grounded in the expectancy-value theory. Their study 

revealed the profiles of pre-service teachers and indicated that the primary motivations of 

pre-service teachers for choosing teaching as a career included their perceived teaching 

abilities, the value of teaching and intrinsic factors such as the desire for making a social 

contribution. Watt et al. (2012) also adopted the FIT-Choice model in their research 

exploring pre-service teachers’ motivations for choosing teaching as a career. They focused 

on pre-service teachers from different countries for an international comparison and 

reported that pre-service teachers’ motivations for teaching showed similarities across 

different countries’ contexts. Fokkens-Bruinsma and Canrinus’s (2014) investigation using 

the same model focused on Dutch teacher education contexts. Their findings indicated that 

working with children and adolescents was among the top motivations of the pre-service 

teachers in the teacher education contexts involved in this study. 

Another line of research focused on the source of pre-service teachers’ motivation, 

investigating whether motivation was intrinsic, extrinsic, altruistic, or a combination of a 

variety of these different factors. Sinclair (2008) reported that pre-service teachers can be 

multi-motivated to become teachers. His study showed pre-service teachers’ intrinsic 

motivations to outweigh their extrinsic motivations and reported that working with children 

and mental stimulation received the highest scores from pre-service teachers in terms of 

their intrinsic motivations. Bruinsma and Jansen’s (2010) study on the intrinsic and extrinsic 

motivations of pre-service teachers with a focus on adaptive and maladaptive motives 

revealed that the intrinsic adaptive motives of pre-service teachers had connections to their 



29 
 

 

prior abilities, their teacher education program and their classroom teaching experiences. 

Similarly, Zhang et al. (2020) found pre-service teachers to have strong intrinsic values 

while their extrinsic values were weak. Though considerable scholarly inquiry has been 

conducted in the literature examining various forms of motivation, an absence of agreement 

persists within academic circles concerning the exact definitions and boundaries that 

separate the varieties of motivation (Richardson & Watt, 2010).  

The development or change of motivation over time is not as well-known as the 

factors that initiate motivation to become teachers (Sinclair et al., 2006). With that said, 

research showed that pre-service teachers’ motivation levels and motivation properties may 

fluctuate over time through their teacher education process (Yuan & Zhang, 2017). Pre-

service teachers’ motivation to teach has connections to their psychological wellbeing. Kaya 

and Çenesiz (2020) noted that pre-service teachers’ psychological wellness was influenced 

by their motivation., with intrinsic motivation having predictive over their psychological 

wellbeing. With regards to teachers’ self-conceptions, Kumazawa (2013) explored novice 

EFL teachers’ teaching motivation through an interpretive inquiry, which revealed that 

teachers shaped their self-concepts as a result of self-reflection, resulting in teachers’ 

regaining their motivation. 

In the educational research conducted within Turkish contexts, the motivations of 

pre-service teachers have been the subject of investigation in a variety of scholarly studies 

that examine the factors influencing motivation, in addition to exploring the multifaceted 

dimensions that constitute motivation. Research on the variety of motivations possessed by 

pre-service teachers has demonstrated a collection of results that reveal the various factors 

that influence pre-service teachers’ motivation to teach and to pursue a career in teaching 

(Yüce et al., 2013). Research into Turkish pre-service teachers’ motivation has explored the 

dimensions of internal and external motivation along with the pre-service teachers’ sources 

of motivation (Dereli & Acat, 2010).  



30 
 

 

Among the many factors that contribute to the construct of motivation, instructors 

constitute another factor that impacts pre-service teachers’ motivation to teach. Instructors 

and the impact of instructors on the process of professional development is an element of 

the specific context of pre-service teacher education. Alpaslan et al.’s (2018) study on the 

impact of support and class belonging on the career motivation of pre-service teachers shed 

light on the influence that instructors have on pre-service teachers. Their study showed that 

the support pre-service teachers receive from their instructors during teacher education 

impacts their motivation. The support pre-service teachers received from their instructors 

was revealed to be the strongest predictor of motivation among the factors explored in this 

study (Alpaslan et al., 2018).  

The experimental case study carried out by Çimen and Çakmak (202) explored pre-

service teacher motivation in relation to the effect of feedback they received from their 

instructors as well as their peers. The study involved a feedback model that was designed 

to explore motivation and reflective thinking of pre-service teachers. Their study not only 

revealed a significant increase in pre-service teachers’ motivation, but it also showed that 

pre-service teachers’ personal development was positively influenced by the 

implementation of the model. 

Some of these scholarly studies that focus on pre-service teachers and their 

motivations for teaching have explored the intricate relationship that exists between their 

motives to engage in the teaching profession and their attitudes and perceptions regarding 

the teaching vocation itself. (Ayık & Ataş, 2014; Gök & Atalay Kabasakal, 2019; Bas, 2022). 

Ayık and Ataş (2014) revealed that pre-service teachers’ motivation to teach had a positive 

and moderate connection to their attitudes towards the profession itself. Pre-service 

teachers' self-efficacy in association with their motivation to teach has been another focus 

of research in this area, with the purpose of identifying the links that exist between the two 

phenomena. (Gök & Atalay Kabasakal, 2019; Bas, 2022). The research study conducted 

by Gök and Atalay Kabasakal (2019) revealed minimal correlation existing between the self-



31 
 

 

efficacy beliefs held by pre-service teachers and their levels of motivation. Contrary to the 

findings of Gök and Atalay (2019), Bas (2022) argued that self-efficacy serves as a crucial 

intermediary variable that mediates the relationship of teaching motivation with beliefs on 

teaching and the attitude towards teaching.  

Research on Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ Motivation to Teach in Türkiye  

Pre-service teachers’ motivation for teaching has been explored in different Turkish 

pre-service teacher education contexts. Pre-service English as a Foreign Language 

teachers’ motivation to teach is no exception to these attempts at exploring teaching 

motivations. Studies focusing on the motivation of pre-service EFL teachers in the Turkish 

context have uncovered a multitude of both intrinsic and extrinsic determinants that either 

foster or hinder the motivation to pursue a career in teaching. 

Motivational orientations of pre-service EFL teachers in freshmen, junior, and senior 

classes was explored by Yütük (2018). He concluded that Turkish pre-service EFL teachers 

had intrinsic motivations more that extrinsic motivations. Adiguzel and Karagol (2022) 

ascertained that the elements exerting the most substantial influence on the motivation 

levels of pre-service teachers in regard to their teaching aspirations were predominantly 

related to the ability to shape the future trajectories of children and adolescents, make 

positive social contributions, and promote social equity (p. 85). In a similar vein, Cengiz 

(2023) articulated that societal factors, particularly those pertaining to social contribution 

and the enhancement of social equity, emerged as the most significant factors influencing 

the decision-making process of pre-service EFL teachers when selecting English language 

education as a career path. Yılmaz (2018) explored pre-service teachers’ self-conceptions 

and revealed that pre-service teachers’ self-beliefs had a considerable impact on the 

development of their self-concepts and that they were all motivated at the start of their 

practicum. 

In terms of the degree of motivation and commitment demonstrated towards the 

profession of teaching, Başöz (2021) conducted an investigation into the career motivational 



32 
 

 

factors of pre-service EFL teachers enrolled in a Turkish state university and discovered 

that the levels of motivation exhibited by these individuals were found to be moderately 

high. In a separate research study, Cengiz (2023) documented the high motivation levels 

among pre-service EFL teachers attending another state university, thereby contributing 

further insights into this area of inquiry. While these studies reported on the motivational 

levels pertaining to teaching among pre-service EFL teachers, it is important to note that 

the scope of these studies were confined specifically to the individual institutions where the 

respective research was carried out.  

Cengiz (2023) also highlighted that detailed research in EFL teacher education is 

needed for a deeper understanding of pre-service EFL teachers’ motivation levels. 

Consequently, in order to achieve a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of 

the motivational dynamics influencing pre-service EFL teachers' aspirations to pursue a 

career in education, research that encompasses a wider and more inclusive scope within 

the context of EFL teacher education in Türkiye arises as an essential necessity. 

Teacher Identity 

Teacher identity is a unique and multifaceted construct that involves and is affected 

by a variety of parameters. It is also dynamic in nature and comprises multiple identities 

(Akkerman & Meijer, 2011). Providing a definition for identity is one of the major struggles 

for the comprehension of identity (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Reeves, 2018) and it is 

denoted to be a task rather difficult due to the impact of differing frameworks (Walkington, 

2005). Although it is challenging to provide a clear and unambiguous description of teacher 

identity, Mayer (1999, as cited in Walkington, 2005) stated that a distinction between 

teacher identity and teachers’ functional roles. The relationship between teacher education 

and identity is crucial as preservice teacher education programs have impact over pre-

service teachers’ perceptions as well as development in relation to teacher identity 

formation (Tunaz & Sarıçoban, 2023). 



33 
 

 

Motivation and commitment to teaching are considered to be among the most 

important elements that constitute the professional identity profile of EFL teachers (Ma, 

2022). It has been posited that an indication of teachers' perception of their professional 

identity can be obtained through the analysis of factors such as teachers' self-efficacy, job 

satisfaction, motivation, and professional dedication in their interplay (Canrinus et al., 2012). 

Hanna et al. (2019) described motivation as one of the main domains of teacher identity, 

while Van Lankveld et al. (2017) listed “a sense of competence” and “a sense of 

commitment and feeling a deep personal interest” (p. 333) among the key indicators of 

teacher identity development. Canrinus et al. (2012) argued that motivation to be relevant 

to teachers' perceptions of their professional identity (p. 116). Li et al. (2022) highlighted the 

importance of the first year of teaching for the professional identity of beginning teachers 

and argued that pre-service teachers with high motivation and positive attitudes towards 

teaching would form a significant source of quality teachers. Considering the importance 

placed on motivation in relation to teacher identity and the argument on the crucial role of 

the first year of teaching for beginning teachers’ professional identity, exploration of 

motivation in relation to candidate teachers is also substantial. 

In terms of the relationship between teachers’ professional identity and their 

knowledge bases, one dimension of teacher identities, with regards to language teachers, 

is described as being cognitive, which involves factors such as teachers’ beliefs and 

knowledge about content and pedagogy (Barkhuizen, 2017). Research on the relationship 

between knowledge and teacher identity posits a reciprocal relationship between the two 

constructs. In this regard, Philips (2017) reported that the implementation of technological 

pedagogical content knowledge is shaped by the processes involved in identity 

development. On the other hand, Feng and Kim (2023) put forward that the process 

pertaining to the development of teachers’ identities is inextricably linked to teacher learning 

and teacher knowledge. 



34 
 

 

Based on these views, motivation and knowledge could be acknowledged as 

forming two factors that are a part of the versatile nature of it, though it is hard to define 

what constitutes teacher identity. Looking at teacher identity from the perspective of the 

research explored in this section, technological pedagogical content knowledge and 

motivation to teach can be accepted as factors that contribute to teacher identity 

development in that the two phenomena relate to the competence base and commitment of 

teachers regarding the teaching profession.  

Conclusion 

 This chapter presented a theoretical background for research in technological 

pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Then, the chapter provided a review of research 

on the assessment of TPACK with a focus on the assessment tools developed specifically 

for this purpose. Then, studies on TPACK in foreign language teaching were presented, 

which was followed by research on pre-service EFL teachers’ TPACK within the context of 

Türkiye. Following these, the chapter also provided a theoretical background for research 

on motivation to teach. Next, the chapter provided a review of literature on the research on 

motivation to teach and pre-service teachers, followed by research on pre-service EFL 

teachers’ motivation to teach within the context of Türkiye. The following chapter will present 

the methodology of the present study.  



35 
 

 

Chapter 3 

Methodology 

This chapter presents the details on the research design of the study, setting and 

participants, data collection instruments as well as the details of the data collection and data 

analysis processes. 

Type of Research 

The study followed a mixed-methods convergent parallel research design. Mixed 

methods research design is a research paradigm based on both quantitative and qualitative 

data collection and data analysis (Creswell, 1999; Dörnyei, 2007). There are several 

reasons for choosing this research design in this study. First of all, this method was chosen 

since both qualitative and quantitative data collection tools and data analysis procedures 

were wanted to be incorporated into this study. Another reason why this method was chosen 

was that it allows for the triangulation of data by bringing the findings of different data 

collection methods together (Creswell, 1999; Bryman, 2006a). Lastly, a mixed-method 

research design was adopted as this method can provide a more complete and 

comprehensive account of the research topic (Bryman, 2006b) since “combining more than 

one type of data source provides a fuller understanding of a research problem” (Guest & 

Fleming, 2015, p. 582). Mixed method research may follow a variety of research designs, 

one of which is convergent parallel design. In convergent parallel research design, the data 

collection and data analysis processes for qualitative and quantitative strands occur 

concurrently and each strand is prioritized in an equal manner, whereas comparing and 

relating the results occurs afterwards for interpretation (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). 

The quantitative data collection tools used in the study were in the form of scales. 

The analysis of the quantitative data for the first research question was carried out through 

simple linear regression analysis. Regression a