Enhancing Teacher Capacity through Interactive Flat Panel Integration in Primary English Classrooms
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37680/ssa.10829Keywords:
Interactive Flat Panel; Teacher Capacity Building; TPACK; English Language Teaching; SDG 4 (Quality Education).Abstract
The integration of digital technologies in primary education has increased the need to understand how technology contributes not only to classroom instruction but also to teachers’ professional capacity. This study aimed to examine the utilization of the Interactive Flat Panel (IFP) in English language teaching and explore its contribution to strengthening teachers’ instructional capacity in an Indonesian primary school. A qualitative single-case study was conducted at SDN 1 Kamulan using interviews, classroom observations, and document analysis. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis following Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña’s interactive model, while the findings were interpreted using the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition (SAMR) frameworks. The findings revealed that the IFP was utilized as an instructional presentation medium, an interactive learning tool, a digital assessment platform, and a gateway to digital learning resources. Its implementation strengthened teachers’ instructional capacity through technology-supported lesson planning, interactive instructional practices, digital assessment, and reflective professional development. The study also identified school leadership support, teacher collaboration, and technical assistance as enabling factors, whereas limited digital competence, technical issues, and infrastructure constraints remained significant challenges. These findings suggest that the educational value of the IFP lies in its capacity to support sustainable teacher development through meaningful technology integration in primary English language teaching.
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: The pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(3), 257–278.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
OECD. (2023). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing.
Puentedura, R. R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education: The SAMR model. Hippasus.
Redecker, C. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu). Publications Office of the European Union.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
UNESCO. (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms? UNESCO Publishing.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ringgi Candraning Prawerti, Fadhila Iswi Maheswari

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




