Exploring the Integration of the Domains of Learning into the TPACK Framework through Art-Based Pedagogy in School Level Education in Nepal

Instructional and pedagogical methods play a significant role in enhancing creativity, critical thinking, innovation and meaningful learning of students for developing the competencies needed for a competitive and globalized world. In the context of Nepal, the most practiced instructional pedagogy is traditional teacher-centered, unidirectional with rote memorization and standardized testing since long which are unable to promote the 21st century core skills that are essential for students to address and adjust in the digitally advanced and complex world. The main aim of this study is to explores the transformative learning by integrating the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains of learning into the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. This research examines how these methodologies can bridge the gap between knowledgeable understanding and expressive engagement with meaningful skills by explicitly converging Art-Based Pedagogy and the STEAM approach along with these domains.
This study primarily uses narrative inquiry to underpin how conventional instructional pedagogy in present context become worthless over transformative and modern instructional pedagogy in this contemporary situation of education system that observed in both private and government schools in Nepal. The key findings of this study indicate that the meaningful and effective integration of arts such as drama, drawing, poem and storytelling promotes the critical thinking, creativity, innovation and transformative and meaningful learnings of the students. Such integration promotes students’ participation, engagement, collaboration and critical reflection that is indeed of holistic development of the students. From this study, it is need of time to reimagine TPACK framework and integration of art-based methods under STEAM approach of learning. Such integration with spiritual intelligence empowers students to step beyond the just transmission of knowledge but leap into the meaningful, sustainable, and transformative learning experiences. This research contributes to the educational discourse by providing a comprehensive strategy for nurturing well-rounded individuals who are scholastically skillful, emotionally intellectual, and communally responsible.

TPACK, Art-Based Pedagogy, STEAM, Domains of Learning, Transformative Learning, Holistic Development.

1. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Longman [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Cahnmann-Taylor, M., & Sanders-Bustle, L. (2019). Art-informed pedagogies in the preparation of teachers in the United States. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cranston, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide foreducators of adults. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. de Souza, M. (2005). Engaging the mind; heart and soul of the student in religious education: Teaching for meaning and connection. Journal of Religious Education, 40-47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. de Souza, M. (2001). Addressing the spiritual dimension in education: Teaching effectively to promote cognition. Journal of Religious Education, 49(3), 31-41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Green, Z. A., & Batool, S. (2017). Emotionalized learning experiences: Tapping into the effective domain. Evaluation and Program Planning, 62, 35-48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hoggan, C., & Kloubert, T. (2020). Transformative learning in theory and practice. Adult Education Quarterly, 70(3), 295-307. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Hoque, M. E. (2016). Three domains of learning: Cognitive, affective and psychomotor. The Journal of EFL Education and Research, 2(2), 45-52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hunter, L., & Frawley, E. (2023). Engaging students using an arts-based pedagogy: teaching and learning sociological theory through film, art, and music. Teaching Sociology, 51(1), 13-25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Jin, X., Jiang, Q., Xiong, W., Pan, X., & Zhao, W. (2022). Using the online self-directed learning environment to promote creativity performance for university students. Educational Technology and Society, 25(2), 130-147. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content? knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(2), 193-212. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mathew, M. J., & Abernethy, A. D. (2023). Spiritual Struggles and Spiritual Care. Spiritual Care in Psychological Suffering: How a Research Collaboration Informs Integrative Practice, 55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mezirow, J. (2008). An overview of transformative learning. Lifelong learning, 40-54. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers’ College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Munna, A. S., & Kalam, M. A. (2021). Impact of active learning strategy on the student engagement. GNOSI: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis, 4(2), 96-114. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Pant, B. P., & Luitel, B. C. (2016). Beliefs about the nature of mathematics and its pedagogical influences. In 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-13), Hamburg, Germany. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Pant, B. P., Luitel, B. C., & Shrestha, I. M. (2020). Incorporating STEAM pedagogy in teaching mathematics. In Proceedings of the Eight International Conference to Review Research in Science, Technology and Mathematics Education (episteme 8), Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education, Mumbai, India. https://episteme8. hbcse.tifr.res.in/proceedings. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Pant, S. K., Luitel, B. C., & Pant, B. P. (2020, December). STEAM pedagogy as an approach for teacher professional development. In Mathematics Education Forum Chitwan 5(5), 28-33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Piaget, J. (1952). The origin of intelligence in children. International University Press [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Pieczura, M. (2013). Decidedly dramatic! The power of creative drama in social studies. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 25(3), 9-12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Rajbanshi, R., & Luitel, B. C. (2020). Transformative learning: An approach to understand participatory action research. Transformations, 6(1), 2. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Schnepfleitner, F. M., & Ferreira, M. P. (2021). Transformative learning theory–Is it time to add a fourth core element? Journal of Educational Studies and Multidisciplinary Approaches, 1(1), 40-49 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 569-608. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Shanwal, V. K., & Kaur, G. (2008). Emotional intelligence in education: applications and implications. Emotional intelligence: theoretical and cultural perspectives. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 153-70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sousa, S., Farina, T., & Guerra, P. (2022). Turning life into art and art into a way of life: a cross-country perspective about art-based research, critical pedagogy, and social intervention. Education Sciences and Society: 1, 2022, 68-90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Taber, K. S. (2014). Meeting educational objectives in the affective and cognitive domains: Personal and social constructivist perspectives on enjoyment, motivation, and learning chemistry. In Affective dimensions in chemistry education (pp. 3-27). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Wu, C. H., Liu, C. H., & Huang, Y. M. (2022). The exploration of continuous learning intention in STEAM education through attitude, motivation, and cognitive load. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Zlabkova, I., Petr, J., Stuchlikova, I., Rokos, L., & Hospesova, A. (2021). Development of teachers’ perspective on formative peer assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 43(3), 428-448. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Zhao, X., & Liu, X. (2022). Sustaining faculty development through visiting scholar programs: A transformative learning perspective. Sustainability, 14(1), 525. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study