Pedagogical Content Knowledge as a tool for developing high quality science teachers: evidence from research Dr. Vanessa Kind

Durham University

School of Education

Durham, UK

∂

Introduction

• Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) as a tool for studying teachers’ practices

• PCK models• Research evidence

– What is pre-service teachers’ PCK like? – What content knowledge do pre-service teachers have?– In what ways do content knowledge and PCK connect?

• A revised model • Educating high quality science teachers

∂

Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) as a tool for studying teachers’ practices

Lee Shulman (1987) described “pedagogical content knowledge” as a “special amalgam” of knowledge possessed by a teacher

PCK is… unique to teachers one component of teachers’ knowledge base

∂

Shulman suggested PCK comprises two components:-

Representations and/or Instructional strategies – what teachers “do” to teach: illustrations, analogies,

explanations and demonstrations

Knowledge of students’ subject-specific learning difficulties– misconceptions, naïve ideas, preconceptions

and that subject matter knowledge, SMK,

is transformed by a teacher for his/her students’ benefit.

∂

Other researchers propose PCK includes any or all of

Purposes / orientations/ Nature of science

Knowledge of curriculum

Context for learning

Subject matter knowledge (SMK)

General pedagogical knowledge / classroom management

Knowledge of assessment

Socio-cultural issues

School knowledge

creating …

∂

A variety of PCK models, such as

Knowledge of …

Grossman (1990)

Magnusson et al

(1999)

Veal & MaKinster

(1999)

Koballa et al

(1999)

Marks (1990)

Representations

Students’ understanding

Subject matter

Curriculum

Assessment

School / context / socio-cultural issues

General pedagogy

Purposes/ orientations

∂

Is subject matter knowledge “in” or “out”?

“Out” Transformative

(Gess-Newsome, 1999)

PCK is new knowledge created by the teacher to make his/her subject matter knowledge understandable

Magnusson et al (1999) Grossman (1990)

“In” Integrative

PCK represents everything a teacher knows / does

Veal & MaKinster (1999)Koballa et al (1999)Marks (1990)

∂

PCK research– occurs in various settings and contexts around the

world – adopts qualitative OR quantitative methodologies

• If qualitative – triangulation and analysis are poor • If quantitative – correlations claim inappropriate

cause and effect– adopts a PCK model as a background framework

• selected BEFORE analysis of empirical evidence • selected model is ASSUMED to be correct

– is often theoretical

∂

Unsurprisingly this results in

– disagreement about what PCK is

– what PCK offers

– limited impact of research on practice of teacher education

∂

Consequences

Philosophically, PCK remains

In the pre-science phase (Kuhn)

A diverse set of research programmes (Lakatos)

And / OR

“Anything goes” (Feyerabend)

More prosaically, PCK is…

Possibly leading us along….

Alluring …

promising …

frustrating..

∂

Research evidence – start at the beginning

• What is pre-service teachers’ PCK like?

• What subject matter knowledge do pre-service teachers have?

• In what ways do subject matter knowledge and PCK connect?

∂

Sample Pre-service teachers (PSTs) starting a one-year

Postgraduate Certificate of Education (PGCE) teacher education program for teaching 11 -16s

All PSTs:- • are graduates in a science subject• have 16+ qualifications in English, Maths and Science• have 18+ qualifications in at least one science subject • pass a “suitability for teaching” interview

235 PSTs from 2005 – 2010, 35 – 52 per year

∂

The pre-service teacher sample

∂

Most PSTs were well-qualified graduates aged 21 -25

∂

Methodology This is a mixed methods study (Meriam & Associates,

2002)

Data were collected by use of three vignettes and open-ended questions Classic content analysis (Ryan & Bernard, 2000) was applied to devise coding schemes for responses

WARNING!

No PCK model was assumed correct in the design of this study!

Test: Does any evidence support a PCK model?

∂

The vignettes

PSTs responded to one vignette each in chemistry, physics and biology

Each:- • described a teaching situation based on a teacher

demonstration• listed main student misconceptions• stated the scientifically correct response• asked PSTs to “describe what you would do” to help

students learn the correct answer

∂

Vignette: example

A teacher showed a class of 11 -12 year olds magnesium burning in air. There was a bright white light, smoke, and white ash remained. Teacher asked, “Where did the white stuff come from?” •Responses included:- Inside the magnesium It is carbon/ soot It is ash left over from burning•Correct answer: It was made in a reaction

What would you do to help the class learn the correct answer?

∂

Biology and physics vignettes

Biology

Explanations for plant growth

Physics

Current flowing through an electric circuit

∂

Vignettes were analysed for evidence of:

PCK

SMK

Connections between SMK and PCK

∂

Chemistry vignette initial PCK: Representations and Instructional Strategies Sub-component

Example Whole sample N=235

Chemists N=71

BiologistsN=125

Physicists N=39

DemonstrationsExperiments

Cut Mg 14 9 4 2

Repeat experiment (variants)

53 20 25 8

Do other reactions 15 4 8 3

Show ash is MgO 10 3 6 1

Explanations Equation for reaction

39 16 19 4

Analogies “mixing paint” “baking a cake”

15 2 10 3

Illustrations Particle diagram 13 4 7 2

Use visual aids 16 3 9 4

∂

Chemistry vignette initial PCK: Knowledge of students’ understanding and orientations Component Sub-component Whole

sample N=235

Chemists N=71

Biologists

N=125

Physicists N=39

Knowledge of students’ understanding

Misconceptions 10 5 4 1

Prior knowledge 11 6 4 1

PSTs’ personal orientations

Didactic 123 39 67 17

Conceptual change 18 9 5 4

Academic rigour 18 5 10 3

Inquiry 8 2 5 1

∂

Examples Explain the nature of electricity, it’s the flow of electrons illustrate how a light bulb works … (Didactic, Physicist)

Talk about the magnesium – it is an element… explain the concept of conservation of mass .. (Didactic, Chemist) Explain that

photosynthesis occurs in the leaves of plants to make food… (Didactic, Biologist)

Most PSTs responded to their specialist vignettes using mainly didactic orientations.

∂

Examples Let students make and practice their own circuits changing it themselves… so they find out through practice.. (Biologist, Physics vignette, Discovery)

Allow pupils to investigate with circuits and ammeters to see readings are the same, then give the correct explanation. (Chemist, Physics vignette, Guided Discovery)

Allow pupils to grow their own plants from start, changing factors, then lead to the answer. (Physicist, Biology vignette, Activity Driven)

PSTs responded to non-specialist vignettes using a greater variety of orientations

∂

Chemistry vignette initial PCK responses: showed no evidence for

Knowledge of curriculum

Context for learning

General pedagogical knowledge / classroom management

Knowledge of assessment

Socio-cultural issues

School knowledge

(of course, limitations apply)

∂

Chemistry vignette initial SMK:

Content knowledge and substantive knowledge Component Quality Example Whole

sample N=235

Chemists N=71

BiologistsN=125

Physicists N=39

Content knowledge – facts, concepts

Correct New substance

23 4 18 1

MgO 22 7 12 3

Partially correct

Mg burned 14 5 6 3

Incorrect Mg and O mix

6 0 5 1

Substantive underpinning ideas

Particle theory 14 5 6 3

Chemical reaction emphasised

16 3 8 5

∂

Connections found between SMK and PCK Type Characteristics

Transformative

Correct content knowledge

Factual content

Analytical

Dismantles misconceptions

Transformative

substantive

Activities linked to substantive statement

Aim to correct misconceptions

Integrative No SMK statement

Experimental detail

Unrealistic experiment

Transformative

Incorrect content knowledge

Misconception apparent

∂

SMK – PCK connection Transformative Correct content knowledge

The white stuff is magnesium oxide Explain that the oxygen in the product comes from the airSay, “If I cut open the Mg strip will there be oxygen in there?” Mg strip only contains Mg atoms…so when it burns the product will contain Mg and atoms from the other reactant, oxygen Ash/ Soot comes from burning carbon containing species

Correct SMK

InstructionalStrategy

Students’understanding

Academic orientation

Chemist, PhD, Female

∂

Transformative substantive

…remind students about the definition of a chemical reaction. …get them to discuss what they think might be reacting with the magnesium, looking for “the air” or “oxygen”. Once established …link to this was the product of reacting magnesium and oxygen to make this new substance. I would return to their original answers to clarify which were correct and or the value in their answers.

Physicist, Masters degree, Male

Substantive SMK

Students’ understanding

Didactic orientation

∂

Integrative

Weigh the magnesium before burning it. Collect the ash. The ash is weighed… an increase should be observed. Ask “Why did the weight increase?” and “Where did the increase come from?” Repeat in nitrogen only. Ask, “Does it burn?” No ….

Industrial chemist, BSc degree, male

No explicit SMK statement

Didactic orientation

Instructionalstrategy

∂

Transformative Incorrect …demonstrate that product is a result of 2 reactants and all look different e.g. demonstrate with different colour paints, Red + blue -> purple Metal + gas -> white powder

Biologist, MSc, female

Incorrect SMKstatement

Didactic orientation

Instructional strategy

∂

Findings

(1) Pre-service teachers’ PCK comprises

We need a more accurate PCK model

Representations and Instructional StrategiesKnowledge of students’ understandings

Orientations tell / show / explain = didactic

And tends to be transformative

PCK is hard to establish from written evidence Categories overlap with each other and there is evidence of “integrated” PCK

BUT

ONLY!

∂

(2) Subject matter knowledge • Pre-service teachers’ subject matter knowledge :-

– is mainly content knowledge which is – correct – incorrect– partially correct

• Quality is related to teachers’ subject specialist backgrounds

• Shows some substantive knowledge based on “big ideas”

We need to acknowledge quality differences

∂

(3) PCK – SMK connections • Good PCK is related to good quality, explicit SMK

– Transformative correct – Transformative substantive

• Poor PCK is related to poor / non-existent SMK– Transformative incorrect – Integrative

• Evidence across all three vignettes indicated that subject specialists with the best quality SMK had the most appropriate PCK

Non-specialists need support for SMK and PCK

∂

Student learning

My PCK model

Knowledge of Students‘

Understanding

Knowledge of Representations and Instructional

Strategies

Are mutually dependent

Fast decision makingSequencing

Effective planning for practice

Good PCK is characterized by and produces

Subject matter knowledge

influen

ces

∂

Limitations and further research These findings are based on evidence from:-

– one group of PSTs from one institution – one data set comprising written evidence only – Vignettes which were limited in scope

Confirmation is required, for example by:-Observing teachingCollecting oral evidence from video analysisUsing vignettes which probe a broader range of Strategies and situations

∂

For PCK valuable research

– use an accurate, evidence-based model based on pre-service teachers’ starting points, and allows for developments

– state what good quality PCK looks like

– ensure good subject matter knowledge

– remember that PCK generates student learning

∂

Finally, teacher education programmes need to:-

• Make transformation of subject knowledge explicit• Acknowledge and address differences in PCK quality • Realise that school science and academic science knowledge

are not the same and deal with this explicitly • Consider pre-service teachers’ starting orientations prior to

training, as these may impact on outcomes • Take note of pre-service teachers’ emotional attributes as

these may impact on progress

∂

Contact details Dr. Vanessa Kind

Reader in Education

School of Education

Durham University

Leazes Road

Durham DH1 1TA

UK

Vanessa.kind@durham.ac.uk

Telephone: + 44 191 334 8369

Fax: +44 191 334 8311

∂

References GESS-NEWSOME, J.(1999) Pedagogical content knowledge: an introduction and orientation In: Explaining

Pedagogical Content Knowledge Eds Gess-Newsome, J. and Lederman, N. Dordrecht: Kluwer GROSSMAN, P. (1990) The Making of a Teacher New York: Teachers College Press KIND, V. (2013) Pre-service science teachers’ initial pedagogical content and subject matter knowledge for

teaching aspects of science Oral presentation European Science Education Research Association conference, Nicosia, Cyprus, 2013

KIND, V. (2009) Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Science Education: Perspectives and potential for progress Studies in Science Education 45 (2): 169 – 204

KOBALLA, T.R., GRÄBER, W., COLEMAN, D. AND KEMP, A.C. (1999) Prospective Teachers’ conceptsions of the knowledge base for teaching chemistry at the gymnasium Journal of Science Teacher Education 10 (4): 269 – 286

MAGNUSSON, S., KRAJCIK, J. AND BORKO, H. (1999) Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction In: Gess-Newsome, J. and Lederman, N.G. Eds (1999) Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers p 95 – 132

MARKS, R. (1990) Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception Journal of Teacher Education 41 (3): 3-11

MERIAM, S.B. & Associates (2002) Qualitative Research in Practice. San Francisco: WileyRYAN, G.W. & BERNARD, H.R. (2000) Data Management and Analysis methods. Chapter 29 p 769 – 802 in

Handbook of Qualitative Research 2nd Edition Eds. Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. London: Sage Publications Ltd

SHULMAN, L. (1987) Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform Harvard Educational Review 57(1): 1- 22

VEAL, W.R. AND MAKINSTER, J.G. (1998) Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies Electronic Journal of Science Education available at http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/vealmak.html (accessed 20.12.06)