Dr. Vanessa Kind Durham University School of Education Durham, UK

1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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.

5. Other researchers propose PCK includes any or all of General pedagogical knowledge / classroom management • Knowledge of curriculum • Knowledge of assessment School knowledge Purposes / orientations/ Nature of science Socio-cultural issues • Subject matter knowledge (SMK) Context for learning • creating …

6. A variety of PCK models, such as

7. “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) Is subject matter knowledge “in” or “out”?

8. 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

9. Unsurprisingly this results in • disagreement about what PCK is • what PCK offers • limited impact of research on practice of teacher education

10. 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… Consequences • Alluring … • promising … • frustrating.. • Possibly leading us along….

11. 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?

12. 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

13. The pre-service teacher sample

14. Most PSTs were well-qualified graduates aged 21 -25

15. Methodology • WARNING! • No PCK model was assumed • correct in the design of this study! • Test: Does any evidence • support a PCK model? 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

16. 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

17. Vignette: example What would you do to help the class learn the correct answer? • 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

18. Biology and physics vignettes Biology Explanations for plant growth Physics Current flowing through an electric circuit

19. Vignettes were analysed for evidence of: • PCK • SMK • Connections between SMK and PCK

20. Chemistry vignette initial PCK: Representations and Instructional Strategies

21. Chemistry vignette initial PCK: Knowledge of students’ understanding and orientations

22. 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.

23. 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

24. Chemistry vignette initial PCK responses: showed no evidence for General pedagogical knowledge / classroom management • Knowledge of curriculum • Knowledge of assessment School knowledge Socio-cultural issues Context for learning • (of course, limitations apply)

25. Chemistry vignette initial SMK: Content knowledge and substantive knowledge

26. Connections found between SMK and PCK

27. SMK – PCK connection Transformative Correct content knowledge • The white stuff is magnesium oxide • Explain that the oxygen in the product comes from the air • Say, “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 • Instructional • Strategy • Academic • orientation • Students’ • understanding • Chemist, PhD, Female

28. 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. • Substantive • SMK • Didactic • orientation • Students’ • understanding • Physicist, Masters degree, Male

29. Integrative • No explicit SMK • statement • 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 …. • Didactic • orientation • Instructional • strategy • Industrial chemist, BSc degree, male

30. Transformative Incorrect • Didactic orientation • …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 • Instructional • strategy • Incorrect SMK • statement • Biologist, MSc, female

31. Findings(1) Pre-service teachers’ PCK comprises Representations and Instructional Strategies Knowledge of students’ understandings • ONLY! 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 • We need a more accurate PCK model

32. (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

33. (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

34. Subject matter knowledge My PCK model • influences Knowledge of Students‘ Understanding Knowledge of Representations and Instructional Strategies Are mutually dependent Good PCK is characterized by • Fast decision making • Sequencing • Effective planning for practice • and produces Student learning

35. 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 teaching Collecting oral evidence from video analysis Using vignettes which probe a broader range of Strategies and situations

36. 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

37. 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

38. 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

39. 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: Wiley • RYAN, 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)