J Sci Teacher Educ (2010) 21:7–12 DOI 10.1007/s10972-009-9155-6
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and the 2003 Science Teacher Preparation Standards for NCATE Accreditation or State Approval Rita Hagevik • William Veal • Erica M. Brownstein Elizabeth Allan • Cathy Ezrailson • Joseph Shane
•
Published online: 26 November 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2009
Abstract The 2003 National Science Teachers Association Standards for Science Teacher Preparation (NSTA-SSTP) were developed to provide guidelines and expectations for science teacher preparation programs. This article is the fourth in a special JSTE series on accreditation written to assist science teacher educators in meeting the NSTA-SSTP. In this article, the authors discuss pedagogical content knowledge and how this is expressed in the NSTA-SSTP. Included are competencies and examples needed for a science teacher preparation program to document developing pedagogical content knowledge in preservice science teachers. Keywords Accreditation Preservice Science teacher preparation NCATE NSTA Pedagogical content knowledge PCK
R. Hagevik Department of Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA W. Veal Department of Teacher Education, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, USA E. M. Brownstein (&) Department of Education, Capital University, Columbus, OH, USA e-mail:
[email protected] E. Allan Biology Department, University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, OK, USA C. Ezrailson Division of Curriculum and Instruction, University of South Dakota, Sioux Falls, SD, USA J. Shane Department of Chemistry, Shippensburg University, Shippensburg, PA, USA
123
8
R. Hagevik et al.
Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has become a ubiquitous word in the preparation of teachers in the past decade. Science teacher preparation has embraced PCK as a basis for understanding the knowledge, skills, and achievements of preservice teachers. While the 2003 National Science Teachers Association Standards for Science Teacher Preparation (NSTA-SSTP) provide a set of minimal competencies for designing programs for preparing science teacher educators (National Science Teachers Association 2003), they also contain Standards that reflect the inherent nature of PCK. This article, the fourth in this series, follows three previous articles on understanding and using the 2003 NSTA Science Teacher Preparation Standards for National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) accreditation or state approval (Brownstein et al. 2009a), the alignment of the NSTA-SSTP with the NCATE Standards (Brownstein et al. 2009b), and Safety and the NSTA-SSTP (Allan et al. 2009). This article will discuss how the NSTA-SSTP relates to pedagogical content knowledge and how performance-based assessments can be used to demonstrate initial development of PCK in preservice science teachers. Shulman (1986) proposed that professional teachers had a unique construct that included the knowledge of ‘‘subject matter for teaching’’ (p. 9). Though pedagogical content knowledge has been defined in a variety of ways, three areas emerge from these definitions: the transformation of knowledge specifically for teaching (van Driel et al. 1998), ‘‘an amalgam of a teacher’s pedagogy and understanding of (science) content’’ (Loughran et al. 2004), and a characteristic that distinguishes an expert from a novice science teacher (Magnusson et al. 1999). Along these lines, PCK has been identified in educational reform documents as a knowledge base that teachers must possess (American Association for the Advancement of Science 1993; National Research Council 1996). Researchers agree that PCK contains or consists of a multitude of different knowledge bases (Grossman 1990; Magnusson et al. 1999; Shulman 1987; van Driel et al. 1998; Veal and MaKinster 1999). Four major themes surface from the litany of articles on the components of PCK: (a) knowledge of context, curriculum, and assessment; (b) knowledge of instructional strategies and representations for teaching science; (c) knowledge of student learning; and (d) knowledge of student understanding about science concepts. Due to the shifting nature of a definition for PCK, it is important to define the terms for the understanding of how they are (or are not) expressed in the NSTA-SSTP. Pedagogical content knowledge is defined as the knowledge base for teaching that distinguishes a secondary science teacher from a generic secondary teacher. The content-specific nature of a secondary science teacher is very different from a teacher who uses general pedagogical methods to deliver content. The science teacher specialist must embrace certain specific methods of teaching science content that are considered ‘‘best practices’’ based on the diversity of students, the physical context of the classroom, and the inherent nature of the science topics. The inherent nature of science content determines methods and procedures a teacher must use during instruction. For example, as mentioned in the previous article, a consideration of safety, in particular, ‘‘is unique to science’’ (Allan et al. 2009, p. 1). The nature of PCK reflects content specific topics, and the NSTA-SSTP contain many examples.
123
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
9
While many researchers have examined the characteristics that make an expert science teacher (Bradbury and Koballa 2007; Park and Oliver 2008), fewer researchers have studied the development of PCK in preservice science teachers (Veal and MaKinster 1999). If the characteristics of PCK are desired in an expert science teacher, then the acquisition of those characteristics are just as vital for beginning teachers. The goal for beginning science teachers is to develop foundational knowledge and skills that will help them develop PCK.
NSTA-SSTP and Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge Standards 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9 contain characteristics of PCK in science teaching. All of these standards have a knowledge component. Knowing science content is essential. Being able to teach using specific pedagogical methods in an age appropriate manner requires a teacher to have PCK. It is this understanding and the ability to apply PCK that distinguishes the teacher who understands the content deeply from the person who can only teach in a perfunctory way. For example, instead of just recognizing the unifying concepts of science (NSTA-SSTP 1b), a science teacher with a deep understanding of PCK is also able to help students reach an understanding of how and why topics and concepts are interconnected. Along the same lines, science teachers must have a deep understanding of the historical and cultural development of science and the philosophical tenets, assumptions, goals, and values (NSTA-STTP 2a and b) that distinguish science from other content areas. This foundation of understanding allows teachers to choose the best examples, analogies, and experiences to represent the content being taught to students. Inquiry (NSTA-STTP 3), as defined by the National Science Education Standards, is foundational to science in that it is a process of investigation that reflects the nature of science (Schwartz et al. 2004). Inquiry may be thought of as the ability to solve a problem or answer questions, but this generic approach to inquiry does not fully represent the process of solving open-ended problems using multiple approaches based upon the science content and scientifically defensible methods. Preservice science teachers should also be able to learn and teach science topics and concepts using a variety of inquiry methods. These knowledge and skills should be reflected in how preservice science teachers prepare lessons and how they assess how their students learn science (NCATE Assessments 3, 5, and 8). Socially important science issues that are found and exemplified in the community are examples of science that preservice science teachers and students must understand. In order to be able to comply with Standard 7, fully understanding and being able to teach this content to students, a preservice science teacher must have knowledge of science concepts and the applicable knowledge of how this knowledge is exemplified in the local community. Generic understanding of the community demographics and working with parents does not show the sciencespecific nature of science issues in the community. Assessment 3 is used to collect data that reflect the fundamental science knowledge that preservice science teachers have about socially important science issues in the community. For example, a unit on energy might be one possible way to include preservice science teachers
123
10
R. Hagevik et al.
planning lessons on a local science issue with connections to regional implications, as many areas of the country are now using alternative energies such as solar and wind power in new and exciting ways.
Performance-Based Assessments and Developing PCK The NCATE assessments that are used to evaluate a preservice science teacher’s NSTA-SSTP knowledge and skills must contain instruments from which data are collected to reflect competency. Minimally, this would include a unit plan that demonstrates science-specific pedagogy. In order to be ‘‘Nationally Recognized,’’ Assessment 4 should contain a science specific addendum that focuses on all four sub-standards of safety and welfare. It is recommended that Assessment 4 include science specific criteria in the addendum that focus on standards 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7. A generic unit observation instrument alone may not adequately provide data on the PCK nature of learning to teach science. Research continues on the development of standardized instruments that may help to assess developing PCK in teachers (Loughran et al. 2001; Veal et al. 2001). Other Standards that reflect PCK include the preservice science teacher’s knowledge of their science content, the nature of science, scientific inquiry, socially important science issues, and science in the community. There are many ways to design programs that align with the NSTA-SSTP and show developing PCK in preservice science teachers. In this way, the NSTA-SSTP defines a set of minimum competencies with ‘‘built-in’’ flexibility to be distinctive while at the same time defining a baseline acceptable level for science teacher preparation (National Science Teachers Association 2003). NCATE Assessments 6 through 8 reflect the inherent nature of PCK in science. Assessment 6 is used to show that preservice science teachers understand safety in the context of the needs of a science teacher. As mentioned in the previous article of this series, this fundamental knowledge can be shown through a myriad of ways specific to science, thus making it an assessment from which PCK development can be evaluated. Assessment 7 (NSTA-SSTP Standards 1d and 1e) is science-specific and requires more than just experiencing a laboratory exercise or experiment. The NSTA-SSTP specifically states that a preservice science teacher must ‘‘understand research and can successfully design, conduct, report, and evaluate investigations in science.’’ Compliance with this Standard requires preservice science teachers to understand and experience authentic research in science through explicit and reflective instruction (Lederman 1992; Lederman et al. 2001). Prolonged engagement in research activity has been shown to be successful (a) in promoting an increased knowledge of science so that teachers are better in framing and answering the questions of their students, (b) in an increased enthusiasm for the teaching of science thereby motivating their students, and (c) in a change toward more inquiry teaching that included student research and laboratory exercises (Westerlund et al. 2002). Preservice science teachers’ use of inquiry in the classroom is most strongly associated with previous research experience (Windschitl 2002).
123
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
11
Assessment 8 (Nature of Science, Inquiry, and Issues in Science or NSTA-SSTP Standard 2a, 2b, 3a, and 4a) is science-specific and also reflects this type of PCK development. The evidence for showing compliance for these standards is left to individual programs. Assessments could include, but are not limited to, essays, tests, projects for studying the history and nature of science, specific courses with assessments or experiences for authentic research, and the history and philosophy of science. For additional information see Table 1 in Alignment of NCATE assessment system and NSTA-SSTP (Brownstein et al. 2009a).
Summary The NSTA-SSTP contain knowledge bases and attributes of PCK that preservice science teachers should start developing. The NCATE Assessments require that a series of instruments be used to collect a spectrum of relevant data on the development of preservice science teachers’ PCK. And although it is difficult to quantify PCK using one instrument, the triangulation of data from multiple sources is recommended to be used to illustrate PCK development. For example, a preservice teacher’s knowledge can be inferred through the description and analysis of what was done in the classroom (science-specific teaching addendum). Additionally, a teacher’s understanding of students’ misconceptions in science has been found to be a major factor that shapes PCK in planning, conducting instruction, and assessment (Park and Oliver 2008). The student learning assessment, most likely implemented during student teaching, takes into consideration the preservice teachers understanding of student’s motivation, background, and previous knowledge when planning and implementing lessons. A pre/post assessment and the collection, organization, analysis, interpretation and reflection of the results could show developing PCK in preservice teachers. Unit and lesson plans should demonstrate the preservice teacher’s ability to plan in the applicable NSTA-SSTP Standards which minimally includes Science Concepts and Principles, Unifying Concepts, Nature of Science, Inquiry, Issues in Science, Science in the Community, and Assessment (NSTA-SSTP Standards 1a, 1b, 2c, 3b, 4b, 7b, and 8). Since PCK is developed through the relationship among knowledge acquisition, new applications of knowledge, and reflection on the uses of that knowledge embedded in practice (Park and Oliver 2008), it is the interaction between multiple experiences in practice that ultimately affects a preservice teacher’s PCK development.
References Allan, E., Shane, J., Brownstein, E., Ezrailson, C., Hagevik, R., & Veal, W. (2009). Using performancebased assessments to prepare safe science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education. doi: 10.1007/s10972-009-9150-y. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy: A tool for curriculum reform. UK: Oxford University Press.
123
12
R. Hagevik et al.
Bradbury, L. U., & Koballa, T. R. (2007). Mentor advice giving in an alternative certification program for secondary science teaching: Opportunities and roadblocks in developing a knowledge base for teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 817–840. Brownstein, E., Allan, E., Ezrailson, C., Hagevik, R., Shane, J., & Veal, W. (2009a). The alignment of the 2003 NSTA science teacher preparation standards with the NCATE assessment system. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 403–413. Brownstein, E., Allan, E., Hagevik, R., Shane, J., & Veal, W. (2009b). Understanding and using the 2003 NSTA science teacher preparation standards for NCATE accreditation or state approval. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 307–311. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359. Lederman, N. G., Schwartz, R. S., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). Preservice teachers’ understanding and teaching of the nature of science: An intervention study. The Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 1, 135–160. Loughran, J., Milroy, P., Berry, A., Gunstone, C., & Mulhall, P. (2001). Documenting science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through PaP-eRs. Research in Science Education, 31, 289–307. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 370–391. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–144). Dordrect, The Netherlands: Kluwer. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Science Teachers Association. (2003). The standards for science teacher preparation. Retrieved July 27, 2009 from http://www.nsta.org/pdfs/NSTAstandards2003.pdf. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 261–284. Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, J., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and science inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 88, 610–645. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge in teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22. van Driel, J., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–696. Veal, W. R., & MaKinster, J. G. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4). Retrieved from http://wolfweb.unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/ vealmak.html. Veal, W. R., van Driel, J., & Hulshof, H. (2001). PCK: How teachers transform subject matter knowledge. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4, 285–291. Westerlund, J. F., Garcia, D. M., Koke, J. R., Taylor, T. A., & Mason, D. S. (2002). Summer scientific research for teachers: The experience and its effect. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 63–83. Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87, 113–143.
123
