2.3 Teacher learning theories
2.3.4 Domains of teacher knowledge
The research which described a knowledge base for teaching dates back to the 1980s when Shulman first engaged with the domains of teacher knowledge to enable the effective teaching that teachers needed (Shulman, 1986, 1987). Since then, other scholars in the last three decades have tried to refine Shulmans’ classification into distinct but interacted categories, constructs or domains, namely: subject matter or content, pedagogy, curriculum, contextual, learners, practical, personal propositional, formal and informal (Banks, Leach, & Moon, 2005; Cochran- Smith & Lytle, 1999; Reed, 2009; Shulman, 1987; Winch, 2013a). Others like Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) tried to describe teacher knowledge with useful theoretical frameworks, but the conceptualisation of the actual professional knowledge base for teachers remains fluid, irrespective of extensive literature globally.
It is necessary to stipulate the domains of teacher knowledge for monitoring purposes, but more significantly, to have a clear understanding of the anticipated knowledge and skills for effective practice. As presented in Chapter Three, professional practice is informed by specialised knowledge and teachers, like all other professions, have a mandatory and often complex knowledge base, specific to enabling them to perform their duties (D. R. Reutzel et al., 2011).
Shulmans’ work, especially with regards to pedagogic content knowledge (PCK), continues to influence research in this field. However, he tended to focus more on the propositional nature of teachers’ knowledge (knowing that) and not very much on the procedural knowledge (knowing how). Even PCK is generally understood as propositional knowledge that needs to be practical. Some teacher educators expressed concern over the ‘static’ nature of Shulman’s work and the separation between ‘theoretical’ and ‘practice’ knowledge, despite attempts by various professional development initiatives to provide a link between the two (Banks et al., 2005; Tinning, 2007; Winch et al., 2015).
There are a number of authors who narrowed down the knowledge base for teachers to a few key components. For example, Taylor &Taylor (2013a) in South Africa, described professional knowledge as having three aspects: disciplinary knowledge, subject knowledge for teaching (pedagogical content knowledge and curriculum knowledge) and classroom competence.
While there are certainly some overlaps in the descriptions of domains of teacher knowledge,
33
there is still not one framework that is accepted by all in the profession and “the differing frameworks constitute clear evidence of the elusiveness and complexity of adequately specifying the nature of the knowledge teachers need to teach effectively” (Reed, 2009; D.R.
Reutzel et al., 2011).
Drawing from their own classroom studies in the UK, (Banks, Leach, & Moon, 1999; Banks et al., 2005) developed a model of teacher knowledge in which subject or disciplinary knowledge, pedagogic knowledge and school knowledge (which includes curriculum knowledge) are actively interrelated with the teacher’s personal knowledge. They argue that these domains of knowledge are acquired when teachers learn from their learning and working contexts. A similar framework was drawn from a study on a “successful teacher education programme” in the USA by (Darling-Hammond, 2006). In relation to designing programmes for pre-service and in-service teacher education, Banks et al. (2005) and Darling-Hammond (2006) believe that it is the responsibility of the teacher educators to use the models which are applicable to student teachers who are working in preparation for classroom practice for the first time and applicable to “expert” teachers working in times of curriculum and social change.
Many researchers in South Africa and elsewhere, find it difficult and complex to explore or quantify the domains of knowledge even from even effective professional learning programmes (Adey et al., 2004; Adler & Reed, 2002; Muller, 2014; Winch, 2013b). Other researchers like Bertram (2011) perceive teacher knowledge as a set of comprehensive information and skills which teachers acquire gradually to enable them to organise coherent teaching. She explicitly states that practicing teachers have a knowledge base in place and professional development activities should create models to boost what they already know by offering appropriate decontextualised formal and informal learning opportunities in the teachers’ context.
Although there are some variations in terminology and examples used, the following elements appear to be common to the conceptualisation of knowledge in the professional development programmes put forward by Banks et al. (2005) for the UK context, Darling-Hammond (2006) for the USA context, Adler and Reed (2002) and Bertram (2011) for the South African context:
pedagogical content knowledge, which includes aspects of ‘school knowledge’, as well as
‘pedagogic knowledge’; knowledge of how learners learn; knowledge of the curriculum; and content knowledge.
34
Apart from Bertram (2011), the three theorists seem to have fragmented the concept rather than consolidating it and they have also not shown the relationship between these fragments. Such fragmentation has left the teacher knowledge a contested field for the last 30 years. For instance, Bertram (2011) and Darling-Hammond (2006) explicitly describe what teachers learn and how they learn in preparation for classroom complexity, but little empirical data are available on the kinds of knowledge that teachers need or how they acquire this knowledge.
However, Darling-Hammond and Banks et al. highlight how teachers’ beliefs and identities influence their subject content knowledge and pedagogy. This view, supported by empirical evidence, also suggests that classroom practices are determined by the teachers’ personal beliefs, experiences and identity. For instance, a study conducted among FP teachers in a South African context and practicing in working-class or rural areas, tended to emphasise teaching as care-giving, rather than highlighting the instructional aspects of the work (Hoadley & Ensor, 2009).
The debates about the nature of ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing how’ are complex, too complex to engage in this study. However, I do support the notion that understanding knowing how is sustained by specific knowing that (Muller, 2012). Professional knowledge cannot only be propositional, which is usually the knowledge used to make professional decisions, where the teacher draws from the general concepts to produce particular instructions (Shalem, 2014b;
Winch, 2013a). For instance, when to correct a particular child is struggling to understand how to write short sentences during a EFAL lesson in Grade 2 or 3, the FP teacher would draw from useful analogies in the context or clarify the concepts using the HL to increase the child’s understanding. Therefore, there is a need to recognise the domains of teacher knowledge, which are essential for the teaching of literacy and other subjects at FP level. This is an area of concern in the field of teacher education, in most of the developing countries.
Emerging frameworks conceptualise teacher knowledge in three broad, sophisticated, complex and interrelated categories, namely, practical, propositional and personal knowledge (E.
Wilson & Demetriou, 2007). In support of this conceptual framework, Bertram (2011) demonstrates how content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, PCK and contextual knowledge are related. She locates PCK in both the practical and propositional domains. For instance, principles of how students learn specific subjects, common learners’ misconceptions
35
or mistakes and subject-specific analogies, should be subsumed as propositional knowledge, while pedagogical knowledge and assessment strategies for a particular subject should be considered under the practical domain (2011, p. 10).
The Norms and Standards for teacher education gazetted in 2000 describe the seven roles that teachers need to enact, rather than the knowledge that they need to enact these roles. It appears as if the policymakers perhaps did not understand knowledge as essential to underpinning the practice of these roles, or that the role of knowledge was so obvious that it did not need to be articulated. The Norms and Standards were replaced by the teacher education policy, the Minimum Requirements for Teacher Education Quality (MRTEQ) (Department of Higher Education and Training, 2011a), which foregrounds the knowledge needed for teaching.
The MRTEQ policy framework was gazetted in 2011 and it serves as an outline for the knowledge base that every teacher has to acquire from the professional development programmes. This framework specifies five teacher knowledge domains, namely, disciplinary (subject), general pedagogical, practical, fundamental and situational knowledge. Of the five, the fundamental and situational domains could be regarded as an attempt to redress the imbalances of the past that were created by the former apartheid regime. On this vein, it appears that the knowledge base for teachers is emerging as an important area of concern in the South African education context and research field. And studies in this field continue to redefine itself in the midst of new policy frameworks and against the international set standards. Research on whether domains of teacher knowledge are currently taught in PD programmes such as ACT is still scarce, yet such research might provide data upon which teacher education providers and policymakers would base claims regarding teacher knowledge. It also seems that the main fields being researched on a large scale in South Africa are teachers’ knowledge in relation to mathematics in particular and to a lesser extent, literacy. The knowledge base for Foundation Phase teachers is even vaguer, as it comprises an amalgamation of three learning areas:
mathematics, literacy and life skills.
In the next section, I present conceptual arguments regarding contingent constructivism approaches, which seem to be ideal for teacher education in in the developing countries including South Africa.