THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.5 Pedagogical content knowledge
76
77 transformative models reason that other knowledge domains such as the knowledge of subject matter; pedagogy; curriculum; school context; educational aims, etc., all act as prerequisites for the transformation process. Similarly, Appleton (2006) contends that when developing their science PCK, teachers draw on these various knowledge domains.
The position taken in this research study is that of transformative PCK, drawing largely on Shulman and Magnusson’s models. PCK is an applied competence, founded on foundational knowledge, one of which is the subject matter knowledge. Teachers with underdeveloped subject matter knowledge for example lack deep and connected understanding of the subject.
They are unlikely to present developed PCK, that which Shulman expressed as “useful forms of representation of ideas, the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations-in a word, the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others” (Shulman, 1986: 9). Hence, this study argues that professional development activities aimed at teachers need to equip them with as much knowledge from various domains such as subject matter knowledge to enable teachers to develop their PCK for successful teaching.
Integrative models reflect mostly initial teacher education programmes since they often present a wide range of components (Kind, 2009). Transformative models of PCK on the other hand tend to focus on subject-specific PCK and are more appropriate for already practising teachers (Kind, 2009). This research study is also concerned with development of PCK for practising Life Sciences teachers and that is why it is aligned with the transformative model.
a. Subject matter knowledge
It has long been argued that the development of teachers' pedagogical content knowledge is influenced by their subject-matter knowledge (Shulman, 1986, 1987; Rollnick et al., 2008).
As a result of the science curricular reforms, which demand a shift towards teaching for understanding, teachers have had to grasp deep and highly structured content knowledge and conceptual understanding. It is this sound content knowledge and rich conceptual understanding that allows the teacher to transform the subject matter to produce representations that are pedagogically powerful (Shulman, 1987) to improve student learning.
Strengthening subject-matter knowledge thus contributes to the development of stronger PCK. Expanding on the description of subject matter knowledge, Carlsen (1999) included the
78
‘nature of science and technology’ as a component of subject matter knowledge which relates to Specific Aim 3 of the South African Life Sciences curriculum. As discussed above, there is a need to strengthen Life Sciences teachers’ knowledge and skills of conducting investigations/practical work so that teachers can effectively teach these process skills.
Since transformative models support subject-specific PCK, it is important that teachers possess good command of content-specific subject matter knowledge. Shulman (as cited by Rollnick et al., 2008) earlier raised concern about the fading of discipline-specific subject matter from programmes of teacher education in the USA. Rollnick et al. (2008: 1366) explain that the disappearance in content was largely shaped by the notion that pedagogy was a ‘content-free skill’, which the assumption that teachers had adequate content preparation during their training. Limited content background may lead to teachers’ over-reliance on transmission methods of teaching and superficial use of content, which has occurred in South Africa (Rogan, 2004). Subject matter knowledge and in particular, discipline-specific knowledge is an important domain that needs special attention, especially in view of the content changes taking place in science curricular, within the broader curriculum reform in South Africa. A teacher’s PCK becomes challenged when teaching specific content that he/she has little familiarity with (Loughran et al., 2006, 2012), restricting the art of transforming SMK into successful PCK. The teacher’s content knowledge must be strong and coherent in order for a teacher to use PCK.
Research is ongoing to find the best practice on how science teachers can successfully transform SMK and develop their PCK through professional development programmes. For example, Loughran et al. (2008, 2012) developed a framework that can be used during teacher development programmes such as workshops to elicit science teachers’ PCK. This PCK framework has two elements, the CoRes (Content Representations) and the PaP-eRs (Pedagogical and Professional –experience Repertoires). The CoRe presents an overview of the particular content taught when teaching the topic (Loughran et al., 2004, 2008, 2012). The CoRe includes aspects such as what students have to learn (content to be taught); how the concepts fit within other; and why it is important for students to learn that material.
The PaP-eRs, which are narrative accounts of teachers’ PCK, are designed to unpack a teacher’s thinking and actions in teaching specific aspects of science content. Loughran’s PCK tool has presented a framework to help teachers define PCK for teaching each specific
79 topic in their subjects. This approach has been used by other researchers including some from South Africa (Rollnick et al., 2008; Ratcliffe, 2008).
b. Pedagogical Knowledge
Whilst SMK plays a much dominant role in the development of teachers’ PCK, other knowledge domains also contribute. Shulman (1987:8) defined pedagogical knowledge as broad principles and strategies of classroom management and organization that appear to transcend subject matter. In line with a transformative view of PCK Magnusson et al. (1999) views this domain as the Knowledge of Instructional Strategies and Representations for Teaching Science. This domain comprises two sub-domains: knowledge of subject-specific strategies and knowledge of topic-specific strategies (Magnusson et al., 1999). Subject- specific strategies deal with approaches for teaching a science subject, such as inquiry-based approach (Park & Oliver, 2008). Topic-specific strategies on the other hand include specific approaches for representing concepts of particular topics (Magnusson et al., 1999; Park &
Oliver, 2008).
c. Knowledge of learners
Magnusson et al. (1999) assert that a teacher needs knowledge of learners’ understanding and beliefs about science in order to be able to present a specific topic. This knowledge domain, according to Magnusson et al. (1999) includes knowledge of the requirements or prerequisite ideas and skills that students will need to learn a specific scientific topic. This also includes teachers’ knowledge of different approaches that students will use to learn specific content. According to Magnussson et al. (1999) effective teachers should recognize the varying needs of their students and have knowledge of an appropriate strategy for a particular type of learner in a specific subject area. In this knowledge domain, Magnusson et al. (1999) also included the ‘knowledge of areas of student difficulty’, which includes teachers’
knowledge of content areas that students will find difficult to learn. Consistent with Magnusson et al. (1999), Park and Oliver (2008:265) affirm that to effectively put PCK to use, teachers need to possess knowledge about ‘students’ conceptions of particular topics, learning difficulties, motivation, and diversity in ability, learning style, interest, developmental level, and need’.
80 d. Curriculum knowledge
Although Shulman (1986) considered curricular knowledge to be separate from PCK, he acknowledged its contribution to teachers’ PCK. In this category Shulman included aspects of knowledge about curriculum materials available for teaching particular subject matter as well as about both the horizontal and vertical curricular for a subject, a concept that was later accentuated by Grossman (1990). From a science perspective, Magnusson et al. (1999) refer to this category as ‘knowledge and beliefs about science curriculum’. This component can be further divided into two sub-domains: mandated goals and objectives and specific curricular programs and materials. Magnusson argued for inclusion of curricular knowledge PCK citing that it is knowledge of the curricular materials that divide the content specialist from the pedagogue, which is a defining factor of PCK.
Goals and objectives: includes knowledge of and the ability to articulate goals and guidelines. This includes knowledge of relevant standards, district, state or national and also includes knowledge of the vertical position of their subject within the progression of student learning (Magnusson et al., 1999).
Specific Curricular Programs and Materials: This includes the knowledge of programs and materials for teaching that are specific within a domain and also the specific relevant sub topics within that domain. Teachers must be more than aware of certain programs or instructional supports; they must also be knowledgeable of the learning goals of these programs in order for the effective implementation of the programs.
e. Knowledge of Educational context
Knowledge of educational contexts is knowledge of schools, classrooms and all settings where learning takes place (Shulman, 1986). According to Turner-Bisset (1999) there are contextual factors that have a significant impact on teaching performance affecting the development and classroom performance. Turner-Bisset found a range of contextual factors that affected teaching performance such as the type and size of school; the class size; the level and quality of support for novice teachers; the quality of relationships in the school, and other pertinent factors (Nichol & Turner-Bisset, 2006:46). Ernest (2006:19) included such contextual factors as knowledge of other teachers; departmental and school location of teaching resources; knowledge of assessment systems and policies; knowledge of the school
81 ethos, and of the school and departmental expectations concerning the role of the teacher.
This knowledge ‘extends beyond the school, to the knowledge of its broader social, cultural, ethnic and geographic contexts’ Ernest (1989:19). Knowledge of school context is therefore among the most powerful determinants of the classroom approach employed by the teacher.
In South Africa, where there is such diversity of culture, religion, socio-economic status and language, it is particularly important for teachers to be aware of such diverse contextual factors in order to develop the full potential of each individual learner.
f.
Knowledge of Educational Ends, Purposes and ValuesShulman included in his list, knowledge of educational end, purposes, and values, and their philosophical and historical grounds. The South African curriculum has laid down a number of educational ends, purposes and values for both its learners and teachers. It envisages teachers who are qualified and competent, who will act as mediators of learning amongst many roles. It envisages a teacher who creates a confident, independent, multi-skilled lifelong learner who has respect for the environment and has the ability to participate in society as a critical and active citizen. With each school subject outlining purposes related to the development of knowledge specific to the subject, teachers are envisaged to be the key facilitators for the development of this knowledge (DBE, 2011c).
In summary, the theories discussed above were used to frame the study as follows:
Adult learning theories were used to frame some of the open ended questions as well as closed-ended items of the questionnaire. Data obtained from these questions will also be analysed using adult learning theories. These questions in the questionnaire dealt with aspects such as teachers’ preferred methods of learning during professional development as well as their motivation to learn. Because teachers are adult learners, it is envisaged that gathered data will shed light on how teachers construct their learning, for example, whether the surveyed teachers exhibited the features of adult learners such as self-directed learning.
Communities of practice as a complementary conceptual framework will be used for analysing data pertaining to learning that takes place in teacher clusters. Teacher clusters provide a platform for shared learning, and can thus be appropriately analysed using
‘Communities of learning’ as a framework.
82 Data on teachers’ content and pedagogical needs will be analysed using PCK as a conceptual framework. This framework is envisaged to demonstrate the extent to which teachers surveyed had developed their content and pedagogical knowledge, which shapes their overall PCK.