 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
||||||||
 |
 |
|
|||||||
 |
|
||||||||
Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge in
Pre-service Science Teachers* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Abstract
Teachers and school personnel desire effective science teachers who are able to produce high quality student learning. In order for teachers to be highly effective in the instruction of science, they need to have a firm understanding of science content. This, however, is not enough as teachers also need pedagogical content knowledge or know how to facilitate learning among their students. Universities are faced with a challenge of building in pre-service teachers both science content and pedagogical content knowledge. San Diego State University in California addresses this challenge by offering science courses to pre-service teachers that model how to develop content through scientific inquiry and other appropriate pedagogical practices.
I. Teachers Need Greater Content Knowledge in Science
Since the publication of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (Gonzalez, 2000) it has been apparent that pre-service teachers in various parts of the world receive different qualities of preparation in science. While students in some countries such as Taipei, Singapore and Japan performed very well, other countries did not. In the 1999 testing, students from the United States were ranked 18th out of 38 nations.
Countries around the world, including the United States and Mexico, have become intensely interested in better preparing teachers to deliver world class education in science to their students. Part of the solution to the problem lies in teacher training. The question of what science content elementary teachers should receive during teacher preparation has become a point of discussion in many universities.
That teachers need strong science content knowledge is clear, but knowing the content is not enough. They also need to know how to teach it. Lee Shulman (1987) of Stanford University referred to this ability to make learning understandable to others as pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers not only need to know about the topic they are teaching (content knowledge), to be effective, they need to know how to help their students understand it as well (pedagogical content knowledge).
Pedagogical content knowledge skills in science are honed through classroom practice (Van Driel, Verloop & DeVos, 1998) and are therefore often undeveloped in beginning teachers (Mulhall, Berry,& Loughran, 2003). As a result, institutions responsible for developing teachers must not only make sure that future teachers have the content knowledge necessary to teach science, they need to assure that teachers have the ability to create productive learning environments for their students, so they too can develop a deep understanding of the content and processes of science.
II. Determining Science Content for Teachers
Selecting science content for elementary teachers is especially difficult because of the range of grades and science topics that elementary teachers must address in the curriculum. One productive approach for narrowing the enormous scope starts by looking at the elementary curriculum. What topics are covered at each grade level?What is the depth of content knowledge necessary to challenge advanced upper grade students in these topics?
The National Research Council (NRC) in the United States brought together leading scientists and science educators to set national content standards for science instruction. The National Science Education Standards (1996) contains eight disciplines of science and divides the content disciplines into three areas:Physical Science, Life Science, and Earth/Space Science. The standards then delineate science content across grade spans in each area as can be seen in Tables 1-3.
Table 1: Physical Science Standards
GRADE LEVELS K-4
GRADE LEVELS 5-8
GRADE LEVELS 9-12
Properties of objects and materials
Properties and changes ofproperties in matter
Structure of atoms
Position and motion of objects
Motions and forces
Structure and properties of matter
Light, heat, electricity, and magnetism
Transfer of energy
Chemical reactions
Motion and forces
Conservation of energy and increase in disorder
Interactions of energy and matter
Table 2: Life Science Standards
GRADE LEVELS K-4
GRADE LEVELS 5-8
GRADE LEVELS 9-12
Characteristics of organisms
Life cycles of organisms
Organisms and environments
Structure and function in living systems
Reproduction and heredity
Regulation and behavior
Populations and ecosystems
Diversity and adaptations of organisms
The cell
Molecular basis of heredityBiological evolution
Interdependence of organisms
Matter, energy, and organization in living systems
Behavior of organisms
Table 3: Earth and Space Science Standards
GRADE LEVELS K-4
GRADE LEVELS 5-8
GRADE LEVELS 9-12
Properties of earth materials
Structure of the earth system
Energy in the earth system
Objectsin the sky
Earth’s history
Geochemical cycles
Changes in earth and sky
Earth in the solar system
Origin and evolution of the earth system
Origin and evolution of the universe
The standards provide an excellent framework around which university level content courses should be built. Prospective teachers need to be given college level curriculum in each area that exposes them to the underlying concepts and principles in the discipline. Additionally, prospective teachers should have the opportunity to experience learning science through pedagogically appropriate methods.
III. Determining Science Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers
The NRC (1996) has also outlined science teaching standards to guide teachers in their lesson preparation. The instructional methods advocated in the Science Teaching Standards shown below require teachers to use instructional strategies, such as inquiry and science discourse, that many of them never experienced in their own education. The challenge before teacher educators is to prepare the future teachers to be successful in employing these often novel strategies in their classrooms.
NRC Science Teaching StandardsStandard A: Teachers of science plan an inquiry-based science program for their students
Standard B: Teachers of science guide and facilitate learning
Standard C: Teachers of science engage in ongoing assessment of their teaching and of student learning.
Standard D: Teachers of science design and manage learning environments that provide students with the time, space, and resources needed for learning science.
Standard E: Teachers of science develop communities of science learners that reflect the intellectual rigor of scientific inquiry and the attitudes and social values conducive to science learning.
Standard F: Teachers of science actively participate in the ongoing planning and development of the school science program.
The NRC highlights the impact of these standards on classroom instruction by delineating changes in classroom practice. The picture becomes quite clear that teachers are no longer expected to stand in front of the class and lecture out of the textbook, but to create an interactive and supportive learning environment that is responsive to individual students. The shifting emphases on what comprises effective science instruction are outlined in Table 4.
Table 4: Changing Emphases in Science Instruction From NRC
LESS EMPHASIS ON
MORE EMPHASIS ON
Treating all student alike and responding to the group as a whole
Understanding and responding to individual student’s interests, strengths, experiences, and needs
Rigidly following curriculum
Selecting and adapting curriculum
Focusing on student acquisition of information
Focusing on student understanding and use of scientific knowledge, ideas, and inquiry processes
Presenting scientific knowledge through lecture,text, and demonstration
Guiding students in active and extended scientific inquiry
Asking for recitation of acquired knowledge
Providing opportunities for scientific discussion and debate among students
Testing students for factual information at the end of the unit or chapter
Continuously assessing student understanding
Maintaining responsibility and authority
Sharing responsibility for learning with students
Supporting competition
Supporting a classroom community with cooperation, shared responsibility, and respect
Working alone
Working with other teachers to enhance the science program.
IV. Preparing Elementary Science Teachers at SDSU
The science content and science education faculty at San Diego State University in California have been working to improve both the content and pedagogical content knowledge of prospective teachers for many years. Not only have the number and type of courses required changed, but the contents of the courses has also been adapted to be more responsive to the needs of the beginning teachers (see Table 5). Prospective teachers are required to take courses from each of the three discipline areas: Life, Earth/Space, and Physical Sciences. New courses, such as one on Natural Disasters have been added to the curriculum to make course content more relevant to the subjects covered in the K-6 classroom where students study volcanoes, earthquakes, and other forces of nature.
Table 5: Content Coursework for Elementary Teachers
TOPIC
SEMESTER UNITS
CONTACT HOURS
Life Science
3-4
45-75
Physical Science or Earth Science
3-4
45-75
Investigation & Experimentation
4
75
Chemistry
3
45
Natural Science Inquiry for Teachers
4
75
Total
17 - 19
285 – 345
The important issue of pedagogical content knowledge has also been included in the course selection and design. For example, a course on Investigation and Experimentation is required to introduce prospective teachers to the underlying processes of science. Another example of teaching both content and pedagogy is the Natural Science Inquiry for Teachers course, developed by Fred Goldberg (2005) of San Diego State University with the support of the National Science Foundation.
V. Blending Content and Pedagogy
Dr. Goldberg and his associates set out to provide prospective teachers with the types of learning experiences that the NRC Science Teaching Standards outlined for students. They selected the content areas of electricity and magnetism, not areas of strength among prospective elementary teachers. This resulted in a course imbued with authentic learning opportunities. The course is divided into seven sections:Interactions and Energy; Interactions and Force; Interactions and Fields; Model of Magnetism; Electric Circuits and Electromagnetic Interactions; Light, Heat Conduction and Infrared Interactions; and Interactions and Conservation. Each section set up student inquiries where students could collect data, make observations and deduce the properties of electricity and magnetism. Students worked in teams providing them the opportunity to reflect and define their thinking with their peers. Class discussions around key concepts help build communication and understanding. In short, the students learned through an instructional style that was advocated by Science Teaching Standards.
The Natural Science Inquiry for Teachers course does more than teach content through exemplary instructional methods. It also introduces the prospective teachers to the type of professional discourse employed by effective teachers. For example, the fifth module of the course addresses Electric Circuits and Electromagnetic Interactions. The participants explore through their own inquiries such topics as circuit interactions, the relationship between circuits, energy, and current, as well as the impact of magnets on electric current and motors. As a culminating activity, participants design an electrical “Wake Up” system. Through these activities the pre-service teachers have many opportunities to develop their own content knowledge in the field.
Pedagogical content knowledge among the teachers is advanced when, using their own content learning experiences, they are asked to predict how grade school students will engage in scientific thinking about electricity. To promote this type of thinking and discussion, the course includes video clips taken from elementary classrooms where students are working on inquiries similar to the ones the prospective teachers have just completed. The elementary students in the video clips are given the opportunity to explain their thinking about what they are doing and the pre-service teachers are tasked with analyzing their remarks and interpret the student’s understanding of the concept. At another point, prospective teachers are to analyze explanations given by two students and determine whether their thinking was sophisticated or simplistic. This type of complex pedagogical content knowledge is often only developed after years of classroom experience, but this course introduces this important pedagogical skill early in the teacher preparation program. Prospective teachers who never experienced inquiry-based learning while they were in elementary school have the opportunity in their coursework and through video clips, to see it in action.
The science methods course taught as part of the Teacher Education program at SDSU-Imperial Valley Campus, is closely aligned to the Science Teaching Standards and the content coursework outlined earlier. The science instructional methods course is designed to take effective instructional skills and teach them in the context of the inquiry-based units that are used in local elementary classrooms. In the methods course, pedagogical content knowledge takes the lead with science content knowledge playing an important, but secondary role. The pedagogical content focus and the activities used to teach them are outlined in Table 6. Many of the course activities in inquiry were adapted from the Exploratorium in San Francisco, a science museum that targets learning through inquiry.
The methods course also introduces prospective teachers to the Science Content Standards used by the state. The class participants examine inquiry-based curricula, such as the Energy and Matter kit, and see how the activities lead students to an understanding of the concepts outlined in the standards. This is also an opportunity for prospective teachers to bring their learning full circle as they see the concepts they learned in Natural Science Inquiry for Teachers course are aligned with the curriculum and pedagogy they will implement in their own classrooms.
Table 6: Pedagogical content focus and the activities
FOCUS
ACTIVITY
Inquiry Process
Exploratorium Ice Balloons
Questioning
Subtle Shifts
Science Process Skills
Fair Test experiences
Content Standards
Magnetism & Electricity kit
Lesson Planning
Video Lessons
Student Notebooks
Analysis of student work
Assessment
Rubric development
Participants in the methods course also explore how the other inquiry-based units (Table 7) match the Science Content Standards (Tables 1-3). Through this process they come to understand that by using a carefully planned science curriculum, elementary students can learn world class science through an interactive and engaging approach.
Table 7: Inquiry-Based Science Units in Imperial Valley Schools
Grade
LIFE
EARTH
PHYSICAL
OPTIONAL
K
Myself and Others
Sunshine and Shadows
Wood (FOSS)
1
Living Things
(Insight)
Finding the Moon (Delta)
Solids & Liquids (STC)
Senses (Insight)
2
Butterfly Cycle (STC)
Soils (STC)
Sink or Float (Delta)
Growing Things (Insight)
3
Brine Shrimp
Earth Materials (FOSS)
Sounds
(Insight)
Amazing Air (Delta)
4
Food Chains Webs (Delta)
Landforms (FOSS)
Magnetism & Elect. (FOSS)
Changes of State (Insight)
5
Human Body Systems(Insight)
Weather and Water (FOSS)
Mixtures and Solutions (FOSS)
Reading the Environ. (Insight)
6
Experiments Plants (STC)
Catastrophic Events (STC)
Measuring Time (STC)
Magnets and Motors (STC)
7
Human Body Systems Macro-Micro (STC)
Earth History (FOSS)
Light
(STC-MS)
N/A
8
N/A
Planetary Science (FOSS)
Properties of Matter (STC)
Energy Machines Motion (STC)
The inquiry-based science program in Imperial Valley, the schools where most of the SDSU-IVC graduates work, is called the Valle Imperial Project in Science (VIPS). This program, originally funded by the National Science Foundation has been highly successful in introducing inquiry-based science into the elementary schools (Amaral, Garrison, & Klentschy, 2002). The teacher training program described in this paper, prepares prospective teachers to join the professional development opportunities available through VIPS and enter the teacher force with a solid foundation in science instruction.
VII. Conclusion
The science content knowledge of prospective elementary school teachers needs to be strengthened. While knowing science content is a necessary condition for effective instruction, it is not sufficient. Teachers must also know how to facilitate science learning in their students, or in other words, they must also have science pedagogical content knowledge. San Diego State University has developed a program which develops in prospective teachers both science content and the pedagogical content knowledge necessary for classroom instruction. This duel process starts with the content courses taken at the undergraduate level and continues through the teacher education (graduate) program. The program is aligned with the NRC Science Content and Science Teaching Standards as well as the inquiry-based curriculum used in local classrooms. This integrated approach provides prospective teachers with the opportunity to not only know science content but to establish inquiry-based learning environments for their students.
VIII. References
Amaral, O. M., Garrison, L., & Klentschy, M. (2002). Helping English learners increase achievement through inquiry-based science instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(2), 213-240.
Goldberg, F. (2005). Physics for Elementary Teachers. San Diego: Montezuma.
Gonzalez, P., et. al. (2000). Pursuing excellence:Comparisons of eighth grade mathematics and science achievement from a U. S. perspective, 1995 and 1999. Washington D. C. : National Center for Education Statistics.
Mulhall, P., Berry, A., & Loughran, J. (2003). Frameworks for representing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching. 4(2).
National Research Council, (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: an investigation of U. S. science and mathematics education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching:Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Van Driel, J. H, Verloop, N., & DeVos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673-695.
