Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Mathematical Pedagogical Content Knowledge VS. Science Pedag
Transcript of Mathematical Pedagogical Content Knowledge VS. Science Pedag
Type of Article
The study employed quantitative and qualitative analyses which included scoring teachers on their lessons against a specified rubric, paper-pencil teacher assessment, video-taped observations, and case study.
Type of article
Conceptual - ideas about importance of SPCK and some results from studies discussed but overall, not an based on a study with empirical results
"Pedagogical content knowledge is a teacher’s
understanding of how to help students understand specific subject matter. It includes knowledge of how particular subject matter topics, problems, and issues can be organized, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and then presented for instruction. It is content specific and transformative" (Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 96).
Scientific Pedagogical Content Knowledge includes 5 components: orientations towards science teaching, knowledge and beliefs about science curriculum, knowledge and beliefs about students’ understanding of specific science topics, knowledge and beliefs about assessment in science and knowledge and beliefs about instructional strategies for teaching science (Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 97).
Mathematical Knowledge of Teaching
Science Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Many scholars identified a unique contribution of teacher knowledge to student achievement (in mathematics, see also Hanushek, 1972; Hill, Rowan, & Ball, 2005; Mullens, Murnane, & Willett, 1996; Rowan, Chiang, &Miller, 1997).
At the same time, scholars studying teacher knowledge have also identified an impact on instruction (e.g., Borko, Eisenhart, Brown, Underhill, Jones, & Agard, 1992; Fennema & Franke, 1992; Leinhardt & Smith, 1985; Putnam, Heaton, Prawat, & Remillard, 1992; Sowder, Phillip, Armstrong, & Shappelle, 1998).
This is a correlational study, though with multiple limitations, demonstrates that there “is a powerful relationship between what a teacher knows, how she knows it, and what she can do in the context of instruction” (p. 496). Nonetheless, the authors declare that they “cannot prove that greater knowledge results in richer instruction” (p. 496).
Relationship of MKT and achievement
Research not present in the article for this comparison.
The authors discuss effective science teachers and the importance of teachers’ knowledge within each area of SPCK, but do not directly link this to student achievement study as math article does. While they propose SPCK is beneficial and important, they do not provide evidence to link student achievement. Maybe this is because of the vast array of areas proposed in what SPCK is, or to point out that more research needs to be done?
Relationship between SPCK and achievement
The mathematical knowledge of teaching (MKT) includes both the mathematical knowledge that is common to individuals working in diverse professions and the mathematical knowledge that is specialized to teaching (p. 430).
MKT includes both the domains traditionally conceived as pedagogical content knowledge (knowledge of content and students [KCS], knowledge of content and teaching [KCT]), as well as two types of subject matter knowledge itself: common content knowledge [CCK], or content knowledge that is used in the work of teaching in ways in common with how it is used in many other professions or occupations that also use mathematics; and specialized content knowledge [SCK], or content knowledge that is tailored in particular for the specialized uses that come up in the work of teaching, and is thus not commonly used in those ways by most other professions or occupations (Ball et al., 2008) (p. 439).
teacher preparation programs
teacher preparation programs
This framework holds implications for teacher preparation programs and for curriculum. With the distinctions of different types of teacher knowledge required to teach mathematics effectively, teacher preparation programs are building the course work to include the development of content and pedagogical practices of teachers.
"Recommendations for helping teachers learn to teach in news ways:
1. helping teachers examine their pre-existing knowledge and beliefs;
2. addressing the relationship between subject matter knowledge and pedagogical
3. situating learning experiences for teachers in meaningful contexts; and
4. using a model of components of pedagogical content knowledge to guide
"Program features consistent with this view include
pairing or combining science content courses with science methods courses focused"
on teaching the same content.
(Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 121)
"Teachers must have the opportunity to learn about new instructional strategies and ideas in meaningful and supportive contexts (practice and reflection)
In-service teachers: support and feedback in lessons"
((Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 125-126).
Professional development programs are devised to focus on content
knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, or both when planning such opportunities for teachers.
Assessment of teacher effectiveness encompasses components of content and pedagogical knowledge as outlined by Ball et al (2008).
Implications for practices
and future research
Implications for practices
and future research
More empirical research in this area is needed to examine the relationship between MKT and students achievement in mathematics as well as the impact of teacher preparation programs in teacher quality and the quality of instruction when MKT components suggested by the framework is considered in devising and executing these programs.
Measures to assess teachers MKT needs to be developed to examine the impact on instruction and and students achievement.
"Much more research is needed to define desired pedagogical content knowledge for specific science topics, and to examine its
influence on teachers’ practice in specific teaching situations. Use various data collection methods to capture complexity of pedagogical content knowledge in classroom: Observations of teachers in their classrooms as well as in teacher education settings; interviews with teachers about their knowledge, beliefs and practices; and interviews with other persons central to change efforts are all important sources of information about teaching"
(Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 127).
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and
development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95-132). Springer Netherlands.
Hill, H. C., Blunk, M. L., Charalambous, C. Y., Lewis, J. M., Phelps, G.
C., Sleep, L., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge
for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and instruction, 26(4), 430-511.
Components of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching
(Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999, p. 99)
Dlavertydo (2012, JANUARY 17). Ball, Thames and Phelps:
Content Knowledge for Teaching, What Makes It Special? (2008). Retrieved from: https://dlavertydotcom.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/ball-thames-and-phelps-content-knowledge-for-teaching-what-makes-it-special-2008/