This differentiation captures whether PCK was considered more of a unique entity (transformative model) or not (integrative model) and was carried out because transformative PCK models are considered more appropriate for explaining developmental processes regarding PCK. These models can also be differentiated as rather integrative or transformative models of PCK. (1999) Park & Oliver, 2008 ) were developed. Numerous conceptual frameworks for PCK (e.g., Grossman, 1990 Magnusson et al. Initially, Shulman viewed PCK as an amalgam of content and pedagogy, so PCK could be seen as a new and distinct form of knowledge transformed from content knowledge (CK) that has to do with subject matter, representations, and phenomena, and pedagogical knowledge (PK), which is general knowledge about learning and teaching, as well a kind of overlap of CK and PK. However, modelling PCK in teacher education has proven difficult and has a diverse history. Even though practical teaching experiences are established to be important for PCK development, the variety of influencing factors and interrelations among constructs, especially since the RCM was established, are less well outlined and textured.
#Tales of arise earth seed professional#
By recognising practical teaching activities as opportunities for this unique form of teacher professional knowledge to be both manifested and generated, as teachers engage in pedagogical reasoning during the teaching cycle, the RCM stresses the context-specific, situated nature of PCK. In the RCM of PCK, researchers conceptualise practical teaching experiences (in the cycle of planning, teaching and reflecting in/on teaching situations) as core to teachers’ PCK. In 2019, earlier discussions were channelled into the refined consensus model (RCM) (a list of all abbreviations in this paper can be found in Appendix A) of PCK in science education. In 2015, after more models emerged that could facilitate the exploration of links between science teachers’ PCK and their practical classroom experiences, there was a growing desire among researchers for a consensus. argued that actual classroom teaching can give teachers the opportunity to experiment with and explore their understanding of teaching and learning processes. Korthagen and colleagues argued 1999 that the development of applicable PCK in science fields and beyond could be facilitated through practical teaching experiences, and ten years later Grossman et al. We argue that the RCM can function as a meaningful theoretical lens for conceptualizing links between teaching practice and PCK development by proposing pedagogical reasoning as a mechanism and/or explanation for PCK development in the context of teaching practice.Ī widely recognized impact factor for PCK development is practical teaching experiences. Furthermore, results of the reviewed studies can mostly be integrated into the RCM. However, in recent years, the studies focused increasingly on quantitative aspects. We found that the studies largely employed a qualitative case-study methodology that included specific PCK models and tools. In this review, the studies’ approaches to investigating PCK and selected findings were characterised and synthesised as an overview comparing research before and after the publication of the RCM. This study sought to systematize existing science education research on PCK through the lens of the recently proposed refined consensus model (RCM) of PCK. A potential problem lies in the diverse conceptualisations of the PCK used in PCK research.
#Tales of arise earth seed how to#
Science education researchers have developed a refined understanding of the structure of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), but how to develop applicable and situation-adequate PCK remains largely unclear.
0 kommentar(er)
