Exploring Pre-service Science Teachers´ Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Concerns in the Context of Evolution

Author(s):

Gökcen Özcan(presenting)Gökcen Özcan(presenting / submitting)Ceren Tekkaya

Conference:

ECER 2011

Network:

10. Teacher Education Research

Format:

Paper

Session Information

10 SES 06 C, Research on Professional Knowledge and Identity in Teacher Education

Paper Session

Time:

2011-09-14

15:00-16:30

Room:

JK 31/124,G, 30

Chair:

Maeve O'Brien

Contribution

Shulman (1987, p.8) in his pioneering work entitled “Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform’’ categorized teacher knowledge base as content knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge, curriculum knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), knowledge of learners and their characteristics, knowledge of educational contexts, as well as knowledge of educational ends, purposes and values, and their philosophical and historical grounds. According to Shulman, PCK “identifies the distinctive body of knowledge for teaching and represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, presented for instruction”. Grossman (1990) conceptualized PCK as having four components, namely subject matter knowledge, knowledge of students’ conceptions and difficulties; knowledge of curriculum; and knowledge of instructional strategies. Magnusson et al. (1999) defined PCK as constituting of five components which are orientations toward science teaching, knowledge of science curriculum, knowledge of science instructional strategies, knowledge of student science understandings, knowledge of science assessment (Abell, 2007). As pedagogical content knowledge develops with respect to specific content knowledge, studies started to focus on examining pedagogical content knowledge with regard to specific science concepts (Cohen & Yarden, 2009; Käpylä, Heikkinen & Asunta, 2008).

In order to gain an understanding about pre-science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge with reference to a specific subject matter, in this study, “evolution” is chosen. . Since evolutionary theory has long been regarded as the most important and unifying theory in biology and serves as an explanation of similarities among organisms, biological diversity and many characteristics of the physical world which are among the most basic characteristics of the world (National Academy of Sciences 1998), it is included as a fundamental concept in the current national elementary science curriculum in Turkey. Asghar, Wiles and Alters (2007) claimed that although evolution may be to basic science literacy, it is ignored in science curricula especially at the elementary school level. Hence, evolution is not only one of the important interdisciplinary subject matter in science but also an important contemporary global discipline which should be comprehended by students with scientific explanations. However, studies showed that not only students but also preservice as well as in-service science teachers hold several misconceptions about evolution (Asghar et al., 2007; Deniz, Donelly, & Yilmaz 2008; Nehm & Schonfeld 2007). It is clear that teachers with misconceptions about evolution are not likely to be developing scientifically accurate concepts in their students. Moreover, teachers’ subject matter knowledge has a strong influence on their curricular and instructional decisions (e.g.Hashweh 1987; Shulman 1986). By considering the important role that future science teachers play for effective science learning, the present study attempted to explore the following research questions:

1. What PCK do pre-service science teachers have regarding the teaching of evolution?

2. What concerns do pre-service science teachers have regarding the teaching of evolution?

Method

This qualitative study included 6 senior preservice science teachers attending to one of the teacher education programs that is intended to prepare them to teach grades 6-8 in the elementary schools. The participants of the study were composed of four female and two male; the range of ages was from 21 to 24 years. Participants overall GPAs ranged from 2.00 to 3.11 with a mean of 2.47 out of four. While three of the participants’ indicated their political views as conservative, the two reported as liberal and one of the participant stated that she did not support any political view. Data collected through individual semi-structured interviews, concept maps, and lesson plans. All the interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim by the researchers. Each interview lasted about one and a half hours. The categories and subcategories were established according to the theoretical framework of the study which was Pedagogical Content Knowledge model of Grossman (1990) and Magnusson et al. (1999).

Expected Outcomes

Participants found to be fairly knowledgeable about students’ difficulties and instructional strategies, were unaware of the place of evolution in science curricula and lacked necessary content knowledge. They had limited understanding about process of evolution, homolog and analog organs, modification, common ancestor, intermediate form and earth's age. They acknowledged that they never heard about Wallace. Participants identified population, mutation, homolog and analog organs, differentiation, adaptation and natural selection as difficult concepts for students to learn. Sources of difficulties attributed to students’ religious beliefs, controversial nature of the evolution, and lack of material. They thought evolution can be taught by case studies, learning cycle and field trip. Tests and portfolios were identified as assessment tools. Respondents concerned about their own beliefs about religion and evolution, their inadequate subject matter knowledge, students’ religious beliefs, lack of student interest, and conflict between creationism and evolution while teaching evolution in Turkish elementary school. One interwees said that “it is not so important for students to learn evolution; there are other important subjects to learn. But, if there is something known as evolution, I would teach it to my students”. Preservice teachers should improve their pedagogical content knowledge, if they want to teach evolution effectively.

References

Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. Handbook of research on science education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Asghar, A., Wiles, J., & Alters, B. (2007). Discovering international perspectives on biological evolution across religions and cultures. International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities, and Nations, 6, 81–88. Deniz, H., Donnelly, L., & Yilmaz, I. (2008). Exploring the factors related to acceptance of evolutionary theory among Turkish preservice biology teachers: Toward a more informative conceptual ecology for biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 420-443. Cohen, R. & Yarden, A. (2009). Experienced junior-high-school teachers’ PCK in light of a curriculum change: “The cell is to be studied longitudinally”. Research in Science Education, 39,131-155. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teacher College Press. Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effects of subject-matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and physics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 109-120. Kapyla, M., Heikkinen, J.-P. & Asunta, T. (2009). Influence of content knowledge on pedagogical content knowledge: The case of teaching photosynthesis and plant growth. International Journal of Science Education, 3, 1395-1415. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp 95-132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer. Nehm, R. H. & Schonfeld, I. R. (2007). Does increasing biology teacher knowledge of evolution and the nature of science lead to greater preference for the teaching of evolution in schools? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 699-723 Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.

Author Information

Gökcen Özcan (presenting)

Sakarya University

Faculty of Education

Sakarya

Gökcen Özcan (presenting / submitting)

Sakarya University, Turkey

Ceren Tekkaya

Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.