Understanding how the knowledge structures of preservice teachers develop as expertise is acquired would seem to be an important aspect of teacher preparation. The purpose of this study was to compare the pedagogical knowledge structures about effective teaching of preservice teachers and teacher educators in the professional preparation programs of two different institutions. Two groups of preservice teachers at two different points in their preparation program at each of the two institutions were asked to complete a concept map (Roehler et al., 1987) about effective teaching. One group completed the concept map just after the first teaching methods course, and the other group completed the map just prior to student teaching. These data were compared with concept maps of teacher educators at each institution. Quantitative and qualitative data revealed differences between the groups of preservice teachers and between the preservice teachers and the teacher educators.A recent emphasis on the knowledge base for teaching has provided the stimulus for an increased emphasis in studying not only what the teacher knows but how that information is structured and organized. Knowing is conceived as a process in which an individual constructs a model of reality from interactions in the environment (Jonassen, 1987), and these models are stored as related constructs referred to as cognitive structures. The concept of knowledge structures has emerged primarily from recent research in cognitive psychology (Frederiksen, 1986; Schue11,1986) and perhaps more importantly from the comparison of experts and novices in a variety of fields (Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982). Schon (1987) suggested that individuals holding different conceptual frameworks pay attention to different facts and make different interpretations of the information. (Morine-Dershimer, 1989; hierarchical concept maps (Roehler et al., 1987); and construct, pattern notes (Jonassen, 1987). There are advantages and disadvantages for particular techniques. For further discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques, the interested reader should consult Kagan (1990) or Reitman, Olson, and Biolsi (1991).Educational research has used either of two similar concept-mapping techniques: concept maps (Morine-Dershimer, 1989 and hierarchical concept maps (Roehler et al., 1987). Concept maps, sometimes called cognitive maps, have been used both as a teaching tool and as a measure of organizational structure and relationships between ideas (Diekhoff & Diekhoff, 1982). Concept maps require subjects to select and categorize a list of starter words on a large concept, such as effective teaching, and to draw a graphic representation of concepts to show how they are conceptually related. Concept maps have the advantage of more comprehensively identifying the meaning a subject attaches to a construct because there is no predetermined structure and no limitation on the number of concepts.Other techniques (digraph analysis, card sorting of concepts, ordered trees) used t...
