Linking pre-service teachers’ enacted topic specific pedagogical content knowledge to learner achievement in organic chemistry

Abstract

This paper reports on the relationship between the pre-service teachers’ enacted Topic Specific Pedagogical Content Knowledge (eTSPCK) observable in the classroom teaching of Organic Chemistry and learner achievement in the topic. The study employed a mixed-methods research design with a sample of 17 pre-service teachers (PSTs). The PSTs were drawn from a Chemistry methodology class exposed to an intervention which focused on the pedagogical transformation of content knowledge of Organic Chemistry at a South African University. A sub-set of 4 of the PSTs was followed during a teaching practicum where the PSTs conducted lessons on Organic Chemistry with 88 Grade 12 Secondary School physical sciences learners in South Africa. Data collected were the video-recordings of the 4 PSTs’ classroom teachings, lesson plans, pre-and post-lesson interviews, and learners’ content knowledge pre-and post-achievement tests on Organic Chemistry prior to and immediately after the PSTs’ teachings, respectively. The video recorded lessons were analysed using an in-depth qualitative method of identifying TSPCK episodes and the interviews were analysed using content analysis. The learners’ achievement tests were scored using a memorandum of correct responses. The Rasch Model Analysis, Analysis of Covariance and Correlation analysis were employed in determining the relationship between PSTs’ eTSPCK and learner achievement. The analysis revealed a statistically significant difference across the means of the learners’ pre/post-tests, as well as a significant positive correlation between pre-service teachers’ eTSPCK and learners’ post-test achievement following the teaching. The correlation was found to increase in positive strength with the displayed higher quality categories of TSPCK episodes. The implications and recommendations for science teacher education are discussed.

The use of frameworks in chemistry education research

“…Researchers generally operationalized the specific frameworks used in alignment with the goals of the broader categories to which the frameworks belong. For example, studies using conceptions-based or fine-grained constructivist theories sought to understand the nature of students' content knowledge and conceptual learning (e.g., Bain et al, 2018;Park et al, 2020), and studies using the pedagogical content knowledge framework focused on how instructors enact or develop their knowledge for teaching (e.g., Akinyemi and Mavhunga, 2021). In both cases, the use of frameworks was consistent with the constructivist framework category and its focus on the nature, structure, and development of knowledge.…”

“…The authors recognize that different frameworks can and do span the four categories in the table, and the placement of frameworks within the categories are based on the authors' understanding of which category the frameworks best align with based on how the frameworks were discussed within the articles included in the review. For each framework indicated, a single article is provided from the sample to exemplify how the framework is used Phenomenology (Burrows et al, 2021) Gender performativity (Miller-Friedmann et al, 2018) Systems thinking (Talanquer, 2019) Mental models (Bongers et al, 2019) Science and chemistry identity (Hosbein and Barbera, 2020) Science capital (Ru ¨schenpo ¨hler and Markic, 2020) Three-dimensional learning/A Framework for K-12 Science Education (Underwood et al, 2021) Pedagogical content knowledge (Akinyemi and Mavhunga, 2021) Motivation/self-determination theory (Partanen, 2020) Representations and representational competence (Ferreira and Lawrie, 2019) Self-efficacy (Willson-Conrad and Grunert Kowalske, 2018) Teacher-centred systemic reform model (Rupnow et al, 2020) Teacher noticing (Schafer and Yezierski, 2021) Frameworks aligned with social constructivism Argumentation ( Frameworks aligned with learning and cognition Bloom's taxonomy (Lu et al, 2020) Cognitive load theory (Karch et al, 2019) Information processing (Galloway et al, 2019) Metacognition (Heidbrink and Weinrich, 2021)…”

Enacted Pedagogical Content Knowledge Profiles of Chemistry Teachers

“…Figure 1. Graphical representation of the RCM of PCK (Carlson & Daehler, 2019, p. 83) Journal of Educational Issues ISSN 2377-22632021 The major contribution of RCM of PCK to literature is the introduction of three variants of PCK: cPCK, pPCK, and ePCK. The reason why this distinction is of importance lies in the answer to the following question; what does each form of PCK represent?…”

“…Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is a useful construct for explaining how to enhance Journal of Educational Issues ISSN 2377-22632021 students' science learning (Kind & Chan, 2019) as teachers with high-quality PCK know 'when to apply a certain strategy in recognition of students' actual learning needs and understanding why a certain teaching approach may be useful in one situation' (van Driel, Berry, & Meirink, 2014, p. 865). While the position of such an important construct has been acknowledged by the science education community (Hume, Cooper, & Borowski, 2019) and in several reform documents (e.g., American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993;National Research Council [NRC], 1996), distinct conceptualizations of PCK have appeared among researchers which diminish or even prevent the potential contribution of PCK to policy documents and science classrooms (Chan & Hume, 2019).…”

Design and validation of an instrument to determine the relationship between pedagogical content knowledge and practical work in science instruction

“…Grossman (1990), Magnusson et al (1999), and Shulman (1986Shulman ( , 1987 proposed a framework of PCK for science teachers that defined five categories: orientations to science teaching (OST), knowledge of students' understanding of science (SK), knowledge of science curriculum (CuK), knowledge of instructional strategies (ISK), and knowledge of assessment (AK). Since then, educational research aligned with this proposal has been responsible for conceptualizing, developing, explaining, and analyzing PCK in science teachers (Abell, 2007(Abell, , 2008Akinyemi & Mavhunga, 2021;Alvarado et al, 2015;Goes et al, 2020;Park & Chen, 2012;Park & Oliver, 2008;Sintema & Marban, 2021). Part of these developments has focused on identifying the role and relationship that practice has with PCK.…”