Professional knowledge affectsaction‐relatedskills: The development ofpreservicephysics teachers' explaining skills during a field experience

Abstract

Professional knowledge is an important source of science teachers' actions in the classroom (e.g., personal professional content knowledge [pedagogical content knowledge, PCK] is the source of enacted PCK in the refined consensus model [RCM] for PCK). However, the evidence for this claim is ambiguous at best. This study applied a cross‐lagged panel design to examine the relationship between professional knowledge and actions in one particular instructional situation: explaining physics. Pre‐ and post a field experience (one semester), 47 preservice physics teachers from four different universities were tested for their content knowledge (CK), PCK, pedagogical knowledge (PK), and action‐related skills in explaining physics. The study showed that joint professional knowledge (the weighted sum of CK, PCK, and PK scores) at the beginning of the field experience impacted the development of explaining skills during the field experience (β = .38**). We interpret this as a particular relationship between professional knowledge and science teachers' action‐related skills (enacted PCK): professional knowledge is necessary for the development of explaining skills. That is evidence that personal PCK affects enacted PCK. In addition, field experiences are often supposed to bridge the theory‐practice gap by transforming professional knowledge into instructional practice. Our results suggest that for field experiences to be effective, preservice teachers should start with profound professional knowledge.

Fostering prospective teachers’ explaining skills during university education—Evaluation of a training module

“…There is also evidence that, after receiving feedback from their mentor during teaching placements, prospective teachers' explanations improved in later lessons (Borko et al 1992;Eisenhart et al 1993). In respect of field placements, Kulgemeyer et al (2020) showed that professional knowledge prior to the teaching placement (pre-test) influenced explaining skills after the teaching placement (post-test). In fact, only teacher candidates entering the school internship with high professional knowledge showed significant development in explaining skills after a 5-month placement.…”

Promoting Coherent Science Instruction through Coherent Science Teacher Education: A Model Framework for Program Design

“…PSTs encounter learning opportunities during university teacher education addressing different components of PCK. Explicit instruction in science method courses supports preservice teachers' knowledge exchange between cPCK and pPCK (Sorge, Stender et al, 2019), and field experiences provide opportunities for preservice teachers to enrich their pPCK (van Driel et al, 2002) and develop their ePCK for planning, teaching and reflecting Kulgemeyer et al, 2020).…”

Pre-service teachers' conceptions about the quality of explanations for the science classroom in the context of peer assessment

“…Recently, the connections between pre-service teachers' explanations and PCK have been empirically supported. We know now that science pre-service teachers' PCK is a mediator of their explaining performance; then, PCK affects their enacted knowledge to explain (Kulgemeyer & Riese, 2018;Kulgemeyer et al, 2020).…”

“…The construct of such an explanatory framework enriched the idea of explanation as an answer to a why-question, highlighting how teachers use analogy, metaphor, examples, axioms and concepts, linking them together into a coherent whole for the classroom (Geelan, 2003). However, constructing explanations is a complicated process, and many teachers struggle to transform academic knowledge into explanations for the school (Cabello, Real, & Impedovo, 2019;Charalambous, Hill, & Ball, 2011;Gobierno de Chile, 2013;Hadzidaki, 2008;Kulgemeyer, et al, 2020;Inoue, 2009;Wittwer & Renkl, 2008). Indeed, this is even more critical for beginner teachers (Leinhardt, 2001;Ospina-Quintero & Bonan, 2011;Marzabal et al, 2019), and practical experience without reflection is unlikely to automatically lead to better results in explaining.…”

“…Moreover, the research regarding studentteacher explanations is still not as developed as the studies focused on student explanations (e.g., Besson, 2010;Herman et al, 2019;Kampourakis & Zogza, 2008). Hence, the intersection of explanation construction and the factors affecting its development in teacher education is still an under-researched field of inquiry (Charalambous et al, 2011;Geelan, 2012;Kulgemeyer & Riese, 2018;Kulgemeyer et al, 2020;Marzabal et al, 2019). Therefore, there is little knowledge about the development of pre-service explanations and relevance for future classroom practice.…”