Enhancing Teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge

According to Osborne (2014), many science teachers have received little training to develop an explicit knowledge of scientific practice that is associated with conceptual, procedural and epistemic understanding. Etkina (2010) asserted that “one cannot learn physics by just listening and reading but needs to engage in the active process of knowledge construction” (p. 020110-2). In-line with the aims and purposes of practical work, experiencing the active processes in scientific practice is significant for physics teachers’ PCK. As alluded to earlier, many scholars suggested that PCK is a personal construct and it develops over time through practice as well as reciprocal reflection and enactment to improve (Etkina, 2010; Wongsopawiro, Zwart & Van Driel, 2017). In other words, PCK can be enhanced as physics teachers continue to experience, reflect on their own teaching practice and in turn make improvements over their years of teaching. However, studies also indicated that knowledge components of PCK can still be enhanced during teacher training. This may also include the development of conceptual and procedural understanding for teaching, learning and assessment in school science (Osborne, 2014; Berg, 2015).

Etkina (2010) suggested that if physics teaching and learning in school science encompasses the understanding of learners’ preconceptions, misconceptions, reflections and collaboration with peers then trainee physics teachers need to act as learners during their teacher training. That means, physics trainee teachers should mimic classroom experiences with their peers in their teacher training courses. This is what Etkina (2010) called the “clinical practice” (p. 020110-2). Similarly, Berg (2015) emphasised that trainee teachers should develop their scientific knowledge, skills and understanding through demo experiences during teacher training courses. In other words, the construction of the knowledge components for PCK can be acquired by actively experiencing the process during demo teaching and learning. According to

73

Etkina (2010), clinical practice can be tailored into teacher training courses by way of using microteaching strategies with peers. Hence, trainee science teachers can plan and execute their lesson plans while their peers act as their learners during “microteaching practices with artificial class environments” (Kartal, Ozturk, & Ekici, 2012, p. 2757). Although such microteaching experience is different from actual teaching of high school learners, the strategies practised and many experiences during microteaching are significant to physics teachers’ PCK development (Berg, 2015; Etkina, 2010; Kartel et al., 2012).

Microteaching provides the opportunity for trainee science teachers to develop the understanding and experience the process to coherently link the aims of curriculum, intended learning outcomes for lesson plans and choices of teaching, learning and assessment activities required to maximise effectiveness. This facet requires a deep understanding of physics concepts, theories and relationships as well as an informed knowledge about the sequences of the physics curriculum (Etkina, 2010). The developmental aspect of curriculum is crucial for lesson planning as well as for outlining learning outcomes for specific lesson plans. Besides, with deep understanding of concepts and curriculum sequence trainee teachers should also be able to progressively plan how to deconstruct, present, identify and assess physics concepts using different modes of representations (Tang, 2011). That means, training teachers should develop the understanding of sequencing and presenting scientific concepts progressively. In other words, knowing what, when to present and how to identify as well as assess starting from simple ideas to construct more complex concepts.

However, De Jong (2000) identified that trainee science teachers usually lack self- confidence not only in their content knowledge but how to meaningfully translate abstract scientific concepts into forms that are comprehensible for learners of diverse backgrounds. Besides, identifying learners’ preconceptions can be challenging (Berg, 2015). In order to deconstruct physics concepts into forms that are comprehensible, it is helpful for trainee teachers to understand and experience the construction of scientific concepts in school science themselves. As noted in subsection 2.3.2, the primary role of mental representations in understanding scientific concepts encompassed the ability to represent the concepts into forms and models that are

74

contextually familiar to both learners as well as trainee teachers (Wartofsky, 1979). The forms and models may include the kind of words used, diagrams, graphs, tables of figures, equations as well as gesturing and analogies (Tang, 2011). Subsequently, training teachers should develop knowledge on how and why these different forms and models can be synthesised and reconstructed to formulate a scientific concept. With these forms and models, trainee teachers can also develop the understanding and skills to identify learners’ preconceptions or misconceptions. That is, training teachers can identify and recognise learners’ demonstrations of the forms and subsequently assess by providing feedbacks and feedforwards.

According to Berg (2015) another generative knowledge and skill that teacher should develop is the use of formative assessment. Trainee science teachers can develop their formative assessment strategies during their microteaching process as well. As such, not only they develop the understanding to identify preconceptions and misconceptions but also to provide scaffolding and attempt remediation (Berg, 2015). Understanding formative assessment is important for scaffolding for learners’ conceptual and procedural understanding in science (Etkina, 2010). Basically, formative assessment can be integrated into the process of teaching and learning of scientific concepts, context and skills (Green & Johnson, 2010). Trainee teachers can develop the understanding and skills for formative assessment during their microteaching practice. Besides trainee teachers should develop the knowledge, understanding and skills to facilitate learners’ learning along different pathways depending on their preconceptions. The pathways can start with different but familiar everyday words, artefacts and analogies or multiple-representations (Mann & Treagust, 2011).

After all, teacher training courses should lay the foundation for continuous professional learning. Hence, progressive development of practising and experienced physics teachers’ PCK is also crucial (Kind, 2009; Wongsopawiro et al., 2017; Yung, 2012). Retrospect to the purpose of this study, the enhancement of science teachers’ PCK is significant for use in the SBA of practical work. That said, a study was conducted by Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) to identify the pathways that high school science teachers’ may take to progressively enhance their PCK over time. Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) employed the “interconnected model of teachers’

75

professional growth (IMTPG)” (p. 191). The IMTPG was developed by Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) to study the improvements in teachers’ knowledge as a result of their active participation in professional learning as well as teaching experiences. According to Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002), teachers’ professional enhancement is a result of reciprocal relationship of reflection and enactment between four factors or domains, namely: (1) personal domain - teacher’s knowledge, beliefs and attitudes; (2) external domain - external information and support; (3) domain of practice – trying out new activities; and (4) domain of consequence – new conclusions from effective outcomes in classroom practice (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002). As science teachers act and then reflect on one of the factors they may subsequently respond by making improvements in other factors.

Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) found that the development of practicing teachers’ PCK is personal, contextual and non-linear. Basically, with minor refinements to the four factors in the IMTPG, Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) found that the domain of consequence or effective outcomes in the classrooms and external domain or external support impacted the development of PCK for experienced and practising teachers. For example, Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) found that teachers enhanced their knowledge on instructional strategies when they were provided with information and professional support from external sources like literature and university lecturers respectively. Added to that, Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) found that action research can be an avenue to stimulate the enhancement of teachers’ PCK. As such, they suggested that action research whereby teachers evaluate and improve their own teaching through their learners’ performance should also be included in professional development modules. This view of using reflective action research was also raised by Halim et al. (2014).

Wongsopawiro et al. (2017) emphasized that external information and facilitators as well as peers are crucial in enhancing practising teachers’ PCK. In fact, Yung (2012) suggested that teachers should play a proactive role in developing their PCK with their peers. Hence, while focusing and reflecting on own practices teachers should also take time to consult, share as well as review the practices of their peers. This is in-line with the notion of a community of practice within a school or cluster of schools. Having a community of practice, teachers can establish collaborative professional learning

76

environments that integrated sociocultural and constructivist practices. For example, Duschl (2008) highlighted the sociocultural and constructivist environments whereby science teachers can interact with each other to develop conceptual, procedural and epistemic understanding in science. Such approach promotes epistemological and sociological processes in learning science as well as developing science teachers’ PCK associated with the NoS (Duschl, 2008). Practising science teachers within a community of practice can further enhance their PCK with external information and expert facilitators from the universities.

In sum, enhancement of science teachers’ PCK for use in the SBA of practical work is complex but can be addressed through teacher training courses as well as ongoing practising science teachers’ professional practice and learning. The PCK components can be integrated into teacher training courses. The courses should focus on developing deep conceptual and procedural understanding in science. Added to that, trainee science teachers should engage in microteaching or clinical practises during their teacher training courses to develop the knowledge of: curriculum; learners’ preconceptions and misconceptions; effective teaching, learning and assessment strategies. While trainee teachers can develop foundational knowledge in teacher training courses, practising science teachers should continue to develop their PCK through action research, establishing communities of practise and use of external information and facilitators.