Illustrating and Developing Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge Through Learning Study

  • Rebecca M. SchneiderEmail author


Using a teacher educator’s perspective to study pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) as described in the Refined Consensus Model (RCM) of PCK, this chapter explores an approach to uncover teacher thinking that is grounded in the complex work of teaching and learning about teaching. PCK is described in the RCM as the knowledge that supports science teachers’ pedagogical reasoning during teaching. Stated from a teacher educator’s perspective, PCK is the knowledge used and developed by science teachers in their teaching practice. The complexity of teaching, however, creates a challenge for researchers and teacher educators interested in gathering evidence to better understand and document science teachers’ developing PCK. An approach to supporting science teacher learning that is embedded in the facets of teaching—planning, enacting, and reflecting—is learning study. Learning study engages teachers in cycles of describing phenomenon-based tasks, anticipating students’ ideas, and analysing learning. Each of these phases in the study of learning draws on science teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in ways that appear to be aligned with descriptions of collective PCK (cPCK) and distinguishes qualitative differences between individual teacher’s ePCK. In the context of graduate teacher education, this chapter describes the potential of learning study to enable researchers and teacher educators to capture, unpack, and refine our ideas about the features of PCK that guide science teachers’ thinking within the different facets of their teaching.


Pedagogical content knowledge Science teacher education Learning study Assessment 


  1. Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709–725). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  2. Cheng, E. C. K., & Ling, L. M. (2013). The approach of learning study: Its origin and implications. Retrieved from
  3. Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. Retrieved from New York.Google Scholar
  4. Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, L., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, teach for America, and teacher effectiveness. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42). Retrieved from Scholar
  5. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2008). Teacher learning: How do teachers learn to teach? In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (pp. 697–705). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Grossman, P. (2005). Research on pedagogical approaches in teacher education. In K. Zeichner (Ed.), Studying teacher education (pp. 425–476). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Grossman, P., Schoenfeld, A. H., & Lee, C. (2005). Teaching subject matter. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  8. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., et al. (2005). How teacher learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 358–389). Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Heritage, M. (2008). Learning progressions: Supporting instruction and formative assessment. Retrieved from Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  10. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schneider, R. M. (2015). Pedagogical content knowledge reconsidered: A teacher educator’s perspective. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 162–177). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Schneider, R. M., & Plasman, K. (2011). Science teacher learning progressions: A review of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge development. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 530–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sykes, G. (1999). Teacher and student learning: Strengthening their connection. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 151–179). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Tan, Y. S. M., & Nashon, S. M. (2013). Promoting teacher learning through learning study discourse: The case of science teachers in Singapore. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 859–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 716–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Windschitl, M. (2008). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 310–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Windschitl, M. (2013). The vision of ambitious science teaching. Retrieved from
  20. Wood, K. (2015). Deepening learning through lesson and learning study. In K. Wood & S. Sithamparam (Eds.), Realizing learning: Teachers’ professional development through lesson and learning study (pp. 1–24). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ToledoToledoUSA

Personalised recommendations