Abstract
This case study describes the interactions between pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and practitioner inquiry as observed in a residency-model teacher preparation program. In the Math and Science Teacher Education Residency (MASTER), novice teachers engaged in iterative cycles of assessing student thinking and using that assessment to reflect on and inform instructional decisions. Through an analysis of resident presentations on their inquiry and examination of student work, this case study explores the synergy between inquiry processes and PCK development and demonstrates that using teacher inquiry as a vehicle for building and refining PCK is a promising practice. MASTER pre-service teachers utilized canonical PCK to analyze assessments, develop goals for student learning, plan for instruction, and then interpret the results of further assessment to understand the impact of their instructional strategies and how they might revise their strategies for future lessons. Implementing the inquiry process provided opportunities for residents to build their personal PCK through their reflection on and analysis of their students’ learning and their own teaching. Collaboration protocols allowed coaches and peers to provide prompts that engaged directly with the content the resident was teaching, pushed the resident to deepen thinking, and developed shared understandings through integrating PCK from multiple individuals. The case study investigates the ways in which PCK is foundational to conducting teacher inquiry but is also built and refined by testing through the “inaction” reflection and revision fostered by the teacher inquiry process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dawson, K. (2014). Teacher inquiry: A vehicle to merge prospective teachers’ experience and reflection during curriculum-based, technology-enhanced field experiences. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38, 265–292.
Duckworth, E. (1986). Teaching as research. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 481–495.
Elliott, J. (1988). Teachers as researchers: Implications for supervision and teacher education, Address to the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 1988.
Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.). (1999). Chapter 2, The complex nature and sources of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 21–22). Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Grace, M., Rietdijk, W., Garrett, C., Griffiths, J. (2015) Improving physics teaching through action research: the impact of a nationwide professional development programme. Teacher Development, 19(4):496–519.
Gudmundsdottir, S. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge: teachers’ ways of knowing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 290 701).
Huffman, D., & Kalnin, J. (2003). Collaborative inquiry to make data-based decisions in schools. Teaching & Teacher Education, 19(6), 569–580.
Langer, G., Colton, A., and Goff, L. (2000). Collaborative Analysis of Student Work: Improving Teaching and Learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, Virginia.
Langer, G. M., Colton, A. B., & Goff, L. (2003). Collaborative analysis of student work: Improving teaching and learning. ASCD: Alexandria.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Morine-Dershimer, G. and Kent, T. (1999). ‘The Complex Nature and Sources of Teachers’ Pedagogical Knowledge’ in Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 261–284.
Park, S., Jang, J., Chen, Y., & Jung, J. (2011). Is Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) necessary for reformed science teaching?: Evidence from an empirical study. Research in Science Education, 41, 245–260.
Robinson, M. A. (2010). School perspectives on collaborative inquiry: Lessons learned from New York City, 2009-2010. Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved from http://www.cpre.org/images/stories/cpre_pdfs/ci-llreport2010final(nov).pdf.
Rockman et al. (2014). Measuring effective teaching: New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College Urban Teacher Residency Project, Year 4. (Unpublished report).
Sagor, R. (2009). Collaborative action research and school improvement: We can’t have one without the other. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 3(1), 7–14.
Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N., & Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title 1 schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1006–1033.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). “Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.” Educational Researcher Feb. 1986: 4–14. (AERA Presidential Address).
Silva, D., and Dana, N. (2001). Collaborative Supervision in the Professional Development School. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 16(4), 305–321.
Smith, P. S., Esch, R. K., Hayes, M. L., & Plumley, C. L. (2016). Developing and testing a method for collecting and synthesizing pedagogical content knowledge. Presented at the 2016 NARST Annual International Conference, Baltimore.
Tabachnick, B. R., & Zeichner, K. M. (1999). Idea and action: Action research and the development of conceptual change teaching of science. Wisconsin Ctr. for Educ. Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI. Science Education, 83(3), 309–322.
Talbert, J. E., Cor, M. K., Chen, P., Kless, L. M., & McLaughlin, M. (2012) Inquiry-based school reform: Lessons from SAM in NYC. Center for Research on the Context of Teaching at Stanford University [Program Evaluation]. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/29864629/Inquiry-based_School_Reform_Lessons_from_SAM_in_NYC
Thompson, P. W. (2016). Researching mathematical meanings for teaching. In L. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 435–461). London: Taylor and Francis.
Zargarpour, N. (2005). A collective inquiry response to high-stakes accountability. California Educational Research Association. Retrieved from http://cera-web.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/Collective-Inquiry_NZ_CERA-Disting-Paper_2005.pdf.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Harford, M., Leopold, R., Williams, W.T., Chatham, E. (2018). Teacher Inquiry as a Vehicle for Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Pre-service Teachers. In: Uzzo, S., Graves, S., Shay, E., Harford, M., Thompson, R. (eds) Pedagogical Content Knowledge in STEM. Advances in STEM Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97474-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97475-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)