Abstract
Primary teachers generally have a deep knowledge of their students and a broad repertoire of pedagogical practices, particularly practices that involve teacher–student and student–student interactions, but they often lack in-depth content knowledge and have a limited repertoire of subject-specific pedagogies. This is almost always a particular issue for their teaching of science. Pedagogically appropriate teacher engagement of/with students requires teachers to have both appropriate content knowledge and knowledge of their students. In this context the idea of “knowledge in action” is central. In-depth content knowledge and subject-specific pedagogies influence teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Effective formative assessment or Assessment for Learning (AfL) interactions mean that teachers need rich and flexible PCK in order to undertake effective interactions with diverse groups of students. In this chapter we highlight what we mean by effective AfL interactions, teachers’ knowledges required for effective interactions and how we might enhance teachers’ knowledges to enhance the potential for student learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an understanding of science teaching in practice. Research in Science Education, 33, 1–25.
Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., & Wiliam, D. (2001, April). Theory and practice of formative assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
Boaler, J. (2003). Studying and capturing the complexity of practice—the case of the ‘dance of agency’. Proceedings of the 2003 Joint Meeting of Psychology of Mathematics Education and Psychology of Mathematics Education North America. Honolulu, Hawaii, 13–18 July.
Brown, A., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions; psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188–228). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 101–116.
Cowie, B., Moreland J., Jones A., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2008). The Classroom InSiTE Project: Understanding classroom interactions to enhance teaching and learning in science and technology. Teaching and learning research initiative. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481–490.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 51–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gipps, C. (1999). Sociocultural aspects to assessment. Review of Educational Research, 24, 353–392.
Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding in science and its impact in the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27, 323–337.
Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and learning: Differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education, 4(3), 365–379.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3–20.
Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2005). The importance of pedagogical content knowledge in assessment for learning practices: A case study of a whole-school approach. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 193–206.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Marshall, B., & Drummond, M-J. (2006). How teachers engage with assessment for learning: Lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 133–149.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Shulman, L. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1–29). New York: Teachers College Press.
Stetsenko, A., & Arievitch, I. (2002). Teaching, learning, and development: A post-Vygotskian perspective. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 84–96). Oxford: Blackwell.
Wells, G., & Claxton, G. (Eds.). (2002). Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wragg, E., Wragg, C., Hayes, G., & Chamberlain, R. (1998). Improving literacy in the primary school. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jones, A., Cowie, B. (2011). Moving Beyond Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Teacher Knowledge-as-Action. In: Corrigan, D., Dillon, J., Gunstone, R. (eds) The Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3926-2
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3927-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)