Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A New Role Change Approach in Pre-service Teacher Education for Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the Context of a Student Outreach Lab

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How pre-service teachers (PST) develop pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) during science teacher education is an open research question. Our teacher education module, theoretically based on PCK, specifically combines biology PSTs’ education with high school students’ biology education and includes an innovative role change approach. Altogether, 41 PSTs each participated in three subsequent module days with students (N = 823) from 50 classes. The module’s content dealt with the syllabus topic Genetic Fingerprinting. During participation, the PSTs changed their role by assuming a student’s role on the first day, a tutor’s role on the second day, and a teacher’s role on the third day. By quasi-experimentally administering pre- and delayed posttests, we qualitatively monitored, then content-analytically categorized, and finally quantitatively analyzed three specific PCK components. In contrast to a control group (which did not participate in the module), our treatment preferentially changed the PSTs’ orientations toward teaching biology to a more student-centered orientation (both intra- and inter-group differences with medium effect sizes). Additionally, the PSTs who participated in the three modules days differed before and after module participation in how they addressed potential student learning difficulties and identified potential instructional strategies for avoiding these difficulties. The changes in these PCK components point to a step-by-step development of the PSTs’ PCK. In this process, our participating PSTs assessed the importance of their three roles on the 3 days quite differently; most notably, we found one relationship between the teacher role and the PSTs’ student-centeredness. We specifically discuss the potential and importance of our role change approach within science teacher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abell, S. (2008). Twenty years later: does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1405–1416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkus, H. (2013). Pre-service secondary science teachers’ images about themselves as science teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12, 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambusaidi, A., & Al-Balushi, S. (2012). A longitudinal study to identify prospective science teachers’ beliefs about science teaching using the draw-a-science-teacher-test checklist. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 7, 291–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amos, R., & Reiss, M. (2012). The benefits of residential fieldwork for school science: insights from a five-year initiative for inner-city students in the UK. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 485–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavarian Ministry of Education (2011). Education in Bavaria. http://www.km.bayern.de/education-in-bavaria.html (access on August 18, 2014).

  • Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Van Driel, J. (2008). Revisiting the roots of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1271–1278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bindernagel, J., & Eilks, I. (2009). Evaluating roadmaps to portray and develop chemistry teachers’ PCK about curricular structures concerning sub-microscopic model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, W., & Tarnai, C. (1999). Content analysis in empirical research. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 659–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P., Friedrichsen, P., & Abell, S. (2013). The development of prospective secondary biology teachers PCK. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clermont, C., Borko, H., & Krajcik, J. (1994). Comparative study of the pedagogical content knowledge of experienced and novice chemical demonstrators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 419–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, T. D., & Campell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Design & analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted Kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, D. (2009). Chemistry teacher education to promote understanding of learning through effective reflective practice. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daehler, K., & Shinohara, M. (2001). A complete circuit is a complete circle: exploring the potential of case materials and methods to develop teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge of science. Research in Science Education, 31, 267–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, O., Van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (2005). Pre-service teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 947–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler, M., & van Driel, J. (2008). Experienced teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of teaching acid-base chemistry. Research in Science Education, 38, 611–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eick, C., & Reed, C. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86, 401–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faikhamta, C. (2013). The development of in-service science teachers’ understandings of and orientations to teaching the nature of science within a PCK-based NOS course. Research in Science Education, 43, 847–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franke, G., Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2013). Investigation of students’ alternative conceptions of terms and processes of gene technology. International Scholarly Research Network Education, 2013, Article ID 741807.

  • Friedrichsen, P., Abell, S., Pareja, E., Brown, P., Lankford, D., & Volkmann, M. (2009). Does teaching experience matter? Examining biology teachers’ prior knowledge for teaching in an alternative certification program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 357–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J., & Abell, S. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95, 358–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gayford, C. (1992). Patterns of group behaviour in open-ended problem solving in sciuence classes of 15-year-old students in England. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher education. NY: Teacher College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halim, L., & Meerah, S.-M. (2002). Science trainee teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and its influence on physics teaching. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20, 215–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L., & Olkin, I. (1984). Nonparametric estimators of effect size in meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 573–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henze, I., Van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (2008). Development of experienced science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of models of the solar system and the universe. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1321–1342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, M., Deshler, D., & Schumaker, J. (1999). Tutoring programs for academically underprepared college students: a review of literature. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 29, 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science. Towards a personalized approach. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, A. (2012). Primary connections: simulating the classroom in initial teacher education. Research in Science Education, 42, 551–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1991). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kampenes, V., Dyba, T., Hannay, J., & Sjoberg, D. (2007). Systematic review of effect size in software engineering experiments. Information and Software Technology, 49, 1073–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Käpylä, M., Heikkinen, J.-P., & Asunta, T. (2009). Influence of content knowledge on pedagogical content knowledge: the case of teaching photosynthesis and plant growth. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1395–1415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasai, K., Nakamura, Y., & White, R. (1990). Amplification of a variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) locus (pMCT118) by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and its application to forensic science. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 35, 1196–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaya, O. (2009). The nature of relationships among the components of pedagogical content knowledge of pre-service science teachers: ‘ozone layer depletion’ as an example. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 961–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kersaint, G., Dogbey, J., Barber, J., & Kephart, D. (2011). The effect of access to an online tutorial service on college algebra student outcomes. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 19, 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Dubberke, T., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, M., & Tsai, J.-M. (2007). Linking aspects of teacher competence to their instruction. Results from the COAKTIV project. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools (pp. 39–59). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E., & Luft, J. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachers’ representations of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1343–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E., Brown, M., Luft, J., & Roehrig, G. (2007). Assessing beginning secondary science teachers’ PCK: pilot year results. School Science & Mathematics, 107, 52–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. (1975). School-teacher. A sociological study. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2007). Science teacher as learner. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook on research in science education (pp. 1043–1104). Machwah: Laurence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J., Milroy, P., Berry, A., Gunstone, R., & Mulhall, P. (2001). Documenting science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through PaP-eRs. Research in Science Education, 31, 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, Niederlande: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markic, S., & Eilks, I. (2008). A case study on German first year chemistry student teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching, and their comparison with student teachers from other science teaching domains. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, P., & Smith, D. (1995). Nonradioactive detection of hypervariable simple sequence repeats in short polyacrylamide gels. BioTechniques, 19, 223–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding: the complex nature of pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service education. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1281–1299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padilla, K., & Van Driel, J. (2011). The relationships between PCK components: the case of quantum chemistry professors. Chemistry Education: Research & Practice, 12, 367–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, S., & Chen, Y. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 922–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1904). On the theory of contingency and its relation to association and normal correlation. Drapers’ Co. Memoirs, Biometrics Series, No. 1: London.

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., Bogner, F.X., & Klautke, S. (2007). Learning in a gene technology lab with educational focus: Results of a teaching unit with authentic experiments. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35, 28–39.

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2010). Instructional efficiency of changing cognitive load in an out-ofschool laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 829–844.

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2011). A new two-step approach for hands-on teaching of gene technology: Effects on students' activities during experimentation in an outreach gene technology lab. Research in Science Education, 41, 505–523.

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2013a). Teaching gene technology in an outreach lab: Students' assigned cognitive load clusters and the clusters' relationships to learner characteristics, laboratory variables, and cognitive achievement. Research in Science Education, 43, 141–161.

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2013b). Instructional efficiency of tutoring in an outreach gene technology laboratory. Research in Science Education, 43, 1267–1288.

  • Sellmann, D., & Bogner, F. X. (2013). Climate change education: quantitatively assessing the impact of a botanical garden as an informal learning environment. Environmental Education Research, 19, 415–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 5, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigma. (2000). GenElute Mammalian DNA Kit. Technical Bulletin, MB 660

  • Steffensky, M., & Parchmann, I. (2007). The project CHEMOL: science education for children - teacher education for students. Chemistry Education and Practice, 8, 120–129.

  • Stolarsky Ben-Nun, M., & Yarden, A. (2009). Learning molecular genetics in teacher-led outreach laboratories. Journal of Biological Education, 44, 19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J., Pederson, J., & Finson, K. (2001). Validating the draw-a-science-teacher-test checklist (DASTT-C): exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12, 295–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, J. (2003). Learning about teacher learning. In J. Wallace & J. Loughran (Eds.), Leadership and professional development in science education: new possibilities for enhancing teacher learning (pp. 1–16). London: Routledge Falmer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, R. (1997). Rating scales. In J. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: an international handbook (pp. 958–965). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeh, H.-C., & Yang, Y.-F. (2011). Prospective teachers’ insights towards scaffolding students’ writing processes through teacher-student role reversal in an online system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 351–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to the teachers and students involved in this study for their cooperation. The study was funded by the Bavarian State Ministry of the Environment and Consumer Protection; the Oberfranken Foundation; and the German National Science Foundation (DFG BO 944/4-5).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre of Math & Science Education, Institute of Biology Didactics, University of Bayreuth, NW I, Universitätsstr. 30, 95440, Bayreuth, Germany

    Franz-Josef Scharfenberg & Franz X. Bogner

Authors
  1. Franz-Josef Scharfenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Franz X. Bogner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Franz-Josef Scharfenberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scharfenberg, FJ., Bogner, F.X. A New Role Change Approach in Pre-service Teacher Education for Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the Context of a Student Outreach Lab. Res Sci Educ 46, 743–766 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9478-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9478-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation