PCK at Stake in Teacher – Student Interaction in Relation to Students’ Difficulties

  • David Cross
  • Celine Lepareur


PCK has been a very successful concept in science education for the last 30 years. Many research studies have used this construct to study teachers’ development, teacher initial training and teachers’ practice. Although PCK has been very fruitful in providing a framework to identify what could be important knowledge for teaching, very little, if anything at all, is known about the link between PCK and student learning.


Science Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge Video Data Table Generator Student Interaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alonzo, A., Kobarg, M., & Seidel, T. (2012). Pedagogical content knowledge as reflected in teacherstudent interactions: Analysis of two video cases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(10), 1211–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., … Tsai, Y. M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 133–180.Google Scholar
  3. Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 147–161). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Caillot, M. (2007). The Building of a new academic field: The case of French didactiques. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cross, D. (2010). Action conjointe et connaissances professionnelles. Éducation & Didactique, 4(3), 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Friedrichsen, P., van Driel, J., & Abell, S. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95(2), 358–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grossman. P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kind, V. (2015). On the beauty of knowing then not knowing. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 178–195), London, England: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
  11. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In N. G. L. Julie Gess-Newsome (Ed.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Boston, MA: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. 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(3), 261–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sensevy, G. (2011). Overcoming fragmentation: Towards a joint action theory in didactics. In B. Hudson & M. Meyer (Eds.), Beyond fragmentation: Didactics, learning and teaching in Europe (pp. 60–76). Opladen, Germany and Farmington Hills, MI: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  15. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tiberghien, A., & Sensevy, G. (2012). Video studies: Time and duration in the teaching-learning processes. In J. Dillon & D. Jorde (Eds.), Handbook “The world of science education” (Vol. 4, pp. 141–179). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. van Driel, J. H., Berry, A., & Meirink, J. A. (2014). Research on science teacher knowledge. In N. Lederman (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 848–870). London, England: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  19. Whitebread, D., & Grau Cardenas, V. (2012). Self-regulated learning and conceptual development in young children: the development of biological understanding. In A. Zohar & Y. J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (pp. 101–132). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Cross
    • 1
  • Celine Lepareur
    • 2
  1. 1.LIRDEFUniversity of MontpellierFrance
  2. 2.Educational Science LaboratoryUniv. Grenoble AlpesFrance

Personalised recommendations