Pedagogical Content Knowledge Summit: A New Way to Visit an Old Construct

• In Event: Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): Considering Models, Methods, and Recommendations From the PCK Summit

Abstract

Fourteen international research teams engaged in the active examination of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in science and mathematics were invited to a five-day PCK Summit. The purpose of the Summit was to bring clarity to the PCK construct, the model of professional knowledge in which it is embedded, and its implications for enhancing teacher practice and student learning. Participating teams were purposefully selected to represent a range of conceptions and models of PCK, as well as variations in research methodology and creation and use of tools to document and assess teacher knowledge and skill.

Teams prepared papers and presentations to describe their theoretical conceptualization of PCK by answering the questions in four key areas:

1) The Nature of PCK: What are your assumptions about PCK as an attribute of teachers? Is it a knowledge base, a skill set, a disposition, or some combination? Is PCK tacit or explicit? Is it an unalterable characteristic or can it be enhanced with experience and/or particular kinds of preparation or professional development? If it can be enhanced, what specific mechanisms exist that might result in differences in PCK?

2) Model of PCK: In your research how did you define the elements that comprise PCK? How is PCK related to the professional knowledge base for teaching? Is it transformative or integrative? How does growth in one area of teacher professional knowledge relate to growth in other areas of professional knowledge, such as PCK?

3) Measurement of PCK: How have you measured PCK? Describe your instruments. How did your answers about the nature of PCK and your model of PCK inform the development of measurement and analysis tools? What have you found to be the appropriate levels or grain sizes at which to measure PCK? Should it be examined at the topic level (e.g., mechanics) or the domain level (e.g., physics)? Why did you choose this level or grain size?

4) Contexts for Studying PCK: Where should the emphasis of PCK research lie in the future? For example, should it be studied in its own right, in terms of the translation of teacher knowledge to practice, in terms of the relationship between teachers’ level of PCK and student outcomes, or some combination of these ideas? Are there other directions for the research we should consider? What is your rationale for favoring one direction over another?

In addition, each team described the rationale for the program of research, the methods used (sample, intervention, data collection tools, data analysis), and results and conclusions. The session will provide an orientation to the PCK Summit and will include presentations by participating teams. In addition, the session will include an overview of the conclusions derived from the Summit, and a discussion of next steps including the identification of the most fruitful lines of research. Audience engagement in a discussion similar to that held at the Summit will be encouraged.

Authors

• Julie Gess-Newsome, Oregon State University - Cascades

• Janet Carlson, Stanford University