Assessing Teachers' Science Content Knowledge: A Strategy for Assessing Depth of Understanding

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 717-743

  McConnell, Tom J ^a   Parker, Joyce M ^b   Eberhardt, Jan ^b  

^a BALL STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Problem based learning; Professional development; Science teaching; Teacher content knowledge

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878316049     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-013-9342-3     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abrams, E. (2001). The how's and why's of biological change: How learners neglect physical mechanisms in their search for meaning. International Journal in Science Education, 23(12), 1271-1281.
2. Akerson, V. L. (2005). How do elementary teachers compensate for incomplete science content knowledge? Research in Science Education, 35(2-3), 245-268.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluations of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 952-978.
5. Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1987). Teaching science. In V. Richardson-Koehler (Ed.), Educators' handbook-A research perspective (pp. 84-111). New York: Longman.
6. Ball, D. (1997). What do students know? Facing challenges of distance, context, and desire in trying to hear children. In B. J. Biddle, et al. (Eds.), International handbook on teachers and teaching (Vol. II, pp. 679-718). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Press.
7. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals; Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.
8. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
10. Czerniak, C., & Chiarelott, L. (1999). Teacher education for effective science instruction-A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 49-58.
11. Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Teacher learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46-53.
12. Da-Silva, C., Mellado, V., Ruiz, C., & Porlan, R. (2007). Evolution of the conceptions of a secondary education biology teacher: Longitudinal analysis using cognitive maps. Science Education, 91(3), 461-491.
13. Delisle, R. (1997). How to use problem-based learning in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
14. Gerard, L. F., Varma, K., Corliss, S. B., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 408-448.
15. Goldhaber, D., & Brewer, D. (1997). Why don't schools and teachers seem to matter? Assessing the impact of unobservables on educational productivity. Journal of Human Resources, 32(3), 505-523.
16. Gotwals, A. W., & Songer, N. B. (2006). Measuring students' scientific content and inquiry reasoning. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on learning sciences, international society of the learning sciences (pp. 196-202).
17. Harlen, W. (1997). The teaching of science in primary schools. London: David Fulton.
18. Hartshorne, R. (2009). Integrating hypermedia in professional development opportunities for elementary teachers of science: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(2), 175-194.
19. Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effect of subject-matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and physics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 109-120.
20. Hauslein, P. L., Good, R. G., & Cummins, C. L. (1992). Biology content cognitive structure: From science student to science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(9), 939-964.
21. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371-406.
22. Howley, A., & Howley, C. B. (2005). High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers' professional development. The Rural Educator, 26(2), 1-5.
23. Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers' classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 668-690.
24. Lee, E., Brown, M. N., Luft, J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2010). Assessing beginning secondary science teachers' PCK: Pilot year results. School Science and Mathematics, 107(2), 52-60.
25. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. 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. Science & technology education library (pp. 95-132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
27. McConnell, T. J., Eberhardt, J., Lundeberg, M. A., Parker, J. M., Koehler, M. J., Urban-Lurain, M., & Stanaway, J. C. (2008). The PBL Project for Teachers: Using problem-based learning to guide K-12 science teachers' professional development. MSTA Journal, 53(1), 16-21.
28. Michigan Department of Education. (2008). Michigan merit curriculum. Retrieved from http://www. michigan. gov/mde/0, 1607, 7-140-38924-, 00. html.
29. Mundry, S. (2005). Changing perspectives in professional development. Science Educator, 14(1), 1-15.
30. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. National Research Council. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices crosscutting concepts and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy.
32. Nehm, R. H., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2008). Measuring knowledge of natural selection: A comparison of the CINS, an open-response instrument, and an oral interview. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1131-1160.
33. Park, S., & Chen, Y. C. (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(7), 922-941.
34. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
35. Rowan, B., Schilling, S. G., Ball, D. L., & Miller, R. (2001). Measuring teachers' pedagogical content knowledge in surveys: An exploratory study. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
36. Sanders, M. (1993). Erroneous ideas about respiration: The teacher factor. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), 919-934.
37. Savinainen, A., & Scott, P. (2002). The force concept inventory: A tool for monitoring student learning. Physics Education, 37(1), 45-52.
38. Shirazian, Z. P. (2012, November). A framework for describing some aspects of PCK. In Proceedings ofcontemporary approaches to research in mathematics, science, health and environmental science. Melbourne, AU: Deakin University.
39. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4-14.
40. Smith, D. C., & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(1), 1-20.
41. Songer, N. B., & Gotwals, A. W. (2012). Guiding explanation construction by children at the entry points of learning progressions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(2), 141-165.
42. Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2004). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right-Using it well. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service.
43. Thames, M. H., & Ball, D. L. (2010). What mathematical knowledge does teaching require? Knowing mathematics in and for teaching. Teaching Children Mathematics, 17(4), 220-229.
44. Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
45. Traianou, A. (2006). Teachers' adequacy of subject knowledge in primary science: Assessing constructivist approaches from a sociocultural perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 28(8), 827-842.
46. Tretter, T. R., Brown, S. L., Bush, W., Saderholm, J., & Moore, B. (2007, April). Valid and reliable physical, life, and earth science content assessments for middle school teachers. Poster presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA. April 15-18 2007.
47. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. A., & Christopher, J. E. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' knowledge of observable moon phases and pattern of change in phases. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(2), 87-101.
48. 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.
49. Weizman, A., Covitt, B. A., Koehler, M. J., Lundeberg, M. A., Oslund, J. A., Low, M. A, Eberhardt, J., Urban-Lurain, M. (2008). Measuring teachers' learning from a problem-based learning approach to professional development in science education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 2(2), 29-60.
50. Windschitl, M. (2009). Cultivating 21st century skills in science learners: How systems of teacher preparation and professional development will have to evolve. National Academies of Science Workshop on 21st Century Skills. Washington, DC. February 5-6 2009.
51. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008a). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92(3), 941-967.
52. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008b). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 310-378.