What Do We Know about Teachers’ Knowledge? Assessing Primary Science Teachers’ Content Knowledge in the Jewish and Arab Sectors

Hava Greensfeld,Tirza Gross

doi:10.29333/ejmste/8473

Abstract

This study concerns the importance of assessing teachers’ content knowledge (CK) and it is one of the very few international studies that directly measures science teachers’ CK. We developed a comprehensive content knowledge test (CKT), relating to the content strand: states of matter. The study compared teachers from the Jewish and the Arab sectors in three stages of professional development: Results showed that all participants’ CK level was low (M = 61.3%). Comparison between the sectors showed that CK scores among the Arab pre-service and science teachers were significantly higher than CK scores among the Jewish pre-service and science teachers. Our study is an example of a direct CK assessment of teachers that provides valuable diagnostic information. Its dismal findings illuminate the need for innovative methods to measure teachers’ CK directly in various disciplines, and contributes strong impetus for a renewed focus on the training and professional development of teachers.

Highlights

A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again (Pope, A., 1711, An Essay on Criticism)Ball (1991) stated, “Teachers cannot help children learn things they themselves do not understand” (p. 5)
Our study is an example of a direct content knowledge (CK) assessment of teachers that provides valuable diagnostic information
We developed a Content Knowledge Test (CKT) on the content strand of states of matter, as a representative central topic that science teachers (STs) are required to teach in primary schools

Summary

Introduction

A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again (Pope, A., 1711, An Essay on Criticism)Ball (1991) stated, “Teachers cannot help children learn things they themselves do not understand” (p. 5). Studies have supported this idea: of all factors that influence classroom learning processes, teachers are the most important. Numerous studies have focused on PCK; their aim has been to understand the kinds of knowledge needed for teaching (e.g., Jüttner, Boone, Park, & Neuhaus, 2013; McConnell, Parker, & Eberhardt, 2013; Scheiner, Montes, Godino, Carrillo, & Pino-Fan, 2019). In contrast to PCK, few studies have explored CK and changes in teachers’ CK experienced over the years (Boothe et al, 2018; Rice, 2005; van Driel, Berry, & Meirink, 2014). Our research is based on the consensus that there are connections and even overlap between CK and PCK, but in the field of science education it is important to measure them as separate knowledge domains (Großschedl, Welter, & Harms, 2019; Jüttner et al, 2013)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion