The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Revisiting the Conceptualisation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): PCK as a Conceptual Tool to Understand Teachers as Professionals
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to rethink the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge based on our descriptive research findings and to show how this new conceptualization helps us to understand teachers as professionals. This study was a multiple case study grounded in a social constructivist framework. Data were collected from multiple sources and analysed using three approaches: (a) constant comparative method, (b) enumerative approach, and (c) in-depth analysis of explicit PCK. The results indicated that (a) PCK was developed through reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action within given instructional contexts, (b) teacher efficacy emerged as an affective affiliate of PCK, (c) students had an important impact on PCK development, (d) students’ misconceptions played a significant role in shaping PCK, and (e) PCK was idiosyncratic in some aspects of its enactment. Discussion centres on how these five aspects are related to teacher professionalism.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Handbook of Qualitative Research
Crozier, G., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121684 · Cited by 26,666
Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching
SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x015002004 · Cited by 18,546
Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform
Shulman, L. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 · Cited by 16,787
Schön, D. A. (2017) · doi:10.4324/9781315237473 · Cited by 1,740
Cited by
Fauth, B., Decristan, J., Decker, A.-T., Büttner, G., Hardy, I., Klieme, E., & Kunter, M. (2019) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2019.102882 · Cited by 484
Relating Teacher PCK and Teacher Practice Using Classroom Observation
Barendsen, E., & Henze, I. (2019) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-017-9637-z · Cited by 125
Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in higher education: A systematic scoping review
Sarkar, M., Gutierrez-Bucheli, L., Yip, S. Y., Lazarus, M., Wright, C., White, P. J., Ilic, D., Hiscox, T. J., & Berry, A. (2024) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2024.104608 · Cited by 55
Yeşildere İmre, S., & Akkoç, H. (2012) · Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education · doi:10.1007/s10857-012-9203-6 · Cited by 33
Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bahcivan, E., Cobern, W., & Western Michigan University (2016) · Australian Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.14221/ajte.2016v41n10.5 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Park, S., & Oliver, J. S.
- Venue
- Research in Science Education
- Published
- 2007-06-16
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 261-284
- ISSN
- 0157-244X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1898
- OpenAlex
- W2064206210
- Cited by
- 1,189
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 58.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
