The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Twenty Years Later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea?
Abstract
This paper considers how the notion of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has developed and changed over the past 20 years. It draws on the preceding papers in this special issue to reflect on the big picture issues and ideas that are important in shaping understandings of PCK and the nature of research on PCK. The paper is structured around four sections. The first section offers analysis of the characteristics of PCK as employed by the researchers in this volume, raising some issues related to the construct. The second section considers the implications for research design that result from these authors’ views of PCK. The third section suggests an agenda for future research on science teacher knowledge. The concluding section examines the continuing value of the PCK construct for the science education community.
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
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
The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1996) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00156001 · Cited by 716
Cited by
Elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science
Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20404 · Cited by 194
Rusznyak, L., & Walton, E. (2011) · Education as Change · doi:10.1080/16823206.2011.619141 · Cited by 100
Student teachers’ situational engagement during teaching practice in Finland and South Africa
Loukomies, A., Petersen, N., Ramsaroop, S., Henning, E., & Lavonen, J. (2022) · The Teacher Educator · doi:10.1080/08878730.2021.1991539 · Cited by 11
Hartmuth, D., Amin, R. M., Schlichting, D., Schött, S., Haudenschild, J., Küchenhoff, H., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2470563 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Abell, S. K.
- Venue
- International Journal of Science Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-08-13
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1405-1416
- ISSN
- 0950-0693 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5289
- OpenAlex
- W2008657524
- Cited by
- 532
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 61.53
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Twenty Years Later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09500690802187041
- The paper
- Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty Years Later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802187041
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.
