The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Lesson planning guidelines for student teachers: A scaffold for the development of pedagogical content knowledge
Open accessAbstract
Lesson planning for student teachers is often regarded in technical terms, merely as the means to ensure effective classroom performance. This approach limits the possibilities that the process of lesson planning offers to the development of professional competence among student teachers. In particular, student teachers need to begin to develop their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), the capacity to make pedagogical choices that are logically derived from content and contextual knowledge. This article reports on a Lesson Planning Guideline which is used to scaffold the construction of student teachers’ PCK individually by requiring them to consider the constituent parts of PCK individually and in relation to one another during the planning process. This guideline was developed in response to perceived limitations of existing guidelines used in our institution and found in texts for student teachers. Called a “Rationale for lesson design” the Guideline does not attempt to simplify the planning process, but rather enables students systematically to access the complexities inherent in effective lesson preparation. By requiring students to articulate their content knowledge and narrate their pedagogical reasoning in some detail, the Guideline enables students not only to teach with confidence but also to construct PCK.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When lesson planning requires little more than a link to curriculum and written lesson steps, opportunities for students to justify their teaching choices are missed.
“For example, when lesson planning requires little more than a link to curriculum and written lesson steps, opportunities for students to justify their teaching choices are missed (Rusznyak & Walton, 2011).”
From Conceptualising work-integrated learning to support pre-service teachers' pedagogic reasoning (2021) · cites this paper as Rusznyak & Walton, 2011
Lesson planning requirements serve as a significant framework that potentially guides the way pre-service teachers rationalise the design of their lessons.
“They serve as a significant framework that potentially guides the way that preservice teachers rationalise the design of their lessons (Rusznyak & Walton, 2011).”
From Conceptualising work-integrated learning to support pre-service teachers' pedagogic reasoning (2021) · cites this paper as Rusznyak & Walton, 2011
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 ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING *
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x · Cited by 8,851
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 40
- 10.1080/09500690802187041 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500690801998885 · DOI · Paper page
- Bransford J., 2000, How people learn: brain, mind, experience and school
- Carter K., 1993, Educational Researcher, 22, 5, 10.3102/0013189X022001005 · DOI · Paper page
- Calderhead J., 1997, Understanding teacher education
- Criticos C., 2009, Getting practical: about classroom-based teaching for the National Curriculum Statement
- Darling-Hammond L., 2006, Powerful teacher education: lessons from exemplary programs
- Darling-Hammond L., 2005, Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do, 169
- Darling-Hammond L., 1997, The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work
- De Beer J., 2010, Becoming a teacher, 76
- 10.1080/00098650903507460 · DOI
- Du Plessis E., 2010, Becoming a teacher, 53
- Du Toit E., 2010, Help! I'm a student teacher! Skills development for teaching practice, 149
- Fuller F., 1975, Teacher education: 74th yearbook of the National Society for Study in Education, 25
- Gall M., 2011, Clinical supervision and teacher development
- Gess-Newsome J., 1999, Examining pedagogical content knowledge, 3
- Grossman P.L., 2005, Preparing teachers for a changing world: what teachers should learn and be able to do, 201
- Hammerness K., 2005, Preparing teachers for a changing world: what teachers should learn and be able to do, 358
- 10.4324/9780203464885 · DOI
- 10.1080/00220270500363620 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0742-051X(97)00035-8 · DOI
- Kagan D.M., 1992, Review of Educational Research, 62, 129, 10.3102/00346543062002129 · DOI · Paper page
- Kemmis S., 2008, Enabling praxis: challenges for education, 15, 10.1163/9789087903275 · DOI
- Killen R., 2010, Teaching strategies for quality teaching and learning
- 10.1080/00220270010000204 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500690801998885 · DOI · Paper page
- Morrow W., 2007, Learning to teach in South Africa
- 10.1080/09500690802186993 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11423-007-9052-7 · DOI
- Richardson V., 2005, Constructivist teacher education, 10.4324/9780203973684 · DOI
- Rusznyak L., 2010, Retrieving teaching: critical issues in curriculum, pedagogy and learning, 117
- 10.1080/16823200903234794 · DOI
- Rusznyak , L. 2008 . Learning to teach: developmental patterns of student teaching . Unpublished doctoral thesis , University of the Witwatersrand , Johannesburg .
- Shalaway L., 1997, Learning to teach…not just for beginners
- Shalem Y., 2010, Retrieving teaching: critical issues in curriculum, pedagogy and learning, 87
- Shalem Y., 2010, Retrieving teaching: critical issues in curriculum, pedagogy and learning, 12
- Shulman L.S., 1987, AAHE Bulletin, 40, 5
- Tyler R.W., 1949, Basic principles of curriculum and instruction
- Walton E., 2010, Inclusivity in the classroom
- Wiggins G., 2005, Understanding by design
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Conceptualising work-integrated learning to support pre-service teachers' pedagogic reasoning
RusznyakI, L., & Bertram, C. (2021) · Journal of Education · doi:10.17159/2520-9868/i83a02 · Cited by 33
“For example, when lesson planning requires little more than a link to curriculum and written lesson steps, opportunities for students to justify their teaching choices are missed (Rusznyak & Walton, 2011).”
BackgroundSelf-citationRusznyak, L., & Bertram, C. (2015) · Journal of Education · doi:10.17159/i60a02 · Cited by 14
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rusznyak, L., & Walton, E.
- Affiliations
- University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Walton, Elizabeth
- Venue
- Education as Change
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 271-285
- ISSN
- 1682-3206 (ISSN-L)
- 1947-9417
- OpenAlex
- W2168403020
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 7.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Education as Change (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- lesson planning, pre-service teachers, pedagogical content knowledge, scaffolding, professional competence, pedagogical reasoning, content knowledge, teacher professional development
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