Exploring a Teacher's Argumentation-Specific Pedagogical Content Knowledge Identified through Collaborative Reflection and Teaching Practice for Science Argumentation

협력적 성찰과 과학 논변수업 실행에서 드러난 교사의 논변특이적 PCK 탐색

  • Received : 2015.09.30
  • Accepted : 2015.12.28
  • Published : 2015.12.31


This study examined the development of a teacher's teaching practice and identified argumentation-specific pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and the influence of the argumentation-specific PCK on teaching practice in an argumentation classroom. The teacher has a Ph.D degree in science education, a 19-year teaching career, and no experience in instructing in an argumentation classroom. The developed program consists of nine lessons regarding photosynthesis for 7th graders. The teacher participated in a collaborative reflection with researchers after each lesson once a week and five times in total, which lasted for thirty minutes. All of the lessons were video- and audio-recorded and the transcript of lessons and collaborative reflection, pre- and post-survey related to argumentation, and researchers' journals were analyzed. Analysis of the data showed that the teacher emphasized group interaction showing utterances of listening, evaluating arguments, counter-arguing/debating, and reflecting on argument process after the fourth lesson although the teacher focused on individual argumentation showing utterances of talking, knowing meaning of argument, and justifying with evidence in the first three lessons. Also, the argumentation-specific PCK, which was identified with the understanding of students, nature of argumentation and argumentation task strategy, also influenced the development of teaching practice. The teacher comprehended the students' challenges in argumentation, developed her understanding of the nature of argumentation from an individual plane to social plane, and demonstrated a deep understanding of the task strategy by voluntarily joining in modifying the argumentation tasks.


argumentation;teacher;teaching practice;argumentation-specific PCK


Supported by : 한국연구재단


  1. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
  2. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
  3. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation : Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260.
  4. Spalding, E., Wilson, A., & Mewborn, D. (2002). Demystifying reflection : A study of pedagogical strategies that encourage reflective journal writing. Teacher College Record, 104(7), 1393-1421.
  5. Sunal, D. W., Hodges, J., Sunal, C. S., Whitaker, K. W., Freeman, L. M., Edwards, L., Ronald, A. J., & Odell, M. (2001). Teaching science in higher education: Faculty professional development and barriers to change. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 246-257.
  6. Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(2), 99-110.
  7. 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.<673::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-J
  8. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.
  9. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
  10. McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203-229.
  11. Munro, J. (1999). Learning more about learning improves teacher effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(2), 151-171.
  12. National Research Council(Ed.). (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.
  13. National Research Council(Ed.). (2000). Inquiry and the National science education standards : A Guide for Teaching and Learning. National Academy Press.
  14. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
  15. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
  16. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
  17. Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122-1148.
  18. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.
  19. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. The journal of the learning sciences, 12(1), 5-51.
  20. Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
  21. Airasian, P. W., & Gullickson, A. (1994). Examination of teacher self-assessment. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(2), 195-203.
  22. Bell, P. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
  23. Berland, L. K., & Lee, V. R. (2012). In pursuit of consensus: Disagreement and legitimization during small-group argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1857-1882.
  24. Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (1998). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 25(2), 46-60.
  25. Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5-22.
  26. Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content
  27. knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263-272.
  28. Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
  29. Dicker, L., & Monda-Amaya, L. (1995). Reflective teaching : A process for analyzing journals of preservice educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 18(4), 240-252.
  30. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
  31. Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., & Erduran, S. (1999, April). Understanding dialogic argumentation among middle school science students. In American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada.
  32. Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72.
  33. Evagorou, M., & Dillon, J. (2011). Argumentation in the Teaching of Science. In The professional knowledge base of science teaching (pp. 189-203). Springer Netherlands.
  34. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.
  35. Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: a reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching, 11(3), 273-292.
  36. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodriguez, A., & Duschl, R. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science":argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-592.<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
  37. Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Crawford, T. (1998). Methodological considerations for studying science-in-the-making in educational settings. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 23-49.
  38. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
  39. Kim, S. K., Min, H. J., Bang, E. J., & Paik, S. H. (2011). Characteristics and Relationships of Teachers' PCK Components in charge of Science Gifted Middle School Students, Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 21(4), 801-828.
  40. Kraft, N. P. (2002). Teacher research as a way to engage in critical reflection : A case study. Reflective Practice, 3(2), 175-189.
  41. Lee, E., & Luft, J. A. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachers' representation of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1343-1363.
  42. Lee, S. K. L., & Loughran, J. (2000). Facilitating pre-service teachers' reflection through a school-based teaching programme. Reflective Practice, 1(1), 69-89.
  43. Loughran, J., Berry, A., Mulhall, P., & Woolnough, J. (2006). Understanding and valuing the development of pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education. In I. Eilks & B. Ralle (Eds.), Towards research-based science teacher education (pp. 65-76). Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
  44. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(4), 370-391.
  45. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95-132). Springer Netherlands.
  46. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of teacher education, 41(3), 3-11.
  47. McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233-268.
  48. McNeill, K. L., & Knight, A. M. (2013). Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Scientific Argumentation: The Impact of Professional Development on K-12 Teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936-972.
  49. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2007). Middle school students' use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. Thinking with data, 233-265.
  50. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers' instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53-78.
  51. Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.