This article discusses the importance of pedagogical content knowledge for teachers who teach Spanish to native-speakers. The article is taken from a study that investigated pedagogical content knowledge, subject-matter knowledge, and cultural awareness knowledge. It also illustrates how two exemplary teachers use the techniques of pedagogical content knowledge in the classroom to reach students and help them to learn the material presented as well as examines survey data, which corroborates what was observed in the two teachers’ classrooms. In addition, the significance of how do teachers who already know and understand their subjects in particular ways learn to transform their knowledge into representations that make sense to their students is discussed.
The debate over the kinds of knowledge teachers should have in order to be effective in the classroom looms large. Shulman (Bennett, 1993, 7) designates seven knowledge bases of teacher knowledge: 1) content knowledge, 2) general pedagogical knowledge, 3) curriculum knowledge, 4) pedagogical-content knowledge, 5) knowledge of learners and their characteristics, 6) knowledge of educational contexts, and 7) knowledge of educational ends, purposes and values the philosophical and historical grounds.
Collinson (1996) proposes a theoretical model for becoming an exemplary teacher, encompassing Shulman’s seven knowledge bases within a triad of knowledge: professional knowledge (i.e., subject matter, curricular, and pedagogical knowledge), interpersonal knowledge (i.e., relationships with students, the educational community, and the local community), and intrapersonal knowledge (i.e., reflection, ethics and dispositions).
Pedagogical content knowledge is important because it focuses on ways of representing and formulating the subject to make it understandable to students as well as an understanding of what makes learning specific themes easy or difficult.
This article will show the results of a study designed to get at the importance of pedagogical content knowledge as well as how pedagogical content knowledge techniques are presented in the classroom.
Pedagogical content knowledge has been defined in various ways. Shulman (1986, 9) defines PCK as the particular form of content knowledge that embodies the aspect of content most germane to its teachability and includes an understanding of what makes the learning of specific topics easy or difficult: the conceptions and preconceptions that students of different ages and backgrounds bring with them to the learning of the most frequently taught topics and lessons.
Much of the current research has demonstrated that knowledge is a powerful force in learning and instruction, and it is also pervasive, individualistic, and modifiable (Alexander, 1996). Stengel (1997) maintains that to get at pedagogical knowing conceptually as well as substantively, requires attending to teachers. It is in the teaching that knowing resides, and is revealed. Since effective teaching is in large part defined in relation to student learning, one cannot see the knowledge until the learning is apparent. Thus in order to define, situate, and understand pedagogical content knowledge, teachers and their students must be observed to determine if learning is apparent through how teachers teach. Teachers’ knowledge can be valued as an organic whole by examining how teachers use their knowledge to make sense of their classrooms in a natural setting (Golembek, 1994).
There is much research on teaching, students and student learning, but very little research focuses on teachers and what teachers do in the classroom. Shulman (2002, 250) states, not to ask how do teachers think and make decisions, but what do teachers know and how do they use what they know? That is to say how do teachers who already know and understand their subjects in particular ways learn to transform their knowledge into representations that make sense to their students. The following study attempts to get at and explain how teachers utilize pedagogical content knowledge in their classrooms.
For the purposes of this article Mullock’s definition of pedagogical content knowledge will be utilized. Mullock (2006, 48) defines PCK as an accumulated knowledge about the act of teaching, including the goals, procedures, and strategies that form the basis for what teachers do in the classroom. It must be further stated that pedagogical content knowledge is a theoretical concept. As such it cannot be directly observed or otherwise discerned in a classroom. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the effects of pedagogical content knowledge - that is to say the techniques that teachers utilize in the classroom that demonstrate their knowledge of pedagogical content. This study is preliminary in its nature as with general knowledge pedagogical content knowledge is highly complex and clearly a much deeper analysis of study and investigation of PCK must be done to further understand the theory that underlies PCK. For this reason it is imperative to look at what teachers do in the classroom – those techniques that demonstrate the effects of PCK which teachers themselves may not be able to verbalize because much of what they know has become automatic. They have done it so often there is no need for them to think about what needs to be done they simply do what needs to be done. This is also why teachers in this study were interviewed and surveyed in order to better understand the what, why and how of what they do in the classroom.
This study examined pedagogical content knowledge, subject-matter knowledge and cultural awareness knowledge. Two teachers, one a native Spanish-speaking teacher and the other a non-native Spanish-speaking teacher of Spanish to Native-Speakers (SNS), were observed two times during the 2000-2001 school year for a period of four weeks and once during the 2001-2002 school year for ten weeks for a total of fourteen weeks. Both teachers have taught SNS courses for nine and 11 years respectively. Luz Tobar and Dominic Soto (these are the pseudonyms the participants selected for themselves) teach at an urban public high school in central California. The researcher had been a colleague of both Luz and Dominic. Both participants and the researcher had attended the same conference sponsored by the California Literature Project that took place over a two-year period. The Spanish Language Literature Summer Institute took place in 1993 in southern California and lasted three weeks. All persons attending this conference signed a contract to attend six follow-up meetings over the next two years (from 1993 to 1995). The researcher had observed both participants teach. The principal at their high school as well as other teachers in the Spanish and ESL departments and the students all agree that Luz and Dominic are exemplary teachers.
The researcher also developed a self-administered questionnaire as a means of obtaining the knowledge that teachers have, but that is not necessarily observable. The questionnaire covered four areas: training and education, long and short term planning, student assessment and evaluation, and self-assessment and evaluation. Questions about training and education as well as long and short term planning were meant to obtain an understanding of pedagogical content knowledge. Questions about student and self-assessment and evaluation were meant to obtain an understanding of interpersonal and intrapersonal knowledge.
The participants took an oral form of the written questionnaire that was sent out to 100 teachers in Florida, Texas and New York. See Appendix C for the oral interview questions.
The following research questions address pedagogical content knowledge. These questions will be explored through a self-administered questionnaire, case studies and participant interviews.
1. In what ways do non-native Spanish-speaking teachers who teach Spanish to native-speakers understand the subject matter pedagogically?
2. What skills and knowledge do non-native Spanish-speaking teachers perceive as necessary for them to acquire pedagogical content knowledge for teaching SNS?
3. What changes, if any, in perceptions of their pedagogical content knowledge do teachers who teach SNS experience over time?The investigation of the type of knowledge non-native Spanish-speaking teachers need to teach SNS was the primary purpose of this study. The desired goal of the data analysis and interpretation was to formulate a professional knowledge framework to provide teachers and teacher educators with the how and why pedagogical content knowledge, subject-matter knowledge, and cultural awareness knowledge are utilized by such teachers to successfully teach SNS classes providing native Spanish-speaking students with the necessary skills to improve their literacy skills in Spanish as well as learning more about their cultural heritage. For the purposes of this article, only data regarding pedagogical content knowledge will be detailed.
The selection of a non-native Spanish-speaking teacher and a native Spanish-speaking teacher was to examine if there were any differences in the types of knowledge that a native Spanish-speaker would have versus a non-native Spanish-speaker in the classroom as well as if these differences provide an advantage or additional benefit for the native Spanish-speaker.
A descriptive case study was selected in order to describe and explore, in as much detail as possible, what occurred in the class as a whole and also to describe the actions of the teacher as well as the interaction between the teacher and the students.
Since there is little empirical evidence available about teaching Spanish to native-speakers; a case study methodology was selected to provide examples of everyday actions and knowledge that was displayed and the context in which this display of knowledge took place in the classroom. The researcher’s purpose for selecting a case study methodology was to provide a detailed examination of what teachers do in the classroom in addition to how and why they draw on the particular types of knowledge that they do to facilitate student learning. The researcher also wanted to provide a sense of the intricacies and the complexities of the different types of knowledge teachers use on a daily basis in their classrooms. In order to formulate a knowledge base for non-native Spanish-speaking teachers, it is first necessary to study what teachers do as well as how the different types of knowledge manifest themselves in the classroom and how such knowledge impacts the students. Schwandt (1997) states that a case study strategy is preferred when the researcher seeks answers to how or why questions, when the object of study is a contemporary phenomenon in a real-life context, when boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not clear, and when it is desirable to use multiple sources of evidence. Therefore, the only way to understand how teacher utilize pedagogical content knowledge, subject-matter knowledge, and cultural awareness knowledge is to study teachers in the classroom and observe their interactions with students.
Observation went hand in hand with case study. Adler and Adler (Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y., 1994) maintain that for as long as people have been interested in studying the social and natural world around them, observation has served as the bedrock source of human knowledge. In this study, observation was utilized to look for patterns through making inferences about what teachers do and say in the classroom. Interviews were also an integral part of this study.
Schwandt (1997) defines interviewing as “a set of techniques for generating and analyzing date from structured, group, and unstructured interviews with respondents, participants, and key informants. In this study, questions for the interviews were derived from the observation of each teacher’s lessons. The interview questions attempted to tap into the teacher’s cognitive mind in an effort to make explicit the knowledge teachers draw on everyday in the classroom. Knowledge cannot be seen or observed in and of itself.
The researcher drew upon grounded theory methodology to aid in the development of interpretation and understanding in reference to the kind of knowledge teachers utilize in the classroom on a daily basis. “Grounded theory is a general methodology for developing theory that is grounded in data systematically gathered and analyzed” (Strauss and Corbin, 1994, 273). Theory evolves during actual research and it does this through continuous interplay between analysis and data collection. Through observation, interviewing, and questionnaires, the researcher sought to uncover patterns of action and interaction between and among the data gathered. Grounded theories are traceable to the data that give rise to them -- within the interactive context of data collecting and data analyzing, in which the analyst is also a crucially significant interactant.
The questionnaire was utilized as an instrument to tap into the kinds of knowledge teachers’ employ on a daily basis in the classroom. The questionnaire was sent to a random sample of one hundred teachers teaching SNS. In the current study the questionnaire had 57 questions that pertained to training, long and short term planning, student and self-assessment, and teachers perceptions about teaching SNS.
The purpose of the questionnaire was twofold: first, it provided a general description of how teachers utilize pedagogical content knowledge, subject-matter knowledge, and cultural awareness knowledge in the classroom, and second, answers from the questionnaire were compared to what the researcher had observed in order to find patterns that may exist. This data also assisted the researcher in utilizing a grounded theory methodology.
A cover letter, prenotice letter, a cover letter for the first replacement questionnaire, a cover letter for the fifth and final contact, and a thank you card were also developed by the researcher to explain why teachers’ responses are important and it invite teachers to participate. The cover letters also included specific critical pieces of information; including, the date, the request to respond to the questionnaire, why the individual has been selected, confidentiality of the individual’s responses, the usefulness of the questionnaire, inclusion of a token of appreciation, willingness of the researcher to answer questions, and to express thanks for responding to the questionnaire (Dillman, 2000).
The researcher wrote to the Departments of Education in Florida, New York, Texas and California to receive a public list of teachers teaching Spanish to Spanish-speakers. She found that teachers teaching SNS were listed under Spanish teachers or under ESL or Bilingual teachers and not separated in their own category, and this proved to be problematic. The researcher was able to get a listing of teachers from Florida, Texas and New York. California was not used because the California Department of Education would only provide her with the names of schools and the principal and not individual teachers and she would have had to write the principal to obtain the names of teachers teaching SNS.
To make certain that only teachers teaching SNS would complete the survey the cover letter asked any teacher who received a questionnaire to return it blank and they were removed from the list (See Appendix D).
Random selection was used to determine the number of selections that would be drawn for each state to number 100. Therefore, 33 samples were drawn from Florida and 33 from New York and 34 samples were drawn from Texas. For each state a random sample was drawn from the target population using a procedure and a table of random numbers from Hopkins, Hopkins and Glass (1996, 148, 348-349).
Before the actual questionnaire was mailed to the target sample a pilot study was performed in order to establish the validity and reliability of the questionnaire.
The researcher utilized coding; that is to say the researcher developed coding categories and generated categories, themes, and patterns. The researcher also utilized a grounded theory approach in coding the data following the procedures and canons as defined by Corbin and Strauss (1990).
The researcher tabulated the results of the questionnaire in each of the four areas: training and education, long and short term planning, student assessment and evaluation, and self-assessment and evaluation. She also cross-referenced the responses from the questionnaires with the observation data and the interview data of the two participants. Each class was tape-recorded and the researcher then transcribed the tapes. The researcher then analyzed the transcriptions and began to code the emerging patterns that were apparent in the data.
The researcher’s aim in this research was to begin with substantive analysis, but take the analysis to a higher level of abstraction and conceptual integration to develop a formal theory that would be the foundation of the professional knowledge base for non-native Spanish-speaking teachers teaching Spanish to native-speakers.
Teachers are expected to do many tasks in their classroom and to do them well. Teachers are expected to manage their classroom; organize activities; allocate time and turns; structure assignments; praise students who do well and cajole, bribe or urge students who are not doing well to do better; formulate the levels of their questions; plan lessons and judge student understanding. The focus of this study was to examine the questions that Shulman (1986, 8) insists are missing in research on teaching: 1) questions about the content of the lessons taught, 2) the questions asked, and 3) the explanations offered in order to understand teacher knowledge.
Borko and Putnam (1995, 46) also state “pedagogical content knowledge consists of an understanding of how a subject area, and the topics and issues within it, can be organized and represented for teaching”. Thus, in order to examine teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge it is important to investigate how teachers organize or structure their classroom so that learning can occur. The following are examples of what was discovered through observation and interview the following is a summary of characteristics that relate to pedagogical content knowledge. The complete list of data for interviews and observations as well as the questionnaire can be found in Appendixes A and B.
One example of an advanced organizer was the use of daily agendas that listed the order in which assignments would take place. Dominic used the computer to display his daily agenda on the television screen; his agenda was presented in the following manner (English translations are the researcher’s):
I. Introducción (Introduction)II. Repaso oral - Vocabulario #1 (Oral review - Vocabulary#1)
A. Examen - Hoy miércoles 5 de septiembre
(Test - Today Wednesday Sept. 5)
(Observation 9/5/01)
Luz wrote her teaching agenda on the blackboard, which was presented as follows:
6 de diciembre del 2000 (December 6, 2000)
-Lectura en silencio (Silent Reading)
-Traducción/reflexión (Translation/reflection)
-Ortografía - homófonos (Spelling - homophones)
-”Raining Backwards” (Short story)
(Observation 12/6/00)
This was also consistent with the survey, Question Number 12, in that 84% of the respondents stated that they used advanced organizers to prepare students for a lesson.
Here are examples of the frequent comprehension checks utilized with the students. The participants also ask the same questions a number of times and provide wait-time for students to respond.
[Excerpt 1 Observation Dominic’s class 9/27/01]
El punto se usa para indicar el final de un párrafo o de un escrito y el punto puede asumir 3 funciones: punto y seguido, punto y aparte, punto final, y Uds. entienden eso ¿verdad?
¿Cuál es punto y aparte, punto y seguido y punto final entienden eso verdad? ¿Sí o no? [Más o menos] Porque si entienden eso, entonces no hay que apuntar esto. Pero pueden apuntar la diferencia entre punto y seguido y punto y aparte.
The period is used to indicate the end of a paragraph or an essay and the period assume 3 functions: to end a paragraph, to end a sentence within a paragraph, and to end of a piece of writing. You all understand this right? What are the 3 functions of the period? You all understand this right? Yes or no? [More or less] If you understand then you don’t need to take notes on this, but you should take notes on the difference between the end of a sentence and the end of a paragraph.
[Excerpt 2 Observation Luz’s class 12/12/00]
Abrazar y abrasar - okay, ¿cuál es cuál? ¿Cuál es cuál? ¿con ese? ¿cómo se escribe brazo? Con zeta, obviamente. Entonces recuerden Uds. cuando hay una palabra y no están seguros váyanse a la palabra original. Sí, obviamente, la palabra abrazo viene de brazo ¿verdad?
Abrazar or abrasar (to embrace and to burn) Which is which? Which is which? With s? How do you spell brazo (arm)? With z, obviously abrazar means to embrace. So remember when there’s a word that you’re not sure of go to the original source word.
Obviously, the word abrazo (embrace) comes from (brazo) arm, right?
Drawing on students’ prior knowledge was another important aspect in Luz and Dominic’s teaching. In the survey in reference to question 8, 66% selected strategies that tap prior knowledge; that was the largest percentage of the eight choices of useful strategies. On survey Question 24, 84% responded that they did take their students’ prior knowledge into consideration when planning their lessons while 9% responded that they did not.
[Excerpt 3 Observation Luz’s class 3/20/01]
El reconocimiento lo comparte con otras lenguas entonces, por ejemplo, en México, ¿cuál es la lengua oficial? [Español] El español. ¿Se hablan otras lenguas? [Sí] ¿Cuáles,
aproximadamente? [Muchas] Setenta y dos lenguas aparte del español...
Other languages are recognized. For example, in Mexico what is the official language? [Spanish] Spanish. Are other languages spoken? [Yes] Approximately, how many?
[Many] There are 72 languages aside from Spanish...
[Excerpt 4 Observation Dominic’s class 9/24/01]
Déjame revisar lo que dice, preguntar sobre lo que está ocurriendo en el cuento o una sección o parte del texto, y probablemente Uds. han hecho esto cuando están viendo las novelas en la tele, okay. Cuando están viendo novelas en la tele, algo sucede: un hombre muy fiel a su esposa ve a otra mujer y la quiere conocer...Let me review what I said, to ask a question about what is happening in a story or in a section or part of the text, and probably, you all have done this when you’re watching soap operas on TV. You’re watching a soap opera and something happens to a man who is usually very faithful to his wife then he sees another woman and he wants to get to know her...
Both participants regularly explained the purpose of classroom assignments and homework to their students.
[Excerpt 5 Observation, Dominic’s class 9/24/01]Ahora quiero introducir otra cosa para las estrategias, ¿y para qué les estoy dando las estrategias de lectura activa? ¿Para qué les estoy dando estas cosas? ¿Alguien se acuerda?
¿Qué hacen las estrategias de lectura activa por nosotros?... El propósito es para mejorar la lectura. Esas estrategias o técnicas les pueden ayudar a involucrarse más con lo que están leyendo, y se acuerdan más con técnicas para ayudarles a ampliar su comprensión, okay.Now I want to introduce another reading strategy. Why am I giving you these strategies for active reading? Why am I giving you these things? Does anyone remember? What do active reading strategies do for us?.. The purpose is to improve your reading. These strategies or techniques can help involve you more in the reading and you remember more with these strategies, which will help your comprehension.
[Excerpt 6 Observation, Luz’s class 12/12/00]
Entre más el hombre piensa como mejor se adapta al pensar o podemos poner a ello ya se adapta a ello porque ya sabemos que se refiere a pensar, ¿verdad? ...Cuando Uds. hacen ejercicio, ¿qué pasan las primeras veces?...¿Qué pasa si no hacemos ejercicio? ¿Qué pasa con nuestros brazos, nuestros músculos? Se atrofian, ¿verdad? Entonces esto pasa igual con la mente, tenemos que ejercitarla y muchas veces no toma mucho de nuestra parte pero tenemos que hacerlo...The more a man thinks, the better adapted he becomes to thinking because we already know that this refers to thinking, right?... When you exercise what happens the first few times? What happens if we don’t exercise? What happens to our arms, our muscles? They deteriorate, right? So the same thing happens to the mind, we have to exercise it often. It doesn’t take much on our part, but we have to do it...
Luz was explaining the importance of doing the daily translation exercises in her SNS (Native-speakers) class. Each day the students were given a quote in English, which they had to translate into Spanish. When translating they had to take into consideration not just the Spanish equivalents, but also the meaning of the quote.
The importance of students understanding concepts presented to them was an important aspect in teaching as well as being in tune to students’ interest or disinterest in classroom activities and assignments. On survey Question 14, 91% of the teachers responded that they did change their lesson plans based on their students needs. On survey Question 18, 91% of the teachers responded that they knew when students understood a concept that had been presented to them. Question 19 asked teachers to rank the behaviors that served as indicators of students understanding; 78% selected “students asked relevant questions”, 84% selected “students showed interest in the topic”, 66% selected “students asked for more information about the topic”, and 50% selected “other indicators of student understanding”. The following are some teacher participant indicators of the level of student understanding in the “Other” category of Question 20: (1) students remain in the classroom talking about the topic, (2) oral and written participation, (3) expressions on students’ faces, students look at you and smile and sometimes ask to extend the topic discussed in class previously, (4) students look directly at you, When you hear the “Oh, I get it” and I can see the brightness in their eyes, (5) formal assessment, students are able to answer teacher’s questions over the concept, (6) students relate the how concepts/topic with previous knowledge and want to share it with the class, (7) we have discussion, some questions are teacher guided, others are open-ended questions, (8) they can explain it in their own words, (9) students answer relevant questions (Questionnaire responses, 8/2001).
On survey Question 20, 91% of the teachers responded that they knew when their students did not understand a concept presented to them. On Question 21, 66% responded that “blank stares served an indicator”, 75% responded that “silence was an indicator”, 59% responded that “the students do nothing as an indicator”, and 31% selected “Other”. The following are the indicators that teachers selected as indicators as students not understanding a concept presented to them in the “Other” category of question 21: (1) my students raise their hands and ask me, (2) students evade the topic, (3) students complain, students’ lack of response, (4) I ask them directly and I encourage them to ask questions, students say they don’t understand, students fail quizzes and tests, students are “off task”, students do not participate.
Both participants were also aware of their students understanding or misunderstanding of concepts presented to them when they responded to oral interview question 9:
[Excerpt 7 Interview with Luz 12/9/00]
They start looking around. They look at the blackboard. They look at me. They start asking their classmates to see what they’re doing or they just don’t do anything.[Excerpt 8 Interview with Dominic 12/8/00]
Well obviously that’s an easy one, you have glassy eyes, you have empty looks on their faces and you’ll ask them is this clear, do you understand and this and they’ll usually say yes and you’ll say okay explain this to me and they can’t and so I’ll give them a bit of a prompt. I’ll say okay here’s the situation or look at this writing or whenever we’re focusing on the capitalization of a proper noun then I’ll prompt them and say remember we’re talking about a person or a place or a specific name, etc. I’ll give them those prompts and then let them take it from there.Both participants worked to make certain that their classrooms were comfortable places for the students. It was evident to see that students could ask questions or make suggestions with respect. Some examples follow:
[Excerpt 9 Interview with Dominic 12/8/00]
I try not to do too much of the individualized response initially because they’re still getting warmed up to work with me plus they’re also new and many are very shy.
[Excerpt 10 Observation, Dominic’s class 9/4/01]
Voy a darles unos 5 minutos... [Diez] Okay, diez, tal vez diez y después entonces haremos el repaso de los resúmenes...
I’m going to give you 5 minutes... [Ten] Okay, ten, perhaps ten, and then we’ll do the summary review.
[Excerpt 11 Observation, Luz’s class 12/12/00]
¿Necesitan algunos ayuda con la tarea? ¿o no? [Sí] Creo que pueden hacer todos la ocho no hay problemas, pero de roza, por ejemplo:La mujer sólo se le roza como el pétalo de una rosa.
Does anyone need help with the homework? Yes or no? [Yes] I think that everyone can do number eight without any problems, but roza, for example:
The woman touches him only slightly, as a rose petal.
[Excerpt 12 Interview with Luz, 3/16/01]
They are shy... and for some of them it’s difficult to participate and I need to call on them more. I need to remind myself of that.
The following are examples of teasing out responses from students by asking a question more than once and in different ways and allowing adequate wait time that was demonstrated by both participants.
[Excerpt 13 Observation, Dominic’s class 9/4/01]
Once, alguien que es considerado con los otros, cumplidor de ordenes, conserva no destruye las cosas. Esta persona es res... [Respetuosa] Respetuoso, sí porque es considerado con los otros. Ahora, que está absorto en sus pensamientos se dice que la persona es pen - sa.. [Pensativo] Pensativo.
Eleven, one who is considerate of others, follows orders, keeps and does not destroy things. This person is res... [Respectful] Respectful, yes, because this person is considerate of others. Now, someone who is absorbed in his or her own thoughts. This person is pen - [Pensive] Pensive.
[Excerpt 14 Observation, Luz’s class 12/12/00]
Ayer estuvimos haciendo el ejercicio de las cuatro esquinas ¿Recuerdan? ¿Algunos me pueden decir qué fue lo que hicimos? ¿De los qué? [Idiomas] De los idiomas de los Estados Unidos, ¿qué más? [Culturas] Las culturas, ¿qué hablamos sobre eso? ¿Cuál dicen las preguntas? [Si el gobierno de los E.E.U.U. tiene obligación a enseñar español e inglés...]Yesterday we did the four corners activity. Remember? Can someone tell me what we
did? What did we talk about? [Languages] We talked about languages in the U.S. and what else? [Culture] Culture, and what did we say about this? What were the questions? [If the U.S. government is obligated to teach English and Spanish...] Other examples of the importance of pedagogical content knowledge come from the questionnaire. Respondents were asked to what item would be most important for teaching SNS and if there were other items that would be equally important for teaching SNS. Survey Question 40 asked teachers what is the single most important understanding a new teacher needs to have when teaching SNS, 53% selected “the ability to make concepts understandable to students”, 13% selected the” Other” category. Survey Question 41 asked teachers what other important understandings, not including their answer to 40, a new teacher needs to have when teaching SNS, 47% selected “the ability to make concepts understandable to students”, while 31% selected the “Other” category. Some of the responses of the other category are (l) I feel all these factors are interdependent, (2) Ability to relate to the students, (3) All are vital, (4) Strongly encourage every student to grow, even when they bring very little prior knowledge of the language to the classroom, (5) Allow each one to feel that they can learn even if it requires extra work.Survey Question 38 asked teachers if their perceptions about teaching SNS changed over time; 69% responded “yes”, and 16% responded “no”. Survey Question 39 asked how had teachers’ perceptions changed over time; 81% selected “the ability to make concepts understandable to students”. The “Other” category for survey question 39 was selected by 25% of the respondents. The comments as they related to pedagogical content knowledge are as follows: (1) Awareness of the different levels of needs, (2) Native speakers have different needs than non-natives. I’ve developed curriculum that I find very stimulating and have been able to convey that to my students.
These examples are highlights of the depth and breath of pedagogical content knowledge displayed by both participants. The observation and interview data were useful in expanding on the responses to the questionnaire. It would have been impossible to obtain “thick description” in a self-administered questionnaire.
Shulman (1987, p. 9) states, “teachers must not only be capable of defining for students the accepted truths in a domain. They must also be able to explain why a particular proposition is deemed warranted, why it is worth knowing, and how it relates to other propositions, both within the discipline and without, both in theory and in practice.” In order for this to occur a teacher must be able to do more than just tell students what they need to know because, as Shulman (1987) has stated, students are unlikely to appear before them as blank slates. Research has done much to focus on the complexity of teaching knowledge as well as the types of knowledge (both content and pedagogical) needed in the classroom, see Shulman (1987; 1986; 1990), Collinson (1994; 1996; 1998; 1999), Grossman (1989; 1990; 1991; 1999), Barnes (1991), Bennett (1993), Brophy (1991), Gess-Newsome, J. & Lederman, N. (1999), Johnston, B. and Goettsch, K. (2000), Raths, J., and McAninch, A. (1999), Reynolds, M. (1989), Richards, K. (1994), and Turner-Bisset, R. (1999).
In what ways do non-native Spanish-speaking teachers who teach Spanish to Native-speakers understand the subject matter pedagogically?
Shulman (1987, p. 9) has stated that pedagogical content knowledge embodies the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others. This includes the most useful forms of representation, the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations. In this study, the participants’ understanding of the subject-matter pedagogically was demonstrated through the use of advanced organizers, and expectations that are clearly stated to the students, having a classroom with a safe environment that is conducive to learning. These examples are presented to highlight some of the crucial elements of pedagogical content knowledge observed in the classrooms.
What skills and knowledge do non-native Spanish-speaking teachers perceive as necessary for them to acquire pedagogical content knowledge for teaching Spanish to Native-speakers?
Their consensus is that teachers should have a strong command of the Spanish language; they need a deep cultural awareness; and they should be empathetic and willing to use culturally relevant practices to attend to the needs of the students. The perceptions indicate that teachers should come into the classroom with the belief that all students are capable of learning. The data from this study indicate that teachers should be able to structure their knowledge in ways that facilitate student learning (i.e., moving from simple to more complex concepts). The data also indicate that teachers should also know themselves and have confidence in themselves as teachers and be competent in their ability to teach. Teachers should also realize the need to be flexible and be able to adapt to the needs of the students.
What changes, if any, in perceptions of their pedagogical content knowledge do teachers who teach Spanish to Native-speakers experience over time?
Some important factors in the change of the perceptions of teachers appeared to be an understanding of the needs of the students as well have confidence in themselves as teachers and be competent in their ability to teach, their increasing comfort level in teaching SNS overtime, and, to a lesser extent continuing education on the subject.In order to enhance instruction for native Spanish speaking students, I offer the following recommendation:
1. Improve pedagogical content knowledge for teachers who teach Spanish to native Spanish-speakers. Pedagogical content knowledge is important because it provides teachers with methods and strategies to use in the classroom to get their students to learn. Ways of representing knowledge to students include: (1) advanced organizers, (2) expectations that are clearly stated to the students, (3) repetition of concepts in a variety of ways, (4) incorporation of students suggestions, (5) awareness of student interest or explanations which include the purpose of doing assigned work, (8) utilizing comprehensible input, (9) teasing out responses from students and encouraging them to think critically, and (10) having a classroom with a safe environment that is conducive to learning. Safe here not only means physical safety, but also mental safety, that is to say that the students know that they will not be ridiculed or made fun of for what they say in the classroom. They are comfortable speaking their minds in a respectful manner.
At this time, it is possible to investigate the effects of pedagogical content knowledge, those aspects that can be observed as well as those that teachers themselves can describe. The goal of the study was to understand perspectives and knowledge of the participants, in particular. To a lesser extent, the survey was designed to investigate this private knowledge of teachers who work closely with Spanish-speaking students. Once this private knowledge is made transparent and public, it can then be as Kennedy (Raths and McAninch, 1999, 31) states, “we can say it and write it down, we can share it and discuss it with others.” Much of the knowledge about teaching Spanish to native-speakers has been done in the field by teachers themselves doing action research. Teachers who teach Spanish to native-speakers have a wealth of knowledge waiting to be explored, and it deserves to be made “public.”
The study has shown that teacher knowledge, in particular PCK is complex in nature. In addition, exemplary teaching is more than a list of skills and methods much of a teacher’s own personality goes into the lesson as well as her/his beliefs about the students, and beliefs about her/his ability to teach.
Shulman’s (1986, 8) missing questions are important in the investigation of pedagogical content knowledge – 1) questions about the content of the lesson taught are important because teachers must know the content of the lesson in order to prepare to teach it to students. Questions two and three – the questions asked and the explanations offered in order to understand teacher knowledge because so much of what teachers do is automatic it is important to ask what they are doing and why they are doing it in order to understand the knowledge behind what they do in the classroom. Dominic commented to the researcher that he appreciated the questions asked of him because it required him to really reflect on his practice – that is to say his automatic thinking processes slowed down and he began to question why he did what he did and was it accomplishing his desired outcomes for the students.
Due to the complex nature of teaching this study just barely scratches the surface of what exemplary teachers do in the classroom and only begins to explain how they are successful at what they do. The researcher agrees with Collinson (1996, 9), who states, “teaching depends to a large degree on how a person sees, acts, and lives (teaching by modeling), one could argue that the development of dispositions and ethics is very important to teacher education. It is, however, such a neglected part of teacher education as to be almost nonexistent”. It is only when teachers and researchers are able to explore the deep knowledge level that exists in the minds and acts of exemplary teachers will the profession of teaching truly be understood and appreciated.
Alexander, P. 1996. The Past, Present, and Future of Knowledge Research: A Reexamination of the Role of Knowledge in Learning and Instruction. Educational Psychologist. Vol. 31, No. 2. Pp. 89-92.
Barnes, H. (1991). Reconceptualizing the Knowledge Base for Teacher Education. In Pugach, M., Barnes, H., Beckum, L. (Eds.). Changing The Practice of Teacher Education . Washington, D.C. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
Bennett, N. (1993). Knowledge bases for learning to teach. In Bennett, N., Carré, C. (Eds.). Learning to Teach. New York. Routledge.
Borko, H., and Putnam, R. (1995). Expanding a Teacher’s Knowledge Base: A Cognitive Psychological Perspective on Professional Development. In Guskey, T. & Huberman, M. (Eds.). Professional Development in Education: New Paradigms and Practices . New York. Teachers College Press.
Brophy, J. (Ed.). (1991). Advances in Research on Teaching: A Research Annual. Teachers’ Knowledge of Subject Matter as it relates to their Teaching Practice . Greenwich, Connecticut. JAI Press Inc.
Collinson, V. (1996). Becoming an Exemplary Teacher: Integrating Professional, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal Knowledge. Paper prepared for the JUSTEC Annual Conference. Naruto University of Education. Naruto, Japan.
Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks . Sage Publications.
Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York, NY. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gess-Newsome, J. & Lederman, N. (1999). Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Golembek, P. (1994). Putting Teachers Back into Teachers’ Knowledge. TESOL Quarterly . Vol. 28, No. 2. Summer. Pp. 401-407
Grossman, P. (1989). A Study in Contrast: Sources of Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Secondary English. Journal of Teacher Education. Vol. 40, No. 5. September-October. Pp. 24-31.
Grossman, P. Wilson, S. & Shulman, L.S. (1989). Teachers of Substance: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching. In Reynolds, M. (Ed.), Knowledge for the beginning teacher (pp.23-36). New York, New York. Pergamon.
Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher education (1-18). New York: Teachers College Press.
Grossman, P. (1991). What are we talking about anyway? Subject-Matter Knowledge of Secondary English Teachers. Advances in Research on Teaching. Vol. 2. Pp. 245- 264.
Grossman, P. Smagorinsky, P. and Valencia, S. (1999). Appropriating Conceptual and Pedagogical Tools for Teaching English: A Conceptual Framework for Studying Professional Development. Albany, New York. National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement.
Hopkins, K., Hopkins, B.R. and Glass, G. (1996). Basic Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Boston. Allyn and Bacon.
Johnston, B. and Goettsch, K. (2000). In Search of the Knowledge Base of Language Teaching: Explanations by Experienced Teachers. The Canadian Modern Language Review . Vol. 56, No. 3. March. Pp. 437-468
Mullock, B. (2006). The Pedagogical Knowledge Bas of Four TESOL Teachers. The Modern Language Journal. Vol. 90, No. 1. Pp. 48-66
Raths, J., and McAninch, A. (Eds.). (1999). Advances in Teacher Education Volume 5: What Counts as Knowledge in Teacher Education? Stamford, Connecticut. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Reynolds, M. (Ed). (1989). Knowledge Base for the Beginning Teacher. New York, New York. Pergamon Press.
Richards, K. (1994). Teachers’ Knowledge: From Guessing What Teachers Think to Finding out What Teachers Know: The Need for a Research Agenda. TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 38, No. 2. Summer. Pp. 401-407.
Schwandt, T. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks, California. Sage Publications.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher. Vol. 15, No. 2. February. Pp. 4-14.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review. Vol. 57, No. 1. February. Pp. 1-22.
Shulman, L. (2002). Truth and Consequences: Inquiry and Policy in Research on Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 53, No. 3. May/June. Pp. 248-253.
Stengel, B. Senkowski. (1997). Pedagogical Knowing: Reconstructing Teachers’ Subject Matter Knowledge. Educational Foundations. Summer. Pp. 29-52.
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview. In Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks. Sage Publications.
Turner-Bisset, R. (1999). The Knowledge Bases of the Expert Teacher. British Educational Research Journal. Vol. 25. Pp. 39-55.
Appendix C
Oral Interview Questions
TRAINING/EDUCATION |
||
1. What educational courses/training (both formal and informal) have you taken or received to teach Spanish to native-speakers? |
||
Name/Type of course |
Place where taken |
Date (Approx.) when taken |
2. Briefly explain what you do to keep your knowledge about Spanish to native-speakers up to date? |
||
3. Have you received any training either formal or informal to assist you in developing successful relationships with students and/or the local community, including parents or guardians and colleagues? If yes, please describe. |
||
4. In your opinion, what are some of the most useful strategies you have learned from any conference or training on teaching Spanish to native-speakers? |
||
PART II. LONG AND SHORT TERM PLANNING |
||
5. Do you have the opportunity to collaborate with other teachers in your department about lessons and curriculum issues? If so, please describe. |
||
6. To what extent do you change your lesson plans from year to year based on your students needs? Describe the types of changes you make most often. |
||
7. How do you prepare your students to get ready for a lesson you are going to present? please describe the techniques or strategies you use most often to prepare students for a new lesson. |
||
PART III. STUDENT ASSESSMENT/EVALUATION |
||
8. Describe what you do at the beginning of the school year to assess your students’ abilities? |
||
9. How do you know when your students do/do not understand a concept that has been presented to them? (For example, students are to write a three (3) paragraph essay using autobiographical incident.) Briefly describe any student behaviors or body language that serve as indicators for you. |
||
10. What do you do to get to know your students as individuals? |
||
11. How much consideration do you give to students’ background knowledge when planning your lessons? Describe how you determine the extent of their prior knowledge about a given subject. |
||
PART IV. SELF-ASSESSMENT/EVALUATION |
||
12. After teaching a lesson, do you evaluate your teaching and consider ways to improve or change it for a future time? If so, please describe the evaluation technique(s) you employ most often. |
||
13. What factors determine whether a lesson was successful or not for you? |
||
14. Briefly describe how you usually resolve disagreements or misunderstandings in your classroom, either between yourself and a student or between students? (For example, a student is unhappy about a particular grade on an assignment or two students are in dispute regarding ownership of a book, etc.) |
||
Appendix D
Questionnaire Cover Letter
Dear Teacher,
The purpose of this letter is to solicit your participation in a study entitled “What teachers know makes a difference!” The project will be conducted over the course of the 2001-2002 school year as partial fulfillment of my doctoral dissertation research. The project consists of a comprehensive analysis of the views of teachers teaching Spanish for native-speakers. Information gained from the study will shed light on the types of knowledge teachers need to successfully teach native Spanish-speakers in U.S. middle and high schools.
Your participation in this study will assist me in my efforts to create a professional knowledge base for teachers of Spanish to native-speakers. This questionnaire is voluntary; however your experiences and expertise would do much to shed light and understanding of the importance of having knowledgeable teachers such as yourself in heritage language classrooms.
All responses to this questionnaire will be confidential, and there will be no disclosure of personal information of any kind. When you return your completed questionnaire, your name will be deleted from the mailing list and it will never be connected to your answers in any manner.
Please fee free to contact me at (123) 456-7891 or Dr. CRH, my advisor at (123) 234-5678 if you have any questions or concerns.
Para demostrar me gratitud por su participación, voy a enviarle a Ud. Con el cuestionario un pequeño regalito.
Thank you in advance for your participation in this research project. If you would please return your completed questionnaire by September 1, 2001 I would be extremely grateful. I look forward to hearing back from you soon.
Sincerely,
V.R.E
Graduate Teaching Associate
Foreign/Second Language Education
P.S. If by some chance I made a mistake and you are not teaching Spanish for native-speakers, please return the questionnaire to me. Otra vez, muchísimas gracias.
© Radical Pedagogy