Michelini M., et.al.: PCK research based module formation of
prospective primary teachers on energy
Pedagogical Content Knowledge research based module
formation of prospective primary teachers on energy
Marisa Michelini1, Lorenzo Santi1, and Alberto Stefanel1
1PERG,
University of Udine, Udine, Italy
Abstract – date of last change of the paper: 02.05.2014
Primary teacher education is a challenge through which passes the formation to an
integrated scientific culture of the future generation. In the perspective of the Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (PCK), the cultural aspects, the conceptual and professional ones
have to be integrated. As a result of a research conducted over several years, a formative
intervention module (FIM) on energy has been designed and experimented by 114
prospective primary teachers at the University of Udine, in the a.y.2011-2012. The FIM
includes two parts: in the subject matter content knowledge (CK) part, a traditional
approach to the concept of energy was proposed starting from the concept of work; in the
Pedagogical Content Knowledge part, a PCK laboratory integrates the analysis of a
teaching/learning proposal based on experimental exploration and an inquiry strategy.
CK-PCK questionnaires, appositely designed, were administered during and at the end of
the different stages. Answers to CK and PCK questionnaires were analyzed as well as the
worksheets (tutorials) filled in during the PCK Lab. The different kinds of data analysis
evidence that the reflection in teaching perspective of the conceptual knots (integrating CK
and PCK items) produces PCK in designing educational teaching/learning proposals. The
quality of proposals designed depends on the experience made in the analysis of a research
based proposal on teaching / learning energy.
Keywords: PCK, Primary Teacher formation, Energy.
1. Introduction
Primary Teacher education involves the challenge of informing future generations about
scientific culture so that teachers help students face the actual challenge to our actual
society [1-2]. Results from research on primary teachers’ growth as teachers, carried out
from different perspectives and in different contexts, show a “fragile” formation of ideas
on subject matters, on educational proposals for pupils, and on didactic strategies,
methodologies, tools and instruments able to activate effective students learning and to
help them to overcome typical and crucial difficulties in these different topics [1-5]. Inservice teachers have experience on how activate and engage pupils. The prospective
primary teachers (PPT) have the same lack of subject-related competence as in-service
teachers and manifest also marked gaps particularly involving educational strategies [611], and Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) approaches [12]. From the perspective of the
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) [13-14], crucial for teacher growth and, in
particular, for PPT growth is the integration of the cultural aspects, both conceptual and
professional ones [1-2, 6, 11-12]. The subject matter related nature of the PCK [13-14],
implies that the specific ways this integration takes place must be specifically translated in
the construction of specific thematic issues [5, 14-15].
In a research project running from more than five years [16-19], framed in the Model of
Educational Reconstruction [20], a research-based Formative Intervention Module (FIM)
1
ICPE-EPEC 2013 Proceedings
on energy has been designed and experimented with 114 PPTs of the studying for a degree
in primary education at the University of Udine, during academic year 2011-12.
In this paper, framed in the Girep Thematic Group on Energy [21], we will analyze how
this learning process is activated. Below the FIM designed will be presented, with related
educational instruments and monitoring tools. The data collected using these monitoring
tools will be presented, collecting results and conclusions emerging from the analysis.
2. The structure of the FIM on energy
In Fig. 1, the structure of the FIM on energy for PPTs is shown, including two parts: 1) CK
part - a traditional lecturing approach to the concept of energy, starting from the concept of
work; 2) PCK laboratory integrating the analysis of a teaching/learning proposal based on
experimental exploration and inquiry strategy by means of tutorials [16-17] and the
analysis of the main conceptual problems emerging from literature [22].
Figure 1. Schema of the formative module on energy
A CK-PCK questionnaire was given at the end of the first part of the FIM and a cluster of
items from the questionnaire was included in the final written examination. The
questionnaire, as will be discussed in section 4.3, from a side focus on the way in which
the PPTs discuss the conceptual meaning of the everyday verbs related to energy: to
conserve, to transform, and to lose, from the other side invites PPTs to discuss typical
educational situations, conceptual problems on energy documented in literature [24-29].
3. Research questions
Among the many aspects involved in the FIM and discussed in previous researches [1617], we focus on the following problems: RQ1. What activate a scientific view on energy
in PPTs? RQ2. What role does analysis and discussion of a research based path play in
promoting PPTs’ competencies for teaching/learning energy? RQ3. How does the analysis
and discussion of educational situations integrating CK and PCK act on the competencies
in recognizing student reasoning and helping to overcome their learning difficulties?
4. Instruments and methods
The core of the FIM is the educational path, designed in previous research and tested in
different primary schools [16-17], offered to PPTs through interactive lecture
demonstrations. The main goals and peculiar characteristics are presented in the Section
4.1. The worksheets used during the laboratory as well as the educational materials used in
activities to monitor and to collect data are describe in 4.2-4.3. In each subsection we
present the methodology of analysis of data based on the different monitoring tools used.
2
Michelini M., et.al.: PCK research based module formation of
prospective primary teachers on energy
4.1 The research-based path on energy for primary
The active role living and analyzing a research based educational path on energy [16-17]
offers to the PPTs the opportunity to understand the conceptual difficulties that students
encounter during the learning process and focuses the PPTs’ attention on methodological
choices and the ways in which to produce a consistent problem-based path. Simple
apparatuses consisted of toys or inexpensive, easy-to-find, familiar materials are used.
The major goals of the path are summarized in the following.
Students should know that energy exists in different types: kinetic energy, potential energy,
internal energy and energy associated with light. The sequence, extensively described in
other papers [16-17], begins with the idea, common in children, that the “human energy”
needed to allow us to move increases as a result of eating food.
Students should recognize that energy is a property of a system in a particular condition (a
state property, described in everyday terms) and is not a material substance, as often
conceptualized by pupils, but not consistent with the thermodynamic view of energy.
Students should be able to identify the transformation of energy in everyday processes and
in significant examples related to large-scale energy production. Carr [30] points out that
questions about energy in static situations often cause confusion among students. The
energy concept can be better recognized in situations in which observable changes are
taking place [31]: wheels spinning more quickly, objects falling from higher to lower
positions, temperatures increasing, etc. Following the recommendation of Carr [30], the
initial and final states of the systems be clearly identified to focus students’ attention on
specific changes, also in the cases of internal energy changes.
Students should know how some forms of energy (or at least changes in energy) can be
observed and measured. The usefulness (and in some sense the meaning) of energy is
tightly linked to our ability to measure it and thus keep track of it as it undergoes transfer
and transformation. Quantitative experiments were not stressed for this age group, but the
idea of measurement is introduced exploring some situation (as pendulum, bouncing ball).
The strategy adopted using this path activates PEC cycles in the analysis of energy
transformations, by means of IBL tutorial worksheets [16-17].
4.2 The PCK-lab and the tutorial worksheet for teacher formation and monitoring
The second part of the MIF activate a reflection on contents, on related conceptual
problems and on the active IBL strategies for learning/teaching energy at primary level and
in particular to bridge common sense reasoning with the scientific ones. The structure of
the lab, named PCK-lab for this reason, focused on the integration of subject contents and
related didactic aspects considered fundamental in the topic for teacher knowledge in the
PCK perspective [13-14, 18-19]. Three individual steps and one group step are included:
Step 1 (10 min - individual) - Task 1: list the concepts considered important about energy
learning; Step 2 (20 min-individual) - Task 2: Identify the critical questions in the learning
process, explaining the choices made; Step 3 (60 min - lecture) - Discussion about the
research-based educational path [16-17]; Step 4 (30 min - individual) - Task 3: Revise the
list of Task 1; Step 5 (30 m - group) - reanalysis of the individual tasks 1-3 with the groups
constructing shared answers (30 m).
Data were collected by means of two worksheets: the first includes the tasks 1-2-3; the
second was designed to promote group discussion and construction of shared conclusions
from re-analysis of the tasks 1-3. In the present work, the individual PPT’s answers to the
3
ICPE-EPEC 2013 Proceedings
worksheet 1 are analyzed for what the person chose to the list as issues considered
important in teaching energy, as emerged: at the beginning of the PCK lab, after the step 4,
at the end of the FIM. The analysis was performed first individuating the elements
considered important, then clustering these elements, categorizing PPTs’ answers giving
their initial vision on the didactics of energy and how that vision changes.
4.3 The CK-PCK questionnaire
The CK-PCK questionnaire [16-19], was organized into two parts: Part A - focused on the
way in which the PPTs discussed how conserve, transform, and lost energy change
meaning in passing from their everyday meaning to their scientific meaning; Part B –
focused on typical pupils’ ideas and conceptual problems on energy, to explore the ways of
focusing on pupils’ learning problems by the PPTs, as for instance: energy associated with
human or living being or as a fuel-like substance that is possessed by living things [22-27];
energy possessed only by moving objects [24, 28]; energy as the product of some process,
existing only during this process [22-26].
The questionnaire was administered at the end of the 1st part of the lab, at the end of the
PCK lab. The questions of part A were administered also in the final exam,
In the present work, only answers to the questions “Q1. What do you know about
Energy?”, “Q2. As far as you know, are there things that make energy?” will be
considered. The first question Q1 gives information on intension and extension of the
concept of energy. The answers were categorized individuating criteria produced by PPTs
to identify energy and what sort of changes will happen during the different stages of the
FIM. The question Q2 provides information on the crucial point concerning the meaning of
energy sources and energy forms, in the perspective of the transformative and conservative
nature of energy. The responses were divided according to two perspectives: those who
look to the types of source or to what is able to produce energy (systems, substances) and
those who look to the processes or transformations as the site of energy production.
For the scope of this work, the following PCK-item of the part B will here analyze: «In an
interview in class the question is asked: “As far as you know, are there body that make
energy?” Three children respond as follows: Giuseppe: "energy is not possessed by bodies,
but is only developed in the instant in which it is produced as in the explosion of a bomb;
Davide: energy is possessed by some bodies such as fuel, heater, radiators, the sun, the
water of a river; Sara: energy is possessed by bodies when they move or when they do
something"». PPTs are request to answer to the following two questions: D1. What are the
learning problems underlying each of the students’ answers? D2. What activities can be
proposed to children to deal with each of the individual learning problems?
The analysis of the answers to this question, administered at the beginning and at the end
of the PCK lab, will focus on attention to student reasoning, rather than their mistakes.
5. Data analysis
5.1 Data from the CK-PCK questionnaire: questions Q1-Q2.
Previous any formation, as shown in Fig. 2, PPTs stressed on forms of energy prevalently
involved in electrical energy production. There is no distinction among the types of energy
(kinetic, potential, internal, and associated to light energy) and the forms of energy (wind,
solar, nuclear…energy). Energy is often identified as the “capability to do work” or that is
conserved because “nothing is destroyed and created”, being often not distinguished by
force or power, or considered as a substance, as fuel. Unclear distinction between potential
4
Michelini M., et.al.: PCK research based module formation of
prospective primary teachers on energy
energy and internal energy was observed. The meaning of conservation and transformation
often appears far different from the scientific one [17-18].
In the present study the scenario of answers at the end of the CK part of the formative
module and before starting the PCK lab is quite different (Fig.2). In their answers, PPTs
proposed criteria to identify energy, and in particular: 60% proposed three or more criteria;
30% - proposed two criteria; and 10% - proposed only one criterion.
Figure 2. Criteria for identification of energy (not exclusive categories), administrating
question Q1 in a pre-test (a.y. 2009/10) and in an intermediate test (a.y. 2011/12).
After the discussion of the reference path (step 3 of the PCK-lab). The new elements
stressed are that sources don’t exist, that there are just sites of transformation (66%), that
energy is a property of state of all bodies (32%), that standing bodies possess potential or
internal energy (25%), and moving ones possess kinetic energy (17%).
The answers at the end of the final exams focused on the properties identifying energy in
operative way, with 80% of PPTs proposing three to four criteria, and 20% proposing two
criteria. Energy as property possessed by bodies (68%); Different types/forms (66%);
energy transforms, conserves (57%); Energy is transferred (34%) or not dispersed (22%).
Concerning the answers to Q2 on “things making energy” before the PCK lab and in the
final examination. In the first administration of the test, PPTs quoted: entities involved in
transformation, as heat, work (91%); phenomena as electricity (11%); substances (79%);
systems as power central (11%). When the same question was administered in the final
exam the answers were of just two categories: “energy is not created, but transformed”
(88%); Power central are energy transformation sites (38%).
5.2 Data from the CK-PCK questionnaire: PCK questions
The analysis of the answers to the questions D1 (conceptual problems), and D2 (related
didactic strategy to face the specific learning problem), highlights the upgrading of the
skills of PPTs in identifying the reasoning behind the conceptual knots of students and how
PPTs are much more focused on conceptual aspects in their intervention proposals for
overcoming the students difficulties. Before the PCK lab, few PPTs (less than 10%) were
able to focus the learning problems underlying the Giuseppe, Davide, Sara sentences (see
part B of the PCK questionnaire and propose some didactic strategy to overcome the
problems identified (22%). Prevalently PPTs stressed on what is wrong in the sentences of
students (69%) or not answered (31%) and suggested "explaining" what is wrong in the
students’ sentences. After the PCK lab all PPTs analyzed the student’s answers stressing
5
ICPE-EPEC 2013 Proceedings
on the learning problems at the base of students sentences (100%), proposing in half cases
specific strategies to overcome it (53%).
5.3 Data from the work sheet used in the PCK lab
Finally, we report here how the aspects considered important about teaching energy
changed. In Fig. 3, we report the distribution of the main aspects evidenced by PPTs at
three stages of the PCK-lab: at the beginning, after the discussion of the reference
educational path (step three of the PCK lab), and at the end of the lab, in the
documentation produced by PPT as part of their portfolio on the FIM.
Figure 3. Issues included as important aspects to be considered for teaching energy.
Legend: A - Operational definition of energy; conservativity, transformability, examples,
types; B - Types/forms (including KE, EP); Transformability or conservation; C- Standard
definition/types/conservation or transformation; D - Identification of energy in a specific
way (types); E – Need to construct an operative definition
The systematic change in the distribution shows the impact of the PCK lab and in
particular of the role of the group interaction (the last step of the PCK lab), in producing an
organic view of the concept of energy.
6. Main Results and concluding remarks
Concerning the competencies developed by the Prospective Primary teachers, from study
of PCK questions, analyzed before and after the discussion of a research based path, we
find a gain both in CK competences (distinction between types and forms of energy;
concepts of energy transformation, conservation, transfer, loss) and in PCK competencies:
knowledge about pupils ideas about energy and related learning problems;
operative/explorative approach to energy introduction with pupils) (RQ2). These aspects
are also evidenced in the educational projects on energy included in the portfolios,
coherently on what emerged in previous works, in particular in the introduction of an
operative approach to energy, with respect to a descriptive approach to energy forms
production that constitute the initial way in which PPTs approach the teaching of energy
without any formation on the theme [17-18]. (RQ2)
For achieving a scientific point of view on energy, two elements of the PCK lab appear
crucial: the analysis of a research-based path and the Group Work carried out at the last
step of the PCK lab, where a re-analysis of the individual work was integrated with the
discussion with peers in the group. The final work documents are richer in understanding
than the union of the single one original answers produced by the individual students in the
class (RQ1)
6
Michelini M., et.al.: PCK research based module formation of
prospective primary teachers on energy
The results show that the formative module for prospective primary teachers as designed
and implemented appears to be useful in teacher education for professional development,
particularly as related to student development of specific PCK on energy. Reflection on
relevant concepts, and problems from different perspectives (CK – PCK), offering
research-based IBL educational path analysis and discussion, the group discussion of
concepts and problems; the PCK questionnaires (Conceptual CK and integration with
PCK), attention to and reflection on pupils reasoning, coherence in teaching/learning path
planning, implementing microteaching monitoring learning processes, and on each task
and experience led to the growth of the students during the proces. (RQ3)
References
[1] Michelini M.: New approach in physics education for primary school teachers. In:
Inquiries into European Higher Education in Physics. Vol. 7. Ed. Ferdinande H.,
Valcke E., Formesyn T., p. 180-198. EUPEN (2003). ISBN 90-804859-6-9
[2] Michelini M. ed.: Quality Development in the teacher Education and Training. Udine:
GIREP, Forum (2004). ISBN: 88-8420-225-6
[3] Viennot L.: Teaching physics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Publ. (2003), ISBN 1-4020-1276-4
[4] Abd-El-Khalick F., Akerson V. L.: Learning as conceptual change. Science Education,
88 (5) (2004), p. 785-810.
[5] Abell S. K.: Research on science teacher knowledge. In: Handbook of Res. on Sci.
Educ.. Ed. Abell S. K., Lederman N. G., p. 1105-1149. Mahwa: Erlbaum, (2007).
[6] Appleton, K.: Science PCK and elementary school teachers. In: Elementary science
teacher education. Ed. Appleton K., p.31-54. New York: Elbaum, (2006).
[7] Patchen T., Cox-Petersen A.: Constructing cultural relevance in science: A case study
of two elementary teachers. Science Education, 92 (6) (2008), p. 994-1014.
[8] Schwarz C.: Developing Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Knowledge and Practices
Through Modeling-Centered Scientific Inquiry. Sci. Educ., 93 (4) (2009), p. 720-744.
[9] Spirtou A., Koumaras P.: Educating primary teachers in science: The case of energy.
In: Europ. Res. in Sci. Educ. Ed. Lijnse P. L., p. 259-265. Utrecht: CDß Press, (1994).
[10] Viennot L.: The contents of Physics. In: Thinking Physics for Teaching. Ed.
Bernardini C. et al., p. 67-76. New York: Plenum, (1995), ISBN 978-1-4613-5786-5
[11] Corni F., Michelini M., Stefanel A.: Strategies in formative intervention modules for
physics education of primary school teachers. In: Quality develop. in teacher educ. and
training. Ed. Michelini M., p. 382-386. Udine: Forum (2004), ISBN: 88-8420-225-6
[12] Samarapungavan A., Mantzicopoulos P., Patrick H.: Learning science through inquiry
in kindergarten. Science Education, 92 (5) (2008), p. 868-908.
[13] Shulman L. S.: Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth. Educational Researcher
15, 2 (1986), p. 4-14.
[14] Gess-Newsome J.: Pedagogical content knowledge. In: Examining PCK. Ed. GessNewsome J., Lederman N. G., p. 3-17. Dordrecht: Kluwer, (1999).
7
ICPE-EPEC 2013 Proceedings
[15] Grayson D. J.: Disciplinary Knowledge from a Pedagogical Point of View. In:
Connecting Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education. Vol. 2. Ed.
Vincentini, M., Sassi, E,. p. 171-185. New Delphi: ICPE, (2010). ISBN 0-9507510-5-0
[16] Duit R. (2006) Science Education Research – An Indispensable Prerequisite for
Improving Instructional Practice. Paper presented at Summer School, Braga. 1-15
[17] Heron P., Michelini M., Stefanel A.: Teaching and learning the concept of energy in
primary. In Phys. Curriculum Design. Ed.: Constantinou C. P., Univ. Cyprus (2008)
[18] Heron P., Michelini M., Stefanel A.: Teaching and learning the concept of energy at
14 years old. In FISER09. Ed.: Garip M. et al., p. 231-240. Famagusta: E.M.U, (2009).
[19] Heron P., Michelini M., Stefanel A.: Evaluating pedagogical content knowledge of
energy of prospective teachers. In: Community and Cooperation, Vol II. Ed. Raine D.,
Hurkett C., Rogers L., p. , 147-161. Leicester: Lulu, (2011). ISBN: 978-1-4466-1139-5
[20] Stefanel A., Michelini M., Santi L.: PCK formation and evaluation of prospective
primary teachers on energy. In: Proceedings of the WCPE 2912. Ed. Tasar F. Pegem
Akademiel, Istanbul, (2014), pp. 473-478.
[21] Michelini M., Heron P., McDermott L. C.: Teaching and learning the concept of
energy, report of the Symposium, in Proceedings of the WCPE 2012, Tasar F. Ed.,
Pegem Akademiel [ISBN 978-605-364-658-7], p. 449.
[22] Millar R.: Teaching about energy. (2005). [online]. Available from:
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/educationalstudies/Paper11Teachingaboutenergy.pdf
[23] Solomon J.: Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domains. European
Journal of Science Education 5, No 1 (1983), p. 49-59.
[24] Watts D: Some alternative views of energy. Physics Education, 18 (1983), p. 213-217.
[25] Watts M., Gilbert J. K.: Appraising the understanding of science concepts: "Energy".
Guildford: Educational Studies (1983).
[26] Nicholls G., Ogborn J.: Dimensions of children's conceptions of energy. International
Journal of Science Education, No 15, 2 (1993), p. 73-81.
[27] Trumper R.: Children’s energy concepts: A cross-age study. International Journal of
Science Education. No 15, 2 (1993), p.139-148.
[28] Stead B.: Energy. Working Paper No.17, Learn. in Sci. Project, Waikato Univ (1980).
[29] Duit R.: Learning the energy concept in school—empirical results from the
Philippines and West Germany. Physics Education, No 19 (1984), p. 59-66.
[30] Carr, M. and Kirkwood, V.: Teaching and learning about energy in New Zeland
secondary school junior science classrooms. Phys. Educ. 23 (1988), 86-91.
[31] Brook, A. J. and Wells, P.: Conserving the circus? An alternative approach to
teaching and learning about energy. Phys. Educ. 23 (1988), p. 80-85.
8