This document analyzes and compares the teaching of two French chemistry teachers - an experienced teacher named Dora and a beginning teacher named Bud - on the topic of the evolution of chemical systems. It finds that Dora employed a more student-centered, hypothetical-deductive approach by having students predict and explain chemical changes, while Bud focused more on a classical, instruction-based laboratory approach. Analysis of their lesson plans, teaching sessions, and reflections showed that Dora displayed stronger pedagogical content knowledge of students' understanding and strategies, while Bud lacked such knowledge and reflexivity. The study suggests that experience helps teachers develop more student-centered strategies and pedagogical content knowledge.

1. JOINT SYMPOSIUM Networks 1 & 10
TEACHER PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: THE LINKAGE
BETWEEN GENERAL AND SPECIFIC PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE
Inferring the pedagogical content
knowledge and the pedagogical
knowledge of two French chemistry
teachers from the study of their activity
Isabelle Kermen
Laboratoire de Didactique André Revuz (EA 4434)
isabelle.kermen@univ-artois.fr
Université Paris Diderot, Paris F-75207 cedex 13,
Univ Lille Nord de France, U Artois, F-62300 Lens , France

2. the teacher’s activity in the classroom
The teacher’s
activity
The teacher’s
Knowledge
The students
The content-to-be-
taught
The syllabus
The teaching-learning
situation
The school and
working people
• gestures,
movements
•words
Visible
actions
• planning
Thinking • deciding
•What is not
thought
•What is not
said
What is
not
done
Goal :
Teaching a
specific
topic to
students
2
Robert (2008)

3. The double didactic and ergonomic approach
(Robert & Rogalski, 2002)
Five dimensions structure the analysis of the activity
Personal
dimension
Institutional
dimension
Social
dimension
Cognitive
dimension
Mediative
dimension
Tasks and
chemical content
involved
Classroom
organisation,
students’
scaffolding
Knowledge,
beliefs ,
experiences
Syllabus,
ressources
People at
work,
Students’
social
background 3

4. Teacher’s professional knowledge
Orientations to
science teaching
Pedagogical
knowledge
Knowledge of
curriculum
Knowledge of
assessment
Knowledge of
students’
understanding
Knowledge of
instructional
strategies
Pedagogical
Content
knowledge
Morine-Dershimer and Kent’s (1999) model , Corrigan (2009)
PK-strategy
PK-management
PK-discourse
......
Magnusson et al. ‘s (1999) model
PCK-programme PCK-assessment PCK-student PCK-strategy
PK-strategy ≠ PCK-strategy
4
Other
knowledge
and beliefs
(König et al., 2011)
(Van Driel et al., 1998)

5. Linkage between DA and teacher’s knowledge
Institutional
dimension
Social
dimension
Cognitive
dimension
Mediative
dimension
Tasks and lesson
plan design
Classroom
organisation,
students’
scaffolding
Content knowledge
PCK-programme
PCK-student
PCK-strategy
PK-discourse
PK-management
PK-strategy
5

6. Context and research questions
Teacher training session: teaching ‘the evolution of chemical systems’ in 12th grade
December 2011 February 2012 March 2012 May 2012
Programme analysis,
Students’ reasoning
Presentation
of lesson plan
Discussion
Implementation
Dora : 4 years experience
Bud: beginning teacher
in 12th grade
Analysing the choice made by the teachers to characterise their activity
and focusing on the knowledge that supports the decisions.
– Which components of teacher professional knowledge is it possible to
identify?
– How can a possible difference between both teachers be
characterised in terms of actions and finally PK, PCK and CK?
6

7. Methodology
• Collecting data
– Teaching sessions filmed
– Teachers’ interviews: before, after implementation;
weeks later in front of the video
• Analysing data
– A priori analysis of the lesson plan => nature and
organisation of tasks
– Analysis of the session transcript => organization of
work and interactions with students
– Analysis of the interviews => comments and reflexivity
7

8. Results: Nature and organization of
tasks
Bud’s lesson plan
• Labwork sheet
– Instructions, chemical
equations, questions
– 5 experiments (4+ acid-base
mixture)
• Tasks:
– Follow the detailed instructions
to perform the experiment
– Observe
– Interpret or Answer the
questions
Dora’s lesson plan
• No handout
– Instructions and questions
step by step
– One experiment: acid-base
mixture
• Tasks :
– Write a chemical equation
– Express species concentrations
– Predict chemical change
– Perform the mixture
– Answer questions
Classical and inductive approach Hypothetical-deductive approach
Different PK-strategy 8

9. Results: analysis of the unfolding teaching session
• Work organization in the classroom
– Commonalities: teacher speaking stages,
collective dialogue stages, students
working in pair stages
– Difference: individual research stages in
Dora’s session
• Students’ scaffolding
– Bud corrects practical gestures
– Dora holds detailed discussion to elicit
the student’s reasoning and to make
them change their mind
Different PK-management
PCK-student
PCK-student
PCK-strategy
9

10. Results: commenting on the session and the video
• Bud’s comments
• Not numerous
• No students’ conceptual difficulty anticipated
• Mostly centred on his actions
• Few strategy and management changes
proposed
• Dora’s comments
• Numerous
• Students’ conceptual errors predicted
• New students’ difficulties highlighted and
explained
• Change of task justified to help the students
and boost the rhythm of the session
lack reflexivity
lack PCK-student
PK-strategy
PK-management
PCK-student
PK-management
10
PK-strategy
reflexivity

11. Conclusion
• The beginning teacher
– holds PK
– lacks PCK and confidence to try student-centred strategies.
• The experienced teacher
– displays PK, PCK and reflexivity
11
Student-centred
pedagogical
strategy
Increasing PCK-student
and
possibly PCK-strategy
eliciting the
students’
reasoning and
difficulties
Teacher’s
reflexivity