What Do Teachers Need to Know?

Barry J. Fishman
University of Michigan
Prepared for the NSF REC PI Meeting, May, 2002

The question of what teachers need to know is hotly contested. Most agree that teachers need knowledge of their subject matter and knowledge about how to teach. However, there is debate about the nature of teacher knowledge, and the extent to which researchers are able to know what teachers know. In addition, in conjunction with the main question about what teachers must know, it is also important to ask, "How do teachers learn?" This second question is necessary if we are ultimately to influence teacher knowledge, which should be a core goal of any instructional reform effort.

What Do Teachers Need to Know?

The National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) provides a useful framework with which to answer this question, because unlike other national standards documents that focus on what students should know (e.g., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993; National Research Council, 1996), the NBPTS focuses on what teachers should know. NBPTS says the following in their science standards¹: "Accomplished science teachers have a broad and current knowledge of science and science education, along with in-depth knowledge of one of the subfields of science, which they use to set important appropriate learning goals" (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, 2001, p. 11). In the standards, this is broken out into the following areas: Nature of science, fundamental ideas of science (and the subfields), the contexts of science. In addition, the NBPTS standards for science in early adolescence include technology as an area in which teachers require knowledge (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, 1998). But this is "just" content knowledge. Elsewhere, the NBPTS standards indicate that teachers must know how to teach these subjects to their students (pedagogical and pedagogical content knowledge). The NBPTS also states that teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning, i.e., they must have knowledge of assessment techniques and knowledge of how students learn. In addition, professional teachers are members of learning communities, according to the NBPTS, which requires that they have knowledge of the local and broader contexts in which they work and know how to interact productively with those contexts. This is a tall order, and in answer to the question, "What do teachers need to know?", one might be tempted to answer, "Everything!"

The Nature of Knowledge

Adding complexity to the issue of what teachers need to know are underlying issues related to the nature of knowledge. This is taken up by Munby, Russell, and Martin (2001), who suggest that we must revisit the argument among positivism, behaviorism, constructivism, and social constructivism. Depending on the perspective taken, there are potentially vast implications for one's view of knowledge. Another important philosophical matter has to do with the distinction between knowledge and belief. Fenstermacher (1994) points out that when you ask a teacher about their knowledge, what you actually get is a report of their beliefs about their knowledge. Richardson (1996) argues that knowledge has to satisfy a "truth condition," while beliefs do not. Thus teachers' knowledge about subjective issues, such as the best pedagogical approach, might appear to be flawed according to some external measure, but it will be difficult to convince the teacher of that. Belief systems are resistant to change. Thus a good deal of the recent research in this area has focused on the relationship between belief and action (e.g., Brickhouse, 1990; Czerniak & Lumpe, 1996; Meyer, 1997; Varrella & Burry-Stock, 2001), and the conclusions so far are mixed. At this point, it is unclear if teachers' beliefs are directly related to their classroom practices, though it seems logical that this should be so. There is more general agreement that beliefs and practice exist in a reciprocal relationship to each other. Practice is as likely to influence belief as the other way around. Thus some researchers have abandoned the idea of a focus on teacher knowledge for a focus on teacher practice. This presents its own challenges, such as trying to reconcile a behavioral approach to evaluating teachers' cognition with constructivist pedagogical goals.

How Do Teachers Learn?

As part of any consideration of what teachers should know, and the nature of that knowledge, it is logical to also ask questions of how to help teachers acquire knowledge (or at least alter their practices). This discussion focuses on in-service teacher learning, or professional development. Professional development is regarded as a cornerstone for the implementation of standards-based reform (Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Preparation, 2001). Educators have learned a great deal about what comprises effective professional development (e.g., Hawley & Valli, 1999; Wilson & Berne, 1999), yet report after report depicts the state of teacher professional development practice as deficient (e.g., CEO Forum on Education and Technology, 1999). Many cite the deficiency in terms of quantity (i.e., not enough hours of professional development), and recent research indicates that substantive pedagogical change requires extended professional development (Supovitz & Turner, 2000). The quality of professional development, however, is a critical issue that must be addressed. We continue to know relatively little about what teachers learn from professional development (Frechtling, Sharp, Carey, & Vaden-Kiernan, 1995), and in turn what students learn as a result of changed teaching practices (Supovitz, 2001), which is the ultimate goal of standards-based reform efforts. To create excellent programs of professional development, it is necessary to build an empirical knowledge base that links different forms of professional development to either teacher or student learning outcomes.

Science and technology educators have many opportunities for professional development, but there are few empirical research efforts studying these programs (Wilson & Berne, 1999). The authors of one of the only studies to date to explore the relationship between professional development and teacher and student learning noted in their review of the literature that, "relatively little systematic research has been conducted on the effects of professional development on improvements in teaching or in student outcomes" (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001). Yet even this study was based on teacher self-report data, not direct examination of professional development, teaching practices, or student learning. Although practically every new program in science education has associated professional development, it is frequently treated as ancillary to the research on the innovation. To compound this problem, where professional development research with a focus on teacher and student learning has been conducted (Carpenter, Fennema, & Franke, 1996; Marx, Freeman, Krajcik, & Blumenfeld, 1998), it has focused on groups of volunteer teachers who are, more often than not, motivated to change or try something new (Supovitz & Zeif, 2000). It is as yet unclear what the implications of this focus on motivated volunteers are for our understanding of professional development, but the differences are sufficient to warrant investigation (Bobrowsky, Marx, & Fishman, 2001). Understanding these differences is critical to the ultimate success of educational reform efforts.

Discussion Questions

1. What is the core "knowledge" encompassed in our reform efforts/projects/research?
2. What methodologies are useful/appropriate for studying teacher knowledge?
3. What is the relationship between knowledge and practice?
4. How can we link teacher knowledge, teacher learning, and student outcomes?
5. What are the differences in the knowledge needs of in-service and pre-service teachers?

Readings for Discussion

Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in Education (pp. 173-209). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

It might also be useful to read one of the standards documents produced by the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards in either Science or Math (depending on your interests). They may be downloaded from this site: http://www.nbpts.org/standards/standards.html.

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy, Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bobrowsky, W., Marx, R., & Fishman, B. (2001, March). The empirical base for professional development in science education: Moving beyond volunteers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, Missouri.

Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62.

Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., & Franke, M. L. (1996). Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction. Elementary School Journal, 97, 3-20.

CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (1999). Professional development: A link to better learning (Year Two Report). Washington, DC: CEO Forum on Education and Technology.

Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Preparation. (2001). Educating teachers of science, mathematics, and technology: New practices for the new millennium. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Relationship between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of science teacher education, 7(4), 247-266.

Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 20, pp. 3-56). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Frechtling, J. A., Sharp, L., Carey, N., & Vaden-Kiernan, N. (1995). Teacher enhancement programs: A perspective on the last four decades [WWW]. National Science Foundation. Retrieved October 23, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/rec/pubs/eval/tep/tep.htm.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Marx, R., Freeman, J. G., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (1998). The professional development of science teachers. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (Vol. 2, pp. 667-680). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Meyer, K. M. (1997). Catalysts and impediments to change in science teachers' beliefs and practices. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers' knowledge and how it develops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (Fourth ed., pp. 877-904). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (1998). Early adolescence/science standards [PDF Document]. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Retrieved May 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://new.nbpts.org/standards/complete/ea_science.pdf .

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2001). Adolescence and young adulthood science standards [PDF Document]. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Retrieved May 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://new.nbpts.org/standards/complete/aya_science.pdf.

National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula & T. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 102-119). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Supovitz, J. A. (2001). Translating teaching practice into improved student performance. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states. 100th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II) (pp. 81-98). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963-980.

Supovitz, J. A., & Zeif, S. G. (2000). Why they stay away. Journal of Staff Development, 21(4), 24-28.

Varrella, G. F., & Burry-Stock, J. (2001, March). Linking science teachers' beliefs and teaching practices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research on Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO.

Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in Education (pp. 173-209). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.

¹ NBPTS has standards in a range of subject areas for both primary and secondary aged learners. For the sake of brevity, I will only deal with the science standards for "adolescence and young adults" in this document. For other standards, see the NBPTS web site at http://www.nbpts.org/.