Examining a Science Teacher’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Interactions among Components through an Alternative Mapping Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.5321Keywords:
Enacted pedagogical content knowledge, Gifted education, Mapping-out approach, Work and energy, Simple machines, Refine consensus model of PCKAbstract
This study investigates the interaction of a science teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) components during the instruction of seventh-grade physics topics—work/energy and simple machines. It aims to explore how these components interconnect and influence instructional practices, particularly in the context of teaching gifted students. The study employed a qualitative research design, using classroom observations as the primary data source. It utilized the Alternative Mapping Approach (AMA), an adaptation of Park and Chen’s (2012) mapping-out method, to analyze PCK interactions. Content analysis and the constant comparative method were applied to interpret the data and construct detailed PCK interaction maps. The study yielded four key findings. First, PCK interaction maps are topic-specific and differ in complexity and structure. Second, student-related factors—such as learning difficulties, misconceptions, and characteristics of gifted learners—significantly influenced pedagogical decisions. Third, the teacher’s knowledge of instructional strategies played a central role in initiating interactions, while knowledge of learners was crucial in addressing instructional challenges. Lastly, contextual factors, particularly the needs of gifted students, required enrichment activities that demonstrated dynamic interactions between knowledge of curriculum and other PCK components. This study contributes to PCK research by introducing the Alternative Mapping Approach (AMA) as a novel and effective tool for capturing the complexity and sequence of PCK component interactions. It highlights the importance of considering contextual and qualitative dimensions in understanding how PCK is enacted in real classroom settings, particularly in differentiated instruction for gifted learners.
References
Ahtee, M., & Johnston, J. (2006). Primary student teachers’ ideas about teaching a physics topic. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830600576021
Akın, F. N., & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E. (2018). The nature of the interplay among components of pedagogical content knowledge in reaction rate and chemical equilibrium topics of novice and experienced chemistry teachers. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 80–105. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00165G
Alkış Küçükaydın, M. (2019). A qualitative meta-synthesis of science education studies regarding pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(3), 336–349. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10286a
Authors, (2024), “XXXXX” Journal YYYYYYY.
Aydeniz, M., & Kirbulut, Z. D. (2014). Exploring challenges of assessing pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 42(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2014.890696
Aydın, S., & Boz, Y. (2013). The nature of integration among PCK components: A case study of two experienced chemistry teachers. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 615–624. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3rp00095h
Aydın, S., Demirdöğen, B., Akın, F. N., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, E., & Tarkın, A. (2015). The nature and development of interaction among components of pedagogical content knowledge in practicum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 46, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.008
Azam, S. (2020). Locating personal pedagogical content knowledge of science teachers within stories of teaching force and motion. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(12), em1907. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8941
Barendsen, E., & Henze, I. (2019). Relating teacher PCK and teacher practice using classroom observation. Research in Science Education, 49, 1141–1175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9637-z
Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and content measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 147–162). Kluwer.
Bayram-Jacobs, D., Henze, I., Evagorou, M., Shwartz, Y., Aschim, E. L., Alcaraz-Dominguez, S., Barajas, M., & Dagan, E. (2019). Science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge development during enactment of socioscientific curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(9), 1207–1233. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21550
Boz, Y., & Belge-Can, H. (2020). Do pre-service chemistry teachers’ collective pedagogical content knowledge regarding solubility concepts enhance after participating in a microteaching lesson study? Science Education International, 31(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i1.4
Bryant, A. (2013). The grounded theory method. In A. A. Trainor & E. Graue (Eds.), Reviewing qualitative research in the social sciences (pp. 108–124). Routledge.
Buma, A., & Nyamupangedengu, E. (2023). Investigating the quality of enacted pedagogical content knowledge by mapping out component interactions: A case study of a teacher educator teaching basic genetics. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(8), 820–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2158267
Carlson, J., & Daehler, K. R. (2019). The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in science education. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science (pp. 77–92). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28954-4_5
Chan, K. K. H. (2022). A critical review of studies using the pedagogical content knowledge map approach. International Journal of Science Education, 44(3), 487–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2035011
Chan, K. K. H., & Hume, A. (2019). Towards a consensus model: Literature review of how science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge is investigated in empirical studies. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science (pp. 3–76). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28954-4_1
Cheng, H. G., & Phillips, M. R. (2014). Secondary analysis of existing data: Opportunities and implementation. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 26(6), 371–375. https://doi.org/10.11919/j.issn.1002-0829.214171
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016). Development and nature of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46(4), 575–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9472-z
Evens, M., Elen, J., Larmuseau, C., & Depaepe, F. (2018). Promoting the development of teacher professional knowledge: Integrating content and pedagogy in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.001
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Friedrichsen, P. J., Abell, S. K., Pareja, E. M., Brown, P. L., Lankford, D. M., & Volkmann, M. J. (2009). Does teaching experience matter? Examining biology teachers’ prior knowledge for teaching in an alternative certification program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(4), 357–383. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20283
Friedrichsen, P. M., & Dana, T. M. (2005). Substantive-level theory of highly regarded secondary biology teachers’ science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 218–244. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20046
Galimova, E. G., Zakharishcheva, M. A., Kolomoets, E. N., Chistyakov, A. A., Prokopyev, A. I., Beloborodova, A. V., & Ilaeva, R. A. (2023). A review of research on pedagogical content knowledge in science and mathematics education in the last five years. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(2), em2223. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12837
Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 38–52). Routledge.
Gilson, T. (2009). Creating school programs for gifted students at the high school level: An administrator’s perspective. Gifted Child Today, 32(2), 36–39. https://doi.org/10.4219/gct-2009-878
Hammer, D. (1996). More than misconceptions: Multiple perspectives on student knowledge and reasoning, and an appropriate role for education research. American Journal of Physics, 64(10), 1316–1325. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18376
Hlaela, N., & Jita, L. C. (2024). Examining physics teachers’ domain-specific pedagogical content knowledge components in Lesotho secondary schools. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(2), 240–259. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.240
Johnston, M. P. (2014). Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 3(3), 619–626.
Khoza, H. C. (2024). Exploring the rationale for lesson design as a tool for developing and evaluating science pre-service teachers’ topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Education, 95, 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i95a01
Lertdechapat, K., & Faikhamta, C. (2025). Student teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge, beliefs, and practices within the context of lesson study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2025.2452736
Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Sense Publishers.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Kluwer.
Mapulanga, T., Ameyaw, Y., Nshogoza, G., & Bwalya, A. (2024). Integration of topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge components in secondary school science teachers’ reflections on biology lessons. Discover Education, 3(17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00104-y
Mazibe, E. N., Gaigher, E., & Coetzee, C. (2023). Exploring dynamic pedagogical content knowledge across fundamental concepts of electrostatics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(3), em2241. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13023
Melo, L., Cañada-Cañada, F., González-Gómez, D., & Jeong, J. S. (2020). Exploring pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of physics teachers in a Colombian secondary school. Education Sciences, 10(12), 362. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120362
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Ministry of National Education. (2006). Middle school 6th, 7th, and 8th grades science and technology curriculum. Ministry of National Education Publications.
Ottogalli, M. E., & Bermudez, G. M. A. (2024). A PCK-mapping approach to show the integration among components of the pedagogical content knowledge of elementary education teacher educators about biodiversity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 151, 104746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104746
Oztay, E. S., & Boz, Y. (2022). Interaction between pre-service chemistry teachers' pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge in electrochemistry. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(1), 245–269. https://dx.doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2022.165
Padilla, K., & van Driel, J. (2011). The relationships between PCK components: The case of quantum chemistry professors. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 367–378. https://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90043A
Park, S., & Chen, Y. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 922–941. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21022
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6
Park, S., & Suh, J. K. (2019). The PCK map approach to capturing the complexity of enacted PCK (ePCK) and pedagogical reasoning in science teaching. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’ professional knowledge (pp. 185–197). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28954-4_10
Park, S., Suh, J., & Seo, K. (2018). Development and validation of measures of secondary science teachers’ PCK for teaching photosynthesis. Research in Science Education, 48(3), 549–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9578-y
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Reis-Jorge, J., Ferreira, M., Olcina-Sempere, G., & Marques, B. (2021). Perceptions of giftedness and classroom practice with gifted children – An exploratory study of primary school teachers. Qualitative Research in Education, 10, 291–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.17583/qre.8097
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (2018). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental approach for promoting creative productivity in young people. In S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaunessy-Dedrick, & M. Foley-Nicpon (Eds.), APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 163–184). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-011
Reynolds, W. M., & Park, S. (2021). Examining the relationship between the educative teacher performance assessment and preservice teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 721–748. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21676
Sæleset, J., & Friedrichsen, P. (2021). Pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge integration of students’ understanding in science and instructional strategies. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(5), em1965. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/10859
Santibáñez, D., Vega, A., Cofré, H., Salas, N., & Adsuar, J. (2025). Bibliometric analysis of pedagogical content knowledge: Countries, authors, and fields of knowledge. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(2), em2583. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15953
Sarabi, M. K., & Abdul Gafoor, K. (2018). Student perception on nature of subjects: Impact on difficulties in learning high school physics, chemistry, and biology. Innovations and Researches in Education, 8(1), 42–55. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED617654.pdf
Sarkar, M., Gutierrez-Bucheli, L., Yip, S. Y., Lazarus, M., Wright, C., White, P. J., Ilic, D., Hiscox, T. J., & Berry, A. (2024). Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in higher education: A systematic scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 144, 104608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104608
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and training: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
Suh, J. K., & Park, S. (2017). Exploring the relationship between pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and sustainability of an innovative science teaching approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 246–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.021
Şen, M. (2023). Suggestions for the analysis of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge components and their interactions. Research in Science Education, 53(4), 1081–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10124-7
Şen, M., Demirdöğen, B., & Öztekin, C. (2022). Interactions among topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge components for science teachers: The impact of content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(8), 860–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.2012630
Sickel, A. J., & Friedrichsen, P. (2018). Using multiple lenses to examine the development of beginning biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching natural selection simulations. Research in Science Education, 48(1), 29–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9558-2
Tenzin, S., Tendar, P., & Zangmo, N. (2022). Enhancing students’ understanding of abstract concepts in physics by integrating ICT in teaching-learning process. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 26(2), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJESS/2022/v26i230624
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). Psychological Corporation.
Wilson, C. D., Borowski, A., & van Driel, J. (2019). Perspectives on the future of PCK research in science education and beyond. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’ professional knowledge (pp. 289–300). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28954-4_15
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Yolcu, H., Kaya Durna, D., Akan, A., & Ulucınar Sağır, Ş. (2022). Analysis of studies on pedagogical content knowledge and technological pedagogical content knowledge by meta-synthesis method. Educational Academic Research, 46, 106–121.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the journal, the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
