Content Knowledge Transformation: an Examination of the Relationship between Content Knowledge and Curricula

Theories associated with teacher knowledge suggest that teachers transform subject content knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge in teaching to enhance the content comprehensibility. It is assumed that the connection between teacher content knowledge and curriculum is characterized by the content knowledge transformation. This study, using an interpretive research method combined with cognitive knowledge elicitation and mapping approaches, examined the subject–pedagogical content knowledge transformation process that was associated with the teachers' curricular decision-making in secondary physical education. Findings indicated that the teachers shared a common subject content knowledge base but demonstrated a personalized pedagogical content knowledge repertoire, suggesting that the teachers' pedagogical content knowledge was personally constructed even though they shared a subject content knowledge base. The classroom curriculum was closely connected to the pedagogical content knowledge base. In addition, the teachers' curricular decisions regarding content inclusion/exclusion were primarily based on their perceptions of student learning abilities. The findings may imply that enhancement of prospective teachers' pedagogical content knowledge should be emphasized in teacher preparation programs because it serves as a bridge linking the subject content knowledge with the curriculum delivered in classrooms. Article: Teacher content knowledge is conceptualized in different yet related components that include subject content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1986). In Shulman's (1986) content knowledge taxonomy, subject content knowledge refers to concepts, principles, and skills within a particular subject discipline. Key ideas, concepts, and skills in the subject content knowledge serve as "steel fibers" in the construction of the curriculum (Goodlad & Su, 1992). In different academic disciplines, those key ideas, concepts, and skills have been identified in academic areas of mathematics (Lampert, 1986), physics (Chi, Feltovich, & Glaser, 1981), and physical education (Jewett & Mullan, 1977). However, subject content knowledge usually is not taught in its original form as stored in the teacher's memory. A knowledge transformation is considered necessary. During the transformation, the teacher may elaborate on the subject content knowledge, identify various representations for the concepts, and reshape the knowledge into a teachable form to maximize its comprehensibility for student learning (Shulman, 1987). The teacher's knowledge of representations for presenting subject content knowledge is then detined as pedagogical content knowledge. This knowledge consists of useful forms of representations for the subject content knowledge such as analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, demonstrations, learning cues, drills, "in a word, the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others" (Shulman, 1986, p. 9). The teacher is expected to be able to transform the subject content knowledge to pedagogical content knowledge for effective teaching. Subject-to-pedagogical content knowledge transformation includes interpretation, representation, and adaptation stages. It is assumed that through these stages the teacher clarifies and interprets the subject content knowledge, identifies and determines representations for presentation of the subject content knowledge, and adapts and tailors the transformed subject content knowledge to meet students' characteristics and needs (Wilson, Shulman, & Richert, 1987). Teachers' subject-to-pedagogical content knowledge transformation is considered directly relating to students' learning. Walkwitz and Lee (1992) examined how pedagogical content knowledge could facilitate effectiveness of teaching overhand throwing skill in physical education. In a teacher training program, a group of teachers was provided with pedagogical content knowledge information, while a control group received subject content knowledge information only. Their findings demonstrated that students taught by the teachers in the pedagogical content knowledge training group gained better performance and understanding about the throwing pattern. In science education, Smith and Neale (1989) studied science teachers' use of pedagogical content knowledge. Their findings suggest that not all teachers transform their subject content knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge during teaching. What was needed in the teachers' knowledge repertoire was a set of specific concept representations consisting of examples and metaphors such as strands of spaghetti to represent light rays (Smith & Neale, 1989, p. 16). These studies imply that an effective teacher is expected to be able to transform the subject content knowledge to pedagogical content knowledge so that he or she can make sound curriculum decisions in teaching. Wilson et al. (1987) suggest that because students are different in abilities, prior knowledge, and learning styles, teachers should be able to teach a concept in "150 different ways" (p. 104). In order for a teacher to be able to teach effectively, the teacher "should possess a representational repertoire that consists of the metaphors, analogies, illustrations, activities, assignments, and examples that teachers used to transform the content for instruction" (Wilson et al., 1987, pp. 119-120). In other words, the teacher should be able to transform the subject content knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge in order to make relevant curriculum decisions to meet the challenges in different teaching settings. Because the teacher is required to be able to prioritize the key ideas, concepts, and skills in the subject content knowledge and determine the representations for classroom presentation during the knowledge transformation, he or she should have an understanding of the importance and the structural organization of the subject content knowledge (Bruner, 1977). From the cognitive science perspective, knowledge has to be organized into a structure to be useful (Howard, 1987). A knowledge structure refers to a cognitive schemata in which information can be cross-referenced and amended (Greeno, 1987). It is assumed that a knowledge structure serves as a mental model or road atlas that guides a person's decision-making process (Howard, 1987). A teacher is expected to possess such a knowledge structure in which the subject content knowledge (concepts, principles, and skills) and pedagogical content knowledge (representations) are organized in an integrated way for teaching. This integration of subject content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the teacher's knowledge structure allows him or her to establish a repertoire consisting of ready-made curricular decisions that is critical to the instruction (Leinhardt, 1983). Leinhardt and Greeno (1986) found that three or four versions of 15 standard routine decisions about mathematics were structured in semantic forms for immediate retrieval in expert teachers' knowledge structures. Based on their findings, the researchers suggested that a teacher should have a well-developed content knowledge structure that allows him or her to teach with maximum flexibility and minimum effort. Although it has been realized that transforming subject content knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge is a critical step toward effective teaching, teachers' underlying considerations that might influence content knowledge transformation still deserves a close examination. It is assumed that during the content knowledge transformation process, a teacher is required to address these questions, What are the core concepts, skills, and attitudes which this topic has the potential of conveying to students?... What analogies, metaphors, example, similes, demonstration, simulations, manipulations, or the like, are most effective in communicating the appropriate understandings or attitudes of this topic to students of particular backgrounds and prerequisites? (Shulman & Sykes, 1986, p. 9, cited in Wilson et al., 1987) The purpose of this study was to examine the content knowledge transformation process associated with teachers' curricular decisions in the physical education domain. Specifically the study was intended to identify and describe physical educators' underlying considerations that characterized the way the above questions were addressed. Two perspectives appear dominant, in re-search on content knowledge and curriculum. From a holistic perspective, content knowledge and curriculum are studied within large social and cultural settings that include political, organizational, and personal and interpersonal influences (McNeil, 1986). On the other hand, a personal expertise perspective usually focuses on individual teachers' personal perspectives and examines the teachers' expertise in transforming knowledge and implementing the curriculum (Leinhardt & Smith, 1985). The personal expertise perspective was adopted to guide this study to provide in-depth information about the characteristics of the teachers' knowledge transformation in the process of curricular decision-making. Method Guided by the personal expertise perspective, an interpretative research design was used in conjunction with a cognitive knowledge elicitation and mapping approach. The combination of the two research approaches was well-suited for this study because the combination is regarded as a useful research tool that "can help in the analysis of both the context and the mechanisms which teachers use to perform specific functions" (Leinhardt,