Teacher content knowledge plays an integral role in the quality of mathematics and science education experienced by students. Teachers’ content knowledge not only impacts what teachers teach, their knowledge also influences how they teach and what students learn. The content knowledge of effective mathematics and science teachers is not limited to their knowledge of the discipline. Teacher content knowledge includes a complex set of understandings that guides their work with students. Numerous theorists have attempted to unravel the various types of content knowledge needed by teachers. The following two sections provide more information about research on whether and how teacher content knowledge matters, and different facets of teacher content-related knowledge.
Teacher Content Knowledge Matters
Empirical evidence demonstrates that teachers’ mathematics/science content knowledge makes a difference in their instructional practice and their students’ achievement. Consistent findings across studies include:
- Teachers’ mathematics/science content knowledge influences their professional practice.
- Teachers’ mathematics/science content knowledge is related to their students’ learning.
Learn more about research on why teachers’ mathematics/science content knowledge matters.
Facets of Teacher Content-Related Knowledge
A new era of scholarly and practical work on teacher content knowledge emerged in 1986 when Shulman proposed five content-specific domains of teacher knowledge: the content itself (facts and concepts of the discipline), the substantive structures of the discipline (how knowledge is organized), the syntactic structures of the discipline (ways of knowing in the discipline), pedagogical content knowledge, and curriculum content knowledge. Although Shulman described these teacher knowledge domains as content-specific, he proposed them without reference to any particular content area.
Over the past 20 years, scholars have suggested a number of categories and characterizations to further clarify teacher content knowledge in mathematics and science. Theoretical writings and empirical studies have given considerable attention to pedagogical content knowledge in particular. More recently, the field’s attention has turned to defining more specifically the disciplinary content knowledge that teachers need for effective practice. The result is a substantial body of work that describes a variety of content-specific knowledge types. To make sense of this diverse body of literature, three primary categories are considered:
- Disciplinary content knowledge;
- Ways of knowing in the discipline; and
- Pedagogical content knowledge.
Most discussions of teacher content knowledge do not include beliefs as knowledge, but it is important to recognize that beliefs, such as whether and why certain topics are important, and what the goals of instruction should be, mediate how teachers draw on their knowledge in their work. One teacher may see the primary aim of instruction as developing conceptual understanding, and draw on content knowledge to structure lessons that engage students with experiences that challenge their initial ideas. By contrast, a teacher who sees the purpose of instruction as transmitting the facts and algorithms of a discipline is likely to draw on content knowledge to structure lessons very differently. A full consideration of the role that beliefs play in how teachers draw on their content knowledge is beyond the scope of this work.
Rarely, if ever, is one category of teacher content knowledge proposed as the only one that matters. Few would argue that any one of them is unimportant for teaching. However, in specific instances of research or practice, one or more of these categories, or a particular facet within one of them, is often clearly in the forefront. The sections below provide a brief description of each of the three primary categories of teacher content knowledge, as well as some distinctions of differing facets within each category. Examples of teacher learning opportunities are also provided to illustrate the various facets. These examples were drawn from two primary sources: interviews with MSP PIs, and written descriptions provided by MSP project leaders or other experienced practitioners.
Facets of Teacher Content-Related Knowledge
Disciplinary Content Knowledge
Disciplinary content knowledge can be thought of as an individual’s understanding of subject matter concepts and how these concepts relate to form the larger body of knowledge. Hill & Ball (2004) refer to this kind of knowledge as “common knowledge of content;” Ferrini-Mundy and colleagues (Ferrini-Mundy, Floden, McCrory, Burrill, & Sandow, 2005) call it “core content knowledge.” Another way to think about common or core knowledge of disciplinary content is as the knowledge held by all professionals who use science or mathematics in their work. This kind of knowledge is not unique to teachers, but it definitely has important connections to teaching.
There is general agreement that teachers need to know the disciplinary content they teach, but there are multiple points of view on what it means to know that content, or what is the appropriate way for teachers to know it. The pages linked below describe three main facets of disciplinary content knowledge that teachers might address:
- Knowledge of student-level disciplinary content;
- Knowledge of advanced disciplinary content; and
- Knowledge of profound disciplinary content.
Ways of Knowing in the Discipline
Mathematics and science are more than simply accumulated bodies of knowledge; each embodies a unique set of ideas about what it means “to know” something, and how that knowledge is generated, sometimes referred to as the syntactic structure of the discipline. The National Science Teachers Association (2003) urges explicit attention to science as a way of knowing in teacher preparation programs. Similarly, the Conference Board for the Mathematical Sciences (2001) recommends that teacher preparation include a specific focus on the nature of knowing and generating knowledge in the discipline of mathematics. The pages linked below describe two facets of this type of knowledge:
- How knowledge is formally established in the disciplines; and
- Habits of working and thinking that characterize the disciplines.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Effective mathematics and science teaching requires more than disciplinary content knowledge and an understanding of ways of knowing in the discipline. It also requires understanding of content-specific knowledge that is uniquely helpful in the work of teaching, which Shulman (1986, 1987) originally conceptualized as pedagogical content knowledge. The idea of pedagogical content knowledge has been expanded both by elaborating and adding to the aspects of this knowledge Shulman first identified, particularly by describing content-specific ideas in relation to the work of teaching. Brodie (2004) characterizes teachers’ mathematical content knowledge as involving both the mathematical practices and the teaching practices in which teachers engage as a part of their work. Magnusson, Krajcik, and Borko (1999) describe domains of pedagogical knowledge that are specific to science disciplines, e.g., knowledge of areas of student difficulty related to particular science concepts. Studies of teaching have raised another important distinction, namely that pedagogical content knowledge as it was originally described by Shulman not only applies to specific content-related situations that can be predicted, but teachers also need broad and flexible knowledge of how students think about content upon which to base instructional decisions that arise in unanticipated ways (Ball, 2002; Ball & Bass, 2000; Ball, Lubienski, & Mewborn, 2001). The pages linked below describe three facets of pedagogical content knowledge:
- Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Knowledge of student thinking;
- Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Knowledge of implications for instruction; and
- Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Knowledge of curriculum.
For the facets of teacher content knowledge bibliography, click here. [PDF 17K]