{"title":"Exploring the Roles of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Teacher Noticing: An Expert–Novice Comparative Study","authors":"Kennedy Kam Ho Chan, Jan van Driel","doi":"10.1002/sce.70073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This exploratory study examined the theoretically assumed, but empirically underexplored, reciprocal relationships between teacher noticing and professional knowledge by comparing the noticing processes of expert and novice science teachers. It examined how their domain-specific knowledge (content knowledge [CK] and pedagogical content knowledge [PCK]) influenced these processes. A video-based interview was conducted with 15 preservice and 12 expert science teachers to elicit and approximate their noticing processes, including perception, interpretation, and proposed instructional responses to atypical student thinking. The quantitative analysis revealed that experts more often evaluated teacher pedagogy and classroom activities, interpreted student thinking and referenced science content in their comments. They also more readily proposed content-specific next instructional moves linked to students' content-specific thinking. The qualitative analysis showed that novices relied mainly on their CK to evaluate student thinking, while experts' CK and PCK supported their more nuanced analysis of student thinking. Moreover, while novices' limited PCK hindered their ability to evaluate teacher pedagogy and classroom activities, as well as to propose subsequent instructional moves, experts' deeper CK and PCK enabled more content-specific evaluations and proposals for instructional moves. Novices tended to emulate the teacher's approaches in the videos, while some experts engaged in knowledge-building, proposing new instructional strategies after noticing the limitations of the teacher's strategies for conveying specific scientific ideas. We conclude that experts, unlike novices, notice teaching interactions as a dynamic interplay among teachers, students, and science content, rather than simply focusing on teacher actions. We discuss the implications of these findings for science teacher education.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1447-1468"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70073","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.70073","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This exploratory study examined the theoretically assumed, but empirically underexplored, reciprocal relationships between teacher noticing and professional knowledge by comparing the noticing processes of expert and novice science teachers. It examined how their domain-specific knowledge (content knowledge [CK] and pedagogical content knowledge [PCK]) influenced these processes. A video-based interview was conducted with 15 preservice and 12 expert science teachers to elicit and approximate their noticing processes, including perception, interpretation, and proposed instructional responses to atypical student thinking. The quantitative analysis revealed that experts more often evaluated teacher pedagogy and classroom activities, interpreted student thinking and referenced science content in their comments. They also more readily proposed content-specific next instructional moves linked to students' content-specific thinking. The qualitative analysis showed that novices relied mainly on their CK to evaluate student thinking, while experts' CK and PCK supported their more nuanced analysis of student thinking. Moreover, while novices' limited PCK hindered their ability to evaluate teacher pedagogy and classroom activities, as well as to propose subsequent instructional moves, experts' deeper CK and PCK enabled more content-specific evaluations and proposals for instructional moves. Novices tended to emulate the teacher's approaches in the videos, while some experts engaged in knowledge-building, proposing new instructional strategies after noticing the limitations of the teacher's strategies for conveying specific scientific ideas. We conclude that experts, unlike novices, notice teaching interactions as a dynamic interplay among teachers, students, and science content, rather than simply focusing on teacher actions. We discuss the implications of these findings for science teacher education.
期刊介绍:
Science Education publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. In addition to original articles, the journal features the following special sections: -Learning : consisting of theoretical and empirical research studies on learning of science. We invite manuscripts that investigate learning and its change and growth from various lenses, including psychological, social, cognitive, sociohistorical, and affective. Studies examining the relationship of learning to teaching, the science knowledge and practices, the learners themselves, and the contexts (social, political, physical, ideological, institutional, epistemological, and cultural) are similarly welcome. -Issues and Trends : consisting primarily of analytical, interpretive, or persuasive essays on current educational, social, or philosophical issues and trends relevant to the teaching of science. This special section particularly seeks to promote informed dialogues about current issues in science education, and carefully reasoned papers representing disparate viewpoints are welcomed. Manuscripts submitted for this section may be in the form of a position paper, a polemical piece, or a creative commentary. -Science Learning in Everyday Life : consisting of analytical, interpretative, or philosophical papers regarding learning science outside of the formal classroom. Papers should investigate experiences in settings such as community, home, the Internet, after school settings, museums, and other opportunities that develop science interest, knowledge or practices across the life span. Attention to issues and factors relating to equity in science learning are especially encouraged.. -Science Teacher Education [...]