Yuliana Lavrysh, PhD in Pedagogical Science

(National Technical University of Ukraine  “ KPI”)

AN APPROACH TO PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

FOR TECHNOLOGY TEACHERS

The changes in the structure and contents of technology  education programs in Ukraine have  generated the interest in  exploring the functions, duties and development challenges of  teachers for technical specialties. In order to demonstrate  high professional quality, a teacher must have excellent command of the contents of her/ his own technical subspecialty. Teacher’s competence should be both theoretical and practical.

 However, good command of the contents alone does not guarantee that the teacher is good at teaching the subject.  Constantly changing pedagogic solutions and techniques, the development of  new subjects   have an effect on the content of  teachers work.

Teachers typically enter the career of a university teacher or lecturer in Ukraine with a degree in a technology subject area plus one year of scientific and pedagogical education. These teachers have specific knowledge upon  their specialty and  good command in technology. During  their one year of teacher education while Master Program they get some knowledge  of the main principles and fundamentals  of general pedagogy and general information of teaching strategies and class management, so the development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge ( PCK) is limited. This problem becomes more important issue for technology teachers who may not have covered well educational strategies and instructions  during undergraduate degrees.

. Engineering education in Ukraine  has a unique structure in that it combines practical and theoretical knowledge and it gives great opportunities to  create a rich and flexible learning environment due to the changes in strategies, curriculum and educational contests.

The  activity of technology teachers and the demands concerning their skills  have been examined in many studies. The top  challenges for teachers  were selected by  researchers from all over the world . These challenges are: creating learning environments that promote active learning, critical thinking, collaborative learning; developing 21st-century literacy; reaching and engaging today’s learners.

Implementing teacher development strategies in order to  fulfill educational  objectives is problematic for technology teacher who has not proficient knowledge of educational strategies.  However, such technologies as problem-based learning and project-based learning are considered  to be a learning environment that may promote students motivation,  technological literacy and teachers development (Prince M., 2004).

         In our research we  addressed  the necessity in changes  of  teacher’s professional pedagogical knowledge  components  which  made up PCK, according to the researches  of Magnusson S., Krajcik J., and Borko H. (Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H., 1999, Williams J., Lockley J., 2012). In their view, an experienced teacher’s PCK includes: orientations towards teaching principles and rules, knowledge of curriculum, knowledge of assessment, knowledge of students’ learning style, knowledge of instructional strategies.

The technology teachers have to understand that the emphasis of the teaching and learning process shifts from the teacher to the student.  Understanding and promoting students learning is a priority of any teacher of the 21st century. The teacher becomes a facilitator of learning, someone who supports the student's quest for knowledge. This facilitator’s role is particularly relevant when the knowledge to be taught is contextual and relative. The traditional pedagogy of workshop-type industrial arts subjects was, and in many cases still is, “show and follow” instead of active learning environment. (Walmsley B. 2003,p.56).

However, technology education is transforming to a subject that deals with an individual student’s ability to solve problems by implementing specifically relevant knowledge of  technological processes and systems. Technology education teachers should create with students a learning partnership, which later will promote learner autonomy (Walmsley B., 2003). The demand to develop both practical skills and problem-solving abilities requires technology teachers to address a pedagogical content.

In order to facilitate learning, technology teacher ought to find out the following factors of students: culture, age, previous educational  experience, personal objectives etc. The thoughtful student-teacher relationship allows students not only to develop judgments, to focus on learning, to master organizational  abilities, but also promotes the development of students’ professional identity. The progression from teacher-centered to student-centered teaching and learning strategies includes both teaching and assessment methods. It is carried out through the following stages: teacher-centered strategy, lectures, demonstrations, discussion, role play, case study, assignments, individualized strategies, projects, researches, student-centered strategies. We can suggest that working together is a powerful determinant of effective teaching.

Curriculum is the totality of formal and informal content that develop skills and organize  knowledge  in order to achieve specific educational goals. The curriculum design approach should be outcome-oriented. The development  of materials that teachers work with should be educationally significant, intellectually challenging and stimulate critical and creative thinking. Multiple teaching options have to be provided in the curriculum: classroom activities, small-group activity, independent activity, laboratory experience, web-based assignments etc.

In addition to lectures, most of which should encourage questioning and discussion, the strategies include demonstrations, tutorials, seminars (many of which should be led by the students), skills analysis and demonstrations, computer-assisted learning, role playing, practice-based experiential learning and self-directed learning. Many of these require dividing the class into small groups, which has resource implications in terms of teachers' numbers and time, as well as implications for how students' learning is assessed.

One of the most important demand to higher  educators and more specifically, technology educator, is the ability to think critically. Technology  educators are integral  to the educational interaction, thereby having the potential to facilitate positive critical thinking abilities of students.

This study has indicated that PCK development can help technology  teachers to improve the results of their activity and support their  willingness to master pedagogical skills despite of  any challenges. This study focused on identifying factors and challenges that influenced the learning environment and outcomes. We strongly believe that teacher’s development requires permanent professional growth that encourages positive feedback and discovery of  teaching practice and subject. All these recommendations will allow to create teacher and students partnership and positively influence the teachers’ attitude to new techniques implementation. 

References

1.     Doppelt, Y. (2005). Assessment of Project-Based Learning in a Mechatronics context. Journal of Technology Education, 16 ( 2), 7-24.

2.     Frank M., Barzilai A. (2006) Project-Based Technology: Instructional Strategy for Developing Technological Literacy. Journal of Technology Education,  18 (1), 39-50.

3.     Givens, N. (2000). Curriculum materials as a vehicle for innovation: A casestudy of the Nuffield design and technology project. Research in Science & Technological Education, 18(1), 71-84.

4.     Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life context: Alternatives for design in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3), 203-220. Retrieved from  http://echo.iat.sfu.ca/library/hill98_problemsolving_design_education.pdf

5.     Loughran, J., Mulhall, P.,  Berry, A. (2008). Exploring pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1301–1320.

6.     Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning works? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.

7.     Walmsley B. (2003). Partnership-centered learning: the case for pedagogic balance in technology education.  The Journal of Technology Education,  14 ( 2), 56-59