Teaching Subject Matter

Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Summary

In Chapter 6, the authors proclaim their assumption that teachers should acquire and retain deep knowledge of subject matter they impart to their students. As subject matter knowledge is an essential component of teaching, the authors strive to express pedagogical content knowledge in relation to teachers’ efforts

of ensuring proactivity (anticipate conceptions/misconceptions), responsiveness (altering instruction based on student patterns), and provisions for differentiated accessibility to content for all students to achieve the highest opportunities for success. To organize their perspective of pedagogical content knowledge, the authors resort to addressing a framework of queries contained by the subject areas of mathematics and English/language arts:

1. Defining subject matter/relationship to education standards: no absolute consensus, big ideas/deep structures, and engagement in practices;

2. School subject matter standards disseminated by professional organizations: histories and purposes for teaching of different groups;

3. Students’ understanding: influenced by subject matter, ages, and schema;

4. Knowledge/application of curriculum materials: critique materials’ visions, purposes, and accuracy;

5. Student understanding/assessment: design and inform/develop instruction; and

6. Teaching specific content: organizing effective groups; design direct instruction; bridge gap between teachers’ and students’ understanding.

The authors remain to emphasize their belief that the importance of teachers’ subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge for teaching is detrimental to the academic achievement of students, especially considering the differing expanse of preparation for secondary and elementary teachers to teach effectively. Solutions posed by the authors include preparing elementary teachers as subject-specialists, prioritizing literacy and mathematics, and embedding deeper opportunities of connecting disciplines and pedagogical demands within the liberal arts component of teacher education.

Reflection

Allow me to first start by testifying that, again, teaching is more complex than it seems to be! I wish more lay observers would read this literature and try their hand at teaching effectively! As many of them have experienced the apprenticeship of observation, which, unfortunately, has provided them with dubious notions of teaching, there are many factors to consider when wielding one’s level of expertise within the practice of teaching. This chapter made me recall moments of insult and inspiration in relation to subject matter/pedagogical content knowledge.

Throughout my journey as a professional educator, I have had close friends and acquaintances provide their perspective on the quality of teacher education. One person averred, “You could have studied anything else, took teacher examinations, and started teaching kids. I mean, what is it that you need to know to prepare kids? You know things and that’s it! So many people do it.” As I heard her speaking, I could not help but question, “Well, how many of them are effective?” As the authors stated, pedagogical content knowledge is far more involved. Teachers should pursue an extensive repertoire of strategies that prepare them to handle teaching in ways that are well-designed and responsive to students’ needs, which reaches far beyond the constraints of a program based on one subject matter that does not attempt to connect content to practice. On the contrary, I have had a friend attempt to teach, after graduating with her bachelor’s degree in architecture, in middle/high school. She explained that she thought teaching was not complicated, but rather a fluid act, until she had to consider the diverse needs of students, as well as discussing other concerns that directly aligned with all six questions from this chapter.

My advice to preservice teachers and those seeking teacher preparation programs will always be rooted in encouraging them to explore more knowledge about their subjects/contents they teach, especially in respect to the way they disseminate knowledge to their students. As the authors stated, I find strengths for connecting students with content through connecting to their schema by using analogies and examples that facilitates connections. For example, when having to teach young children about math concepts, such as money, one may relate to them going to a store to buy items they would be interested in or had prior experience in buying. It allows students to become more engaged in the concept because they feel a sense of ownership or responsibility of a situation that may occur, again. The students, in turn, feel more accountable for their learning. Preservice teachers should know that while you are teaching your students, you are also teaching yourself how to teach.

As the authors mentioned, “professional education should help students interrogate how differing purposes for teaching the subject matter to different groups of students can reinforce existing inequities and affect access to higher education.” As a teacher at a Title I school and at settings of highly diverse populations, it is imperative that teachers convey knowledge to their students in ways that impact their learning to become productive human beings. Everyone reserves the right to attaining knowledge, our jobs as educators is to orchestrate it!