Investigating the Classroom Implementation of Mandarin Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): Exploring Effective Strategies and Practices for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language in the Philippines

Cavin F. Pamintuan(1*),

(1) Angeles University Foundation, Philippines
(*) Corresponding Author




DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v8i1.60912

Abstract


This mixed-methods explanatory sequential research investigated the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) cognitions and practices of Filipino high school teachers of Mandarin. The PCK framework highlights the crucial interplay between pedagogical and content knowledge, aiding educators in selecting the most suitable teaching techniques to effectively present the subject matter. This study combined both quantitative and qualitative data from self-assessment reports, semi-structured interviews, and classroom observations, providing a clear picture of the participants’ PCK. Using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, this study fully captured the participants’ PCK. The qualitative data revealed that the participants' confidence level on their pedagogical content knowledge was considered high. While the qualitative data uncovered the participants’ eighteen PCK practices, and their cognitions on the significance of using appropriate techniques to maintain motivation, achieve lesson’s objectives, cater students’ needs, and bridge challenges in teaching Chinese Mandarin. Lastly, anchored from the findings, this study provided recommendations such as deepening the participants’ understanding of the PCK framework and strengthening each professional knowledge, contributing to improving the participants’ capability to effectively teach Mandarin.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Alkis-Kucukaydin, M., & Ulucinar Sagir, Ş. (2016). An investigation of primary school teachers’ PCK towards science subjects using an inquiry-based approach. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1), 87–108.

Allen, A. N., & Spaulding, L. S. (2018). The effects of classroom management on student achievement: A meta-analysis of research. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(4), 380-392.

Asl, E., Asl, N. & Asl, A. (2014). The erosion of EFL teachers’ content and pedagogical-content knowledge throughout the years of teaching experience. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.583.

Baker, A. (2011). Pronunciation pedagogy: Second language teacher cognition and practice [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgia State University.

Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407.

Blomeke, S., Hsieh, F. J., Kaiser, G., & Schmidt, W. H. (2014). International perspectives on teacher knowledge, beliefs, and opportunities to learn: TEDS-M results. Springer.

Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Calafato, R. (2021). “I feel like it’s giving me a lot as a language teacher to be a learner myself”: Factors affecting the implementation of a multilingual pedagogy as reported by teachers of diverse languages. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11(4), 576–606. https://doi.org/10.14746/SSLLT.2021.11.4.5

Calis, E. & Dikilitas, K. (2012). The use of translation in EFL Classes as l2 learning practice. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46,5079-5084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.389.

Carreres, A. (2006). Strange Bedfellows: Translation and language teaching. the teaching of translation into l2 in modern languages degrees: uses and limitations (online). In Sixth symposium on translation, terminology and interpretation in Cuba and Canada: December 2006. Canadian Translators, Terminologists and Interpreters Council. http://www.cttic.org/publications_06Symposium.asp (accessed August 2011).

Cook, V. (2016). second language learning and language teaching: fifth edition (5th ed.). Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions (4th edition). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://people.ucsc.edu/~ktellez/Creswell_validity2000.pdf

Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Teacher learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46-53.

Edmonds, W., & Kennedy, T. (2017). Explanatory-sequential approach. In an applied guide to research designs. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103-112.

Evens, M., Elen, J., & Depaepe, F. (2015). Developing pedagogical content knowledge: Lessons learned from intervention studies. Education Research International, 2015, 790417. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/790417

Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (2017). Examining teachers' pedagogical content knowledge: Implications for science teacher education. Research in Science Education, 47(3), 447-474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9482-5

Harris, J. B., Hofer, M. J., Schmidt, D. A., Blanchard, M. R., Young, C. Y., & Van Olphen, M. (2010). " Grounded " technology integration: Instructional planning using curriculum-based activity type taxonomies. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(4), 573–605.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Validating the ecological assumption: The relationship of measure of instructional quality to state achievement gains. The Elementary School Journal, 108(4), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1086/589986

Hughes, J., Cavell, T., & Willson, V. (2001). Further support for the developmental significance of the quality of the teacher–student relationship. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00074-7

Jeong, H., & Kim, M. (2019). A review of studies on mathematics teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(1), em1667. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/104781

Koehler, & Mishra, P. (2015). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 31(2), 46-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10402454.2015.996127

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy, and technology. Computers and Education, 49(3), 740–762.

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (2015). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In Second international handbook of science education. Springer.

McCormick, M. P., & O’Connor, E. E. (2015). Teacher–child relationship quality and academic achievement in elementary school: Does gender matter? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 502–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037457

Morse, J., Barrett M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., and Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202

Niess, M. L. (2016). Investigating PCK within the context of a technology integration professional development program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2015.1070275

Park, S. and Chen, Y.-C. (2012), Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49: 922-941. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21022

Pekkanli, I. (2012). Translation and the contemporary language teacher. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 955–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.230

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

Raz, H. (1985). Role-play in foreign language learning, System, 13 (3). https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(85)90037-5.

Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Roorda, D. L., Jak, S., Zee, M., Oort, F. J., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2017). Affective teacher-student relationships and students’ engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic update and test of the mediating role of engagement. School Psychology Review, 46(3), 239–261. http://doi.org/10.0.66.209/SPR-2017-0035.V46-3

Saliés, T. (1995). Teaching language realistically: Role play is the thing. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:141072298

Salma, N., & Prastikawati, E. F. (2021). Performance-based assessment in the English learning process: washback and barriers. Getsempena English Education Journal, 8(1), 164-176. https://doi.org/10.46244/geej.v8i1.1305

Shi, L. & Baker, A. (2022). Innovations in teaching l2 writing: How changes in teachers’ SCK and PCK impact learners’ perceptions and writing outcomes. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102788.

Shulman, L. S. (1986b). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 119 times | PDF view : 26 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


License URL: https://creativecommons.org/

 

 

 

Creative Commons License


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.