Unit 2

The Knowledge Base for Teaching: An

Examination of Shulman’s Framework
Overview

In this unit we continue our examination of the sources of knowledge about teaching
but we focus more specifically on the body of knowledge for teaching which is
acquired formally through teacher preparation programme but which also identifies
the variety of sources from which this knowledge to be learnt comes. For long it was
the view that teachers required no more than content knowledge to teach, a view
largely discredited by empirical research but which still rested on shaky ground given
the failure of teacher education programmes to make significant influences on the
learning to teach process when the influence of prior experience is taken into
consideration.

The continued criticisms levelled at teacher education, especially in developed nations

such as the United States of America led to a series of reform efforts to make
improvements in teacher education programmes. Though these attempts to improve
teacher education and thus the quality of the teaching force were also motivated by
the drive to improve the professional status of teaching to make it on par with the elite
professions (such as medicine and law), there was also the felt need to identify a
codifiable body of knowledge that all teachers would need to acquire in view of the
fact that teacher education across nations and programmes within colleges/schools of
education in universities showed more disparities than they did unity of purpose with
regards to the preparation of teachers. This was in stark contrast to what obtains in
other professions such as medicine.

One of the most significant outcomes of the reform efforts was the conceptualization
of a framework for a knowledge base for teaching, a task accredited to the work of
Lee Shulman. It is thus the purpose of this unit to examine that framework developed
by Shulman and what it implies about what prospective teachers should know and be
able to do after completing their formal stage of teacher preparation. This is the focus

31
of the first session of the unit. The second session explores the relationship between
the knowledge base for teaching and the debate/question over the status of teaching,
answered perhaps by the existence of an agenda for the professionalization of
teaching.

Readings

Darling-Hammond, L., and Baratz-Snowden, J. (2005). A Good teacher in every

classroom. Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., and Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the
teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one?
Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3 -15.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reforms.
Harvard Educational Review, (57)1, 1-22.

32
Session 2.1
The Knowledge Base for Teaching: Shulman’s Framework

Objectives of this Session

• Outline the different categories of knowledge which constitutes the
knowledge base for teaching as conceptualized by Shulman (1987)
• Explain why pedagogical content knowledge is seen as being of ‘special
interest’
• Explain the meaning and stages of teaching as an act of pedagogical
reasoning

In this session we consider the work of Lee Shulman who conceptualized a

framework which elucidated the areas of knowledge that teachers need to acquire
within the context of teacher education. This framework was the result of ongoing
research and the accumulation of empirical evidence which supported the contention
that a codifiable knowledge base for teaching exists. Shulman was foremost among
the writers/researchers interested in articulating this knowledge base for teaching and
he initially identified three categories of content knowledge that constitute teacher
knowledge. These are subject matter content knowledge, pedagogical content
knowledge and curricular knowledge. Let us look at how Shulman defines and
explain these categories of knowledge:

The Knowledge Base for Teaching

Content Knowledge: This refers to the amount and organization of knowledge per se in the
mind of the teacher (Shulman, 1986/2004, p.201).
In the different subject matter areas, the ways of discussing, the content structure of
knowledge differs. To think properly about content knowledge requires going beyond
knowledge of the facts or concepts of a domain. It requires understanding the structures of
the subject matter in the manner defined by such scholars as Joseph Schwab…

33
For Schwab, the structures of a subject include both the substantive and the syntactic
structures. The substantive structures are the variety of ways in which the basic concepts and
principles of the discipline are organized to incorporate its facts. The syntactic structure of a
discipline is the set of ways in which truth or falsehood, validity or invalidity, are
established. When there exist competing claims regarding a given phenomenon, the syntax of
a discipline provides the rules for determining which claim has greater warrant. A syntax is
like a grammar. It is the set of rules for determining what is legitimate to say in a disciplinary
domain and what “breaks” the rules...

Teachers must not only be capable of defining for students the accepted truths in a domain.
They must also be able to explain why a particular proposition is deemed warranted, why it
is worth knowing, and how it relates to other propositions, both within the discipline and
without, both in theory and in practice…

… Moreover, we expect the teacher to understand why a given topic is particularly central to
a discipline whereas another may be somewhat peripheral. This will be important in
subsequent pedagogical judgements regarding relative curricular emphasis.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge: This is a second kind of content knowledge, which goes
beyond knowledge of subject matter per se to the dimension of subject matter knowledge for
teaching…
Within the category of pedagogical content knowledge I include, for the most regularly
taught topics in one’s subject area, the most useful forms of representation of those ideas, the
most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations – in a
word, the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to
others. Since there are no single most powerful forms of alternative representation, the
teacher must have at hand a veritable armamentarium of alternative forms of representation,
some of which derive from research whereas others originate in the wisdom of practice.
Pedagogical content knowledge also includes an understanding of what makes the learning
of specific topics easy or difficult: the conceptions and preconceptions that students of
different ages and backgrounds bring with them to the learning of those most frequently
taught topics and lessons. If those preconceptions are misconceptions, which they so often

34
are, teachers need knowledge of the strategies most likely to be fruitful in reorganizing the
understanding of learners, because those learners are unlikely to appear before them as blank
slates

Curricular Knowledge: The curriculum is represented by the full range of programs

designed for the teaching of particular subjects and topics at a given level, the variety of
instructional materials available in relation to those programs, and the set of characteristics
that serve as both the indications and contraindications for the use of particular curriculum or
program materials in particular circumstances.
We expect the mature physician to understand the full range of treatments available to
ameliorate a given disorder, as well as the range of alternatives for particular circumstances
of sensitivity, cost, interaction with other interventions, convenience, safety, or comfort.
Similarly, we ought to expect that the mature teacher possesses such understandings about
the curricular alternatives available for instruction…

In addition to the knowledge of alternative curriculum materials for a given subject or topic
within a grade, there are two additional aspects of curricular knowledge. I would expect a
professional teacher to be familiar with the curriculum materials under study by his or her
students in other subjects they are studying at the same time.
This lateral curriculum knowledge… underlies the teacher’s ability to relate the content of a
given course or lessons to topics or issues being discussed simultaneously in other classes.
The vertical equivalent of that curriculum knowledge is familiarity with the topics and issues
that have been and will be taught in the same subject are during the preceding and later years
un school, and the material that embody them

Source: Shulman, L.S. (1986/2004). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.
In The wisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning and learning to teach (pp.189-215),
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

In reading through Shulman’s description of the three categories of teacher

knowledge, attempt to come to your own understanding of what each category of
knowledge as he defines them, means to you. We can begin with content knowledge.
It is simply not a matter of being able to recall, explain and demonstrate some

35
understanding of the facts of a particular content area. It is evident that teachers, as
Shulman’s discussion shows, are expected to know and understand how knowledge is
constructed in their content area. That is:

How do biologists, chemists, physicist, mathematicians, historians, linguists
among others construct knowledge in their disciplines? Or how do they come
to know the knowledge pertinent to their field? In other words what methods
of investigation do they use to find out or discover knowledge and what
constitute the knowledge in these different fields?

What are the substantive and syntactic structures of your discipline?

When is the knowledge in your field seen as tentative or
trustworthy/established/ factual or valid?

How does knowledge change in a particular (your) field?

These are questions which help to clarify what is meant by the syntactic structure of a
discipline. Shulman’s arguments suggest that teachers should not only know the
content of their subject area but the structure of the discipline, the rules of the
discipline or the methods of inquiry. A part of being knowledgeable about the
substantive and syntactic structure of a field is to know, use and teach the language
and concepts of the field.

With respect to pedagogical content knowledge what does Shulman mean by it? Of
the areas of knowledge he identified, Shulman singled out pedagogical content
knowledge as being of special interest because:
it identifies the distinctive bodies of knowledge for teaching. It represents the
blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular
topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented, and adapted to the
diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction.
Pedagogical content knowledge is the category most likely to distinguish the
understanding of the content specialist from that of the pedagogue (Shulman,
1987, p.8).

His explanation above suggests that pedagogical content knowledge is the kind of
knowledge that teachers possess about how to present content in ways which are
understandable to students. Teachers therefore act as the conduits through which
36
academic knowledge is transformed into school knowledge or knowledge for
teaching, in ways which make sense to students. Shulman’s discussion of this form of
knowledge also suggests that teachers should possess a variety of ways of
representing content to student. For, as his arguments suggests, an essential aspect of
the teachers’ knowledge base is to have an intimate enough knowledge of their
content area so that they are aware of the challenges which are inherent in the study of
that discipline and the concepts which students are likely to find difficult. Having this
knowledge they should also be aware of the methods that can be employed to reduce
the challenges for students and to enable them to grasp the more difficult concepts or
principles peculiar to a particular subject area.

Activity 2.1

 In your own words, write what you understand about the three categories of
knowledge identified by Shulman. Why do you think pedagogical content
knowledge is regarded as being of special interest?
 Try to establish what represents the substantive and syntactic structure of your
discipline
 What areas or aspects of your discipline do you believe presents the most
challenge to learn? You can reflect on your own experiences of learning the
subject in school as a starting point.

Following his discussion of the three categories of knowledge that “grows in the
minds of teachers” as he phrased it, Shulman (1987) subsequently provided a model
for the knowledge base for teaching which elaborates on the categories of knowledge
for teaching in addition to the three areas of content knowledge that he identified
earlier. He was of the view that if “teacher knowledge were to be organized into a
handbook” the category heading would look like that outlined below:

37
 Categories of the Knowledge Base
-content knowledge;
-general pedagogical knowledge, with reference to those broad principles and
strategies of classroom management and organization that appear to transcend subject
matter;
- curriculum knowledge, with particular grasp of the materials and programs that
serve as “tools of the trade” for teachers;
- pedagogical content knowledge, that special amalgam of content and pedagogy that
is uniquely the province of teachers, their own special form of professional
understanding;
- knowledge of learners and their characteristics;
- knowledge of educational contexts, ranging from the workings of the group or
classroom, the governance and financing of school districts, to the character of
communities and cultures; and
- knowledge of educational ends, purposes, and values, and their philosophical and
historical roots (Shulman, 1987, p.8).

Along with the development of this framework of a knowledge base for teaching,
Shulman also argued that there are four main sources from which the knowledge for
teaching comes. These he identified as:
(1) Scholarship in content discipline
(2) Educational materials and structure
(3) Formal educational scholarship
(4) Wisdom of practice
These you can read about in more details for the activity based on Shulman’s article
included in your course reader.

Teaching as an Act of Pedagogical Reasoning

Shulman not only argues for a knowledge base he contends at the same time that
content knowledge is an important aspect of teacher’s knowledge and was critical of
the teacher effectiveness research which reduced teaching to the display of certain

38
skills in the classroom. His discussion therefore was intended to show not only the
centrality of content knowledge to teaching but how a deep knowledge of content
facilitates a teacher’s ability to design instructional task to engage students
meaningfully in learning. He drew on case studies of expert teachers to illustrate the
knowledge which comes from the wisdom of practice. In pointing to the potential of
this knowledge, Shulman (1987) stated:
We have concluded from our research with teachers at all levels of experience
that the potentially codifiable knowledge that can be gleaned from the wisdom
of practice is extensive…A major portion of the research agenda for the next
decade will be to collect, collate, and interpret the practical knowledge of
teachers for the
purpose of establishing a case literature and codifying its principles,
precedents, and parables (p.12)

Drawing on both philosophical sources and from empirical research where data is
collected through methods such as interviews and observation, Shulman also explains
that teaching is basically an act of pedagogical reasoning. His model of pedagogical
reasoning and action outlines how this process works by identifying and explaining
the different phases of this reasoning process which he explains, commences with an
act of comprehension. The process then moves in a cycle though different phases -
transformation, instruction, evaluation, reflection and results in new comprehension.
The model confirms that teaching is both an intellectual/mental/thinking/reasoning
activity as much as it is a practical one. At the heart of this pedagogical reasoning
and action is the body of knowledge – the subject matter content knowledge - which
forms the basis for the commencement of the teaching act representing as it does, the
knowledge to be comprehended and transformed for instructional purposes. The
cyclical nature of the model of pedagogical reasoning and action is depicted below.

39
 New Comprehension
comprehension

Reflection Transformation

Evaluation Instruction

Figure 2.1: Pedagogical Reasoning Cycle

In drawing on the research of Shulman and others into the knowledge base for
teaching and in response to the question ‘What do teachers need to know?’ Darling-
Hammond and Baratz-Snowden (2005) acknowledged that a ‘review of the research
suggest that the common practices of effective teachers draw on three general areas of
knowledge that beginning teachers must acquire in order to be successful with their
students’ (p.5). These areas of knowledge as outlined by Darling-Hammond and
Baratz-Snowden include:
• Knowledge of learners and how they learn and develop within social contexts
• Understanding of the subject matter and skills to be taught in light of the
social purposes of education
• Understanding of teaching in light of the content and learners to be taught, as
informed by assessment and supported by a productive classroom
environment (2005, p.7).

40
From the above it is evident that not only a general knowledge base that is applicable
to the preparation of teachers has been identified but that on inspection, this
framework has been informed by research in various disciplinary fields on which
education draws. Thus in order to plan appropriately for instruction, teachers would
need to understand the various theories of learning (coming from the field of
psychology) which offers insights into how learning takes place at different
developmental levels and how new information is processed in light of existing
knowledge, how it is stored in both short and long term memory and later retrieved.

In addition to understanding how learning occurs in students, “teachers must know the
subject matter they will teach and understand how to organize curriculum in light of
both students’ needs and the schools’ learning objectives” (Darling-Hammond and
Baratz-Snowden, 2005, p. 14). As both writers explained:
Within the classroom, beginning teachers must be able to plan and enact a set
of learning opportunities that provide access to key concepts and skills for all
students and help them develop along the various developmental
pathways…The capacity to plan instruction so that it meets the needs of
students and the demands of content – and therefore is purposeful and ‘adds
up’ to important, well-developed abilities for students - is not something that
most people know how to do intuitively or that they can learn from unguided
classroom experience (Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden, 2005, p.15).

If you consider the areas of knowledge that student teachers are expected to master in
order to be effective teachers, you will notice the influence of Shulman’s framework
which outlines the knowledge base for teaching. Thus, planning and enacting of
lessons for example, is predicated on the existence of a good content knowledge and
an understanding of the demands of the subject (its structure/nature) if a beginning
teacher is to provide access to key concepts and skills and help students develop along
the various developmental pathways as expressed by Darling-Hammond and Baratz-
Snoden (2005).

41
Activity 2.2
Section A
Read through the chapter by Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden included in your
course reader and make a note of their explanations of the knowledge that beginning
teachers need to acquire under the following three broad headings:
a) knowledge of learners and their development
b) knowledge of subject matter and curricular goals
c) knowledge of teaching
Section B
Read the article by Hiebert, Gallimore and Stigler included in your course reader.
Make a note of a – j to further enhance your understanding of what a knowledge base
for teaching means. Try to relate the arguments put forward by Hiebert et al, to
Shulman’s discussion of the ‘wisdom of practice’ as a source from which much can be
learnt about teaching.
a) It seems that even though teacher education programmes have made several
changes in their programmatic features, the issue of teachers’ use of data about
teaching derived from research is sparse. Hiebert et al make that observation
in the abstract of their article. Their contention is that classroom teachers do
not make sufficient use of archived research knowledge in their daily practice.
The authors therefore explore the possibility of building a knowledge base
from the practice of teaching and looked first at the nature of teachers’
practical knowledge before considering the ways in which practitioner
knowledge can be transformed into a professional knowledge base for
teaching
b) In view of the above, what observations did Hiebert et al, make about
classroom teachers’ use of research-based knowledge?
c) What efforts have they identified as having been made to increase the impact
of research for teachers?
d) How have they differentiated between researcher’s knowledge and teachers’
craft knowledge?
e) What are some of the features and limitations of practitioner’s knowledge?

42
 f) Explain the chief limitation of practitioner knowledge that has hindered it
from becoming a part of the knowledge base for teaching.
g) Explain the relevance of teacher collaboration to the development of a
professional knowledge base for teaching.
h) What was the nature of the authors’ discussion on (1) how to make teachers’
professional knowledge storable and shareable? (2) finding a mechanism for
verifying and improving professional knowledge?
i) What lessons did the authors draw from the Japanese example of lesson study
as one way by which practitioner knowledge can be transformed into
professional knowledge?
j) What are some of the reasons for optimism and scepticism with regards to the
possibility of using a system similar to the Japanese lesson study in the United
States of America? How feasible do you think such a system is to your context
(even with the necessary modifications that would be needed because of
cultural differences)?
Section C
What connections can you make between the points raised by Hiebert et al, about
practitioner knowledge and Marland’s article on teachers’ practical theories read in
Unit 1?

43
Activity 2.3 Analyzing Shulman’s Framework for a Knowledge Base for
Teaching
The main activity for this unit is to deconstruct Shulman’s arguments by looking at
how he framed his discussion on ‘Knowledge and Teaching’. In doing so, we will go
through three of the critical steps (eliminating the others which are not necessary for
this exercise) that can be followed when analyzing a text.

The three steps are as follow:

 To establish the purpose for writing the paper
 To establish what his main argument or thesis is
 To locate/find/identify the major sub points that support the main
argument/thesis
As we go through the steps, questions are posed along the way to get you to think
about the content of his discussion and how he contextualizes and lines up his
arguments in support of his main contention or central argument or thesis.

Establishing the Purpose for Writing

Every writer has a purpose for writing. It can be to contribute to a topic being debated
in the research arena by adding a new perspective or extending the argument, to
highlight an area that has not been discussed (that is to fill a gap in the literature on
the topic), and/or to show disagreement or approval. Depending on the writing style
of the author, they might begin with a statement of their purpose, or they might give
some background to the topic, highlighting what has been said, pointing to an angle
that has not been explored thereby locating a space in the discussion for them to make
their contribution. It is usual for the purpose to be stated before the main argument or
thesis is presented.
Question 1: Which approach mentioned above did Shulman take in his article?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

44
What background discussion did Shulman provide before he stated his purpose and
what function did those arguments serve? To begin our answer to this question we
should turn our attention to the portrait of experience that Shulman began with.
Question 2: What do you think was the purpose of this portrait?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 3: What is the content of the ‘Portrait of Expertise’ and how can it
inform research on the knowledge base for teaching?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second bit of background information that Shulman provides is that concerning
the ‘New Reforms’ put forward by groups such as the Holmes Group and the
Carnegie Task Force.
Question 4: What did Shulman have to say about the ‘New Reforms’ in terms of
the recurring themes in these reports?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

45
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 5: On what premise is the claim made that teaching deserves
professional status and what underlying beliefs are reflected in the reports
according to Shulman?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 6: What is Shulman’s critique of the rhetoric regarding the knowledge
base for teaching?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is after he has presented his two main discussion points that he presented his
purpose. The statement of purpose represents a writer’s statement of intent which
means outlining for their reader what they intend to do in the paper/book/article.
Shulman’s statement of purpose reads like this:
In this paper, I present an argument regarding the content, character, and

46
 sources for a knowledge base of teaching that suggests an answer to the
question of the intellectual, practical, and normative basis for the
professionalization of teaching (Shulman, 1987, p.4).

Establishing the Main Arguments

Having outlined his purpose, he went on to enumerate the questions to guide his
discussion. If the purpose of our exercise was to review or critique his work, it would
be these questions that we would use as our measuring stick to determine the extent to
which they were answered. The questions are as follow:
1) What are the sources of the knowledge base for teaching?
2) In what terms can these sources be conceptualized?
3) What are the implications for teaching policy and educational reforms?
Having identified the question, Shulman then tells us that his work has been
influenced by other eminent scholars but he also pointed to two other sources of
influences; to projects with which he was involved. Here too he provides additional
contextual information to establish why this topic on the knowledge base for teaching
has his attention
Question 7: How did the two projects identified by Shulman shape his approach
to proposing an outline of a knowledge base for teaching?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

47
Question 8: What assumptions, according to Shulman, do the new reform
proposals carry about the knowledge base for teaching? Identify the proposals
then the assumptions beside each.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In establishing the background against which they identify their purpose, writers are
also establishing a platform on which to place their main argument or thesis. Again,
depending on the style of the writer, that central and defining argument might be
stated explicitly using key words such as ‘this paper argues that; this paper suggest;
it is the contention/view of this paper’ or some other phrase that functions to cue you
into the writer’s perspective on the topic. It is not unusual however for the thesis or
central argument to be implicit in the work and for it to be either restated, if stated
explicitly earlier, or be given in the conclusion prefaced by a statement such as ‘This
paper has argued…’. The important thing is to try and figure out what the writer is
‘arguing about’.

Before presenting his main argument/thesis statement, Shulman outlines the activities
of the research community in their attempts to delineate a knowledge base for
teaching. Note the substance of this section of the discussion which provides the
immediate context for stating his main argument. You should now be in a position to
identify his main argument or thesis statement.

48
Question 9: What is Shulman’s main argument or thesis?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing the Major Sub-Points
The thesis statement provides us with a focus in following the rest of the discussion as
our purpose from here on is to identify the major sub-points which are presented in
support of the main argument/thesis and in keeping with the writer’s purpose. To
follow the rest of his discussion it is useful to pay attention to the subheadings which
are used to organize the paper.
Question 10: What view of teaching does Shulman presents and how does this
help us to understand what the nature of the teacher’s knowledge base should
be?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

49
Question 11
After reading through the four sources identified by Shulman try to capture with as
much brevity as you can the essence of his discussion of these sources in your own
words:
1.Scholarship in content discipline:-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Educational materials and structures:----------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Formal educational scholarship:-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

50
4. Wisdom of practice:---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 12
(i)Examine carefully the model of pedagogical reasoning presented by Shulman and
write your personal interpretation of what happens at each stage of the reasoning
process. Note in particular the case study of Colleen (ii) Review the characteristics of
expert teachers as described by Berliner (Refer to Unit 1) and relate these to the
descriptions of Nancy provided by Shulman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reflect on Shulman’s article and explain the extent to which it helps you to
understand the role of experience in learning to teach. How is the ‘portrait of
experience’ a reflection of the knowledge base which Shulman identified and a
demonstration of teaching as an act of pedagogical reasoning?

51
Summary
In this unit we:
 Examined the components of the knowledge base for teaching as outlined by
Lee Shulman
 Outlined the meaning of teaching as an act of pedagogical reasoning

52
 References

Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L., and LePage, P. (Eds.). (2005). Introduction. In

L. Darling-Hammond, & J. Bransford, J. Preparing teachers for a changing
world. What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 1-39). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L., and Baratz-Snowden, J. (2005). A Good teacher in every

classroom. Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Darling-Hammond L. (2005). Teaching as a profession; lessons in teacher preparation

and professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, (87) 3, 237- 241.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., and Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the
teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one?
Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3 -15.

Shulman, L. S. (2004). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. In L.

S. Shulman, The wisdom of practice. Essays on teaching, learning and
learning to teach, (pp. 189-215). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reforms.
Harvard Educational Review, (57)1, 1-22.

53
54