Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)

According to Teacher Education Curriculum Development Document (TECDD) of Farhangiyan University, teacher professional competencies include Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and General Knowledge (GK). Of these competencies, CK and PCK are specific to teachers of each major while PK and GK are common among all majors. This study was an attempt to explore the components that constitute high school EFL teachers’ CK and PCK through review of the related literature and investigation of high school EFL teachers (N=40) and teacher educators’ (N=20) perspectives. Based on the content analysis of these two sources which resulted in strong agreement, 20 items of CK and 17 items of PCK were identified. To validate the items and explore their underlying factors, data were collected from 445 high school EFL teachers and teacher educators using a questionnaire. Factor analysis with Varimax rotation was carried out on CK and PCK items separately. Regarding CK items, factor analysis gave way to the emergence of three factors, namely knowledge of the principles of language teaching methodology, knowledge of linguistics, and language proficiency. Regarding PCK items, factor analysis also gave way to three factors, namely knowledge of teaching and assessing the components of the curriculum, knowledge of developing, planning and managing language teaching, and knowledge of developing and evaluating instructional materials. The results of this study can be used in the design of high school EFL teacher education program.

This study, contrary to the conventional research on PCK, which attempted to enhance the teachers’ PCK and single out its driving factors, aims to use PCK as an outcome-based lens for evaluating Iranian EFL teachers’ programs. To this end, two current EFL teacher-education programs (i.e., State and Islamic Azad universities on the one hand and Farhnagian Teacher Education University on the other), each with its specific approach to developing EFL teachers’ PCK, were selected. Along with administering a glocally developed and validated PCK questionnaire among 263 student-teachers, this study ran a one-on-one semi-structured interview with 80 student-teachers to capture a crystal-clear evaluation of the outcomes the programs were to cultivate. The results of running qualitative and MANOVA analysis methods showed the student-teachers trained in the program with a more finely-tuned PCK instruction, which was accompanied by four continuous courses of teaching internship, were more cognizant of the role of PCK in their professional development and enjoyed a statistically significant index of developed PCK. Although there existed some similarities between these programs in terms of reviewing high school English course books, evaluation and assessment, and applying technology in teaching English, student-teachers in both programs were not completely aware of different components of PCK, including curriculum design and materials development, language teachers’ technological knowledge, and professional development. The results imply that content knowledge, PCK, and internship should be fettered together. The findings suggest that EFL teachers’ PCK can be applied as an effective lens for delving deeply into teacher training programs.