Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.

25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

Using Studio-Based Learning for Enhancing EFL Preservice Teachers Pedagogical Knowledge and Investigating the Effect on their Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Prof. So(eir I)ra(ei* +o(a*ed Selei*& ,r. -afaa .(*ed Na/ir +a(*oud0 1urriculu* and Instruction ,epart*ent& E23 Section& 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4& Eg4pt. 0 E-*ail of t(e corresponding aut(or8 wafaana/ir94a(oo.co* !stract :(is researc( utili/ed a studio-)ased learning classroo* to en(ance students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and in7estigated t(e effect of t(is treat*ent on t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. Participants of t(e researc( were pre-tested and di7ided into an e>peri*ental group (n?3! and a control group (n?3! . :(e researc( e*plo4ed a pre;post pedagogical =nowledge test and an anal4tic pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric. :(e e>peri*ent lasted for 2 *ont(s during w(ic( t(e e>peri*ental group *e*)ers were trained in a colla)orati7e studio classroo* on classroo* *anage*ent and lesson planning. :raditional lectures on t(e sa*e topics were deli7ered to t(e control group. 6pon t(e co*pletion of t(e e>peri*ent& t(e participants were post-tested. -(en statistical anal4sis was done& it was found t(at a significant difference e>isted )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental and control groups on t(e post- ad*inistration of )ot( t(e test and t(e ru)ric. +oreo7er& t(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* was found to )e of a large effect si/e on en(ancing t(e pedagogical =nowledge of t(e targeted topics of t(e e>peri*ental group. So& it was concluded t(at it (ad a greater effect si/e in en(ancing t(e targeted pedagogical =nowledge topics for t(e e>peri*ental group t(an t(e traditional lecturing for t(e control group. It see*ed also t(at a positi7e correlation e>isted )etween en(ancing students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and de7eloping t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. So& t(e researc( reco**ended t(at8 (1 .s students< pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge are not less i*portant t(an t(eir content =nowledge& t(e4 s(ould )e gi7en *ore attention in Eg4ptian E23 faculties of education. (2 ,e7eloping E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge 7ia studio)ased learning is wort(w(ile and reAuires *ore in7estigation. Ke"words# Pedagogical =nowledge& pedagogical content =nowledge& studio-)ased learning& E23 students;teac(ers< preparation. $% Introduction and Bac&ground In t(e age of =nowledge t(ere is a necessit4 for using our full potentials in learning and teac(ing Englis( as a 2oreign 3anguage (E23 w(ic( (as )eco*e t(e uni7ersall4 ac=nowledged *eans of =nowledge production. E23 teac(ing is a *ultifaceted acti7it4B it (as se7eral di*ensions& and it *ust rise to t(e c(allenge of its en(anced responsi)ilities8 2irst and fore*ost& t(e responsi)ilities are educational )ut also social (to teac( students to respect people of different cultural )ac=grounds& for e>a*ple . E23 teac(ing is t(us a co*ple> endea7our (Cu(l*an D Cne/e7ic& 2'13 . :(is (ig(lig(ts t(e i*portance of t(e E23 teac(ers and (ow far t(e4 are eAuipped for t(is crucial responsi)ilit4 towards t(eir societ4. In spite of t(is (eig(tened interest in teac(er preparation& according to Cari*i (2'11 & still not enoug( researc( is done on language teac(er cognition and *ental life and our understanding of (ow and w(4 teac(ers *a=e t(e decisions t(e4 *a=e and w(at forces are influential in t(e for*ation of t(eir professional identit4 is 4et to )e co*pleted. 2urt(er*ore& so*e teac(ers *a4 regard language teac(ing as a process of infor*ation trans*ission due to t(e ineffectual preparation t(e4 recei7ed. :(is is affir*ed )4 E(eng (2''F& p.7G B Hse7eral studies suggest t(at student teac(ers freAuentl4 start professional training wit( 7iews of teac(ing as telling and learning as re*e*)ering& w(ic( poses difficulties w(en t(e4 are encouraged to conduct co**unicati7e language teac(ing.I :(is raises a crucial Auestion8 (a7e Englis( teac(ers preparation progra*s c(anged to prepare future teac(ers to educate Englis( language learners effecti7el4J #<Neal et al. (2''!& p.1 pointed out t(at Ht(e role of teac(er preparation progra*s (as traditionall4 )een to prepare future teac(ers wit( content =nowledge& understanding of cogniti7e& ps4c(ological& and linguistic de7elop*ent& as well as t(e current and (istoric pedagogical t(eories and *et(odologiesI. :(is was later assured in ot(er words )4 Es(un D +ensa( (2'13& p.177 on sa4ing8 H=nowledge is at t(e core of teac(er education progra**es and t(e foundation of teac(ing and learning. :eac(ers< understanding of a su)Kect *atter and a)ilit4 to s(are infor*ation wit( students co*es fro* t(e foundations of =nowledge t(e4 (a7e gained. :(e =nowledge )ase for teac(ing defines a set of =nowledge necessar4 to )e an effecti7e teac(er.I .lt(oug( teac(er =nowledge (as )een a part of professional educators< studies for a long ti*e& it re*ained undefined. E7entuall4& in t(e *id !'s& it (as )een defined )4 S(ul*an (1F!7 . 5e descri)ed a professional

1'7

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

=nowledge )ase for teac(ing t(at included se7en specific categories of teac(er =nowledge (:a)le 1 . :a)le 1. :eac(ers@ Professional Cnowledge Lase 1ategories. :eac(er Cnowledge 1ategor4 ,efinition Su)Kect *atter content Cnowledge .cade*ic related =nowledge Su)Kect *atter =nowledge includes infor*ation or data and t(e structures& rules& and con7entions for organi/ing and using infor*ation or data. Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge :(e co*)ination of content and pedagog4 Infor*ation or data t(at (elps lead learners to an understanding would classif4 as pedagogical content =nowledge. :(is includes an4 wa4 of representing a su)Kect t(at *a=es it co*pre(ensi)le to ot(ers. 1urriculu* Cnowledge +aterials and progra*s t(at ser7e as Mtools of t(e tradeM for teac(ers Cnowledge of t(e curriculu* can )e considered 7ertical (wit(in a discipline area across grades & or (ori/ontal (wit(in grade and across disciplines . Neneral Pedagogical Cnowledge Principles of classroo* *anage*ent and organi/ation unrelated to su)Kect *atter Neneral pedagogical =nowledge is unrelated to a specific su)Kect *atter and can t(erefore )e i*ple*ented in a 7ast arra4 of classroo* settings. Cnowledge of 3earners Specific understanding of t(e learners@ c(aracteristics :(ese c(aracteristics can )e used to speciali/e and adKust instruction. Cnowledge of Educational 1onte>ts .n understanding of t(e classroo*& t(e go7ernance and financing of sc(ool districts& t(e c(aracter of sc(ool co**unities. Cnowledge of t(e )ig picture surrounding t(e classroo* (elps to infor* teac(ers a)out (ow t(e co**unit4 *a4 percei7e t(eir educational actions. :(is =nowledge of educational conte>ts *a4 also infor* teac(ers a)out (ow to proceed in t(e classroo* in relation to sc(ool& co**unit4& and state con7entions& laws& and rules. Cnowledge of Educational Ends :(e purposes and 7alues of education as well as t(eir p(ilosop(ical and (istorical grounds .n understanding of t(e purposes and 7alues of education will (elp teac(ers *oti7ate learners. .dopted fro* S(ul*an& 3. (1F!7& p.! . Cnowledge and teac(ing8 2oundations of t(e new refor*. .s clarified in (:a)le 1 & se7en categories of teac(er =nowledge were defined )4 S(ul*an (1F!7 . 5owe7er& literature a)out teac(ers< =nowledge (as pointed out t(e i*portance of de7eloping onl4 t(ree *ain categories of teac(ers< =nowledge8 content =nowledge (1C & generic instructional *et(ods or pedagogical =nowledge (PC & and pedagogical content =nowledge (P1C . :(is was detected and declared )4 *an4 researc(ers suc( as 1ogill (2''! and COnig D Llo*e=e (2'12 . 1orrespondingl4& Pa(i*i (2''!& p.% stated t(at language teac(er educators (a7e specified t(e =nowledge;co*petenc4 )ase of E23 teac(er education progra*s and (a7e proposed a tripartite including8 =nowledge of language8 content =nowledge& =nowledge of t(e su)Kect *atter& Englis( language =nowledge of science of teac(ing and pedagog48 pedagogical =nowledge& =nowledge of generic teac(ing strategies& )eliefs& and practicesB along wit( support =nowledge& t(e =nowledge of t(e 7arious disciplines t(at would enric( teac(ers< approac( to t(e teac(ing and learning of Englis( =nowledge;co*petenc4 of teac(ing in realit48 pedagogical content =nowledge& t(e speciali/ed =nowledge of (ow to represent content =nowledge in t(e classroo* and (ow students co*e to understand t(e su)Kect *atter in t(e conte>t of real teac(ingB t(e students< pro)le*s and wa4s to o7erco*e t(ose pro)le*s )4 considering all 7aria)les related to t(eir learning (teac(ing *aterials& assess*ent procedures& parents& etc. So*e researc(ers )elie7ed t(at t(ese t(ree categories are interrelated to eac( ot(er to guarantee teac(ers< effecti7e transfor*ation of =nowledge to learners (#/den& 2''!B 3iu& 2'13 . Lut (ow t(ese categories are incorporated or correlated wit( eac( ot(ers is still a Auestion t(at necessitates e*pirical researc(. In t(is respect& for t(e )est of t(e =nowledge of t(e researc(ers of t(e present stud4& 7er4 s*all nu*)er of studies atte*pted to in7estigate t(is assu*ed correlation a*ong t(ese categoriesB (3ee& 2''2B 2renc(& 2''5B #/den& 2''! . .ccordingl4& in7estigating t(is correlation& if an4& (as )eco*e one of t(e ai*s of t(e current researc(. In t(e last two decades& a great deal of researc( (as )een conducted to e>plore pedagogical =nowledge and 1'!

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

pedagogical content =nowledge in general education& *at(e*atics& science& second ;foreign language education& and applied linguistics fields (S(ul*an& 1F!7B ,riel et al.& 1FF!B +eiKer &$erloop D LeiKard& 2''1B S*it(& 2''1B Lorg& 2''3B Cwong& 2''7B Ladawi& 2''FB Ea@/a@& 2'11B COnig D Llo*e=e& 2'12B 3oug(ran& 2'12B 1(o4 et al. & 2'13 . .lt(oug( t(ese studies (a7e )een significant in furt(ering researc(ers< understanding of teac(ers< practical =nowledge& it is assured )4 .rQoRul (2''7 and 3iu (2'13 t(at t(ere is still a lac= of researc( particularl4 in t(e fields of applied linguistics and second;foreign language education. :(us& teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge )ase in teac(ing Englis( to spea=ers of ot(er languages (:ES#3 is still an understudied area. 5ence& t(e present researc( atte*pted to fill t(is gap t(roug( using a studio-)ased learning classroo* to en(ance preser7ice E23 Eg4ptian teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge. +oreo7er& t(e present researc( went furt(er to in7estigate w(et(er t(e pedagogical content =nowledge of t(ese preser7ice teac(ers was affected t(roug( assessing t(eir teac(ing perfor*ance in t(e field practice. :(erefore& t(e following t(ree sections of t(e present researc( paper present literature re7iew for *ain features of teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge& pedagogical content =nowledge& and studio-)ased learning. :(e researc(ers of t(e current researc( (ope t(at )4 atte*pting t(is understudied area of teac(ers< professional de7elop*ent& t(eir researc( would elicit furt(er e*pirical researc( )ased on it. 1.1. Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) :eac(er<s pedagogical =nowledge )ase was defined )4 +ulloc= (2''G& p.%! as t(e Haccu*ulated =nowledge a)out t(e act of teac(ing& including goals& procedures& and strategies t(at for* t(e )asis for w(at teac(ers do in classroo*I. It was also e>plained )4 $alencia (2''F as t(e general set of *et(odologies and strategies t(at t(e teac(er needs in order to carr4 out t(e teac(ing acti7it4. .lso& 5o==aido :eac(ers of Englis( ProKect (5:EP (2''2 stated t(at8 H:(e researc( a)out t(e role of t(e teac(er in t(e instructional process 4ielded a profile of (ow co*ple> classroo* teac(ing is wit( (undreds of decisions )eing *ade )4 t(e teac(er eac( *inute. 2urt(er researc( identified (ow *uc( pedagogical =nowledge ca*e to )ear on eac( decision. Pesearc( literature defines t(is as t(e =nowledge of teac(ing and learning t(eories& principles& and processes t(at cut across disciplines. It is also t(e s=ill in t(e use of teac(ing *et(ods and strategies t(at are not su)Kect-specific.I Ladawi (2''F& p.15 assured t(at Hpedagogical =nowledge refers to teac(ers@ =nowledge a)out t(e )asic teac(ing;learning *atters suc( as learning t(eories& teac(ing approac(es& curriculu* designs& e7aluation tec(niAues& and rele7ant *anagerial issues.I In a *ore detailed description of pedagogical =nowledge& 3en(art (2'1' descri)ed it as an4 t(eor4 or )elief a)out teac(ing and t(e process of learning t(at a teac(er possesses t(at influences t(at teac(er@s teac(ing. 5e furt(er ela)orated t(at t(is process includes t(e a)ilit4 to plan and prepare *aterialsB ti*e and classroo* *anage*ent s=illsB i*ple*entation& pro)le* sol7ing& and teac(ing strategiesB Auestioning tec(niAuesB and assess*ent. .s suggested )4 +ulloc= (2''G & t(e stud4 of t(is t4pe of =nowledge founded on t(e a)o7e conceptuali/ation (as its roots in t(e )elief t(at all t(e practices carried out )4 teac(ers in t(e classroo* are acco*panied )4 so*e for* of )ac=ground t(in=ing. +oreo7er& it is clai*ed t(at t(e sources of t(is t4pe of =nowledge co*e fro* p(ilosop(4& pedagog4& ps4c(olog4& and researc( interested in capturing a general fra*ewor= of teac(ing. 5owe7er& t(ere (as )een an e>pansion in regards to t(e sources w(ic( feed in general pedagog4 (Lanegas& 2'12 . .ccording to COnig D Llo*e=e (2'12 & generic t(eories and *et(ods of instruction and learning as well as of classroo* *anage*ent can )e defined as essential parts of general pedagogical =nowledge. :(e4 also added t(at S(ul*an (1F!7 stated t(at general pedagogical =nowledge in7ol7es )road principles and strategies of classroo* *anage*ent and organi/ation t(at appear to transcend su)Kect *atter as well as =nowledge a)out learners and learning& assess*ent& and educational conte>ts and purposes. So& it could )e inferred t(at an effecti7e teac(er *ust de*onstrate =nowledge of t(e su)Kect )eing taug(t and =nowledge of pedagog4. Effecti7e teac(ers are distinguis(ed )4 :(e National Loard for Professional :eac(ing Standards (1FF! as Hteac(ers w(o *aster pedagogical =nowledge used to con7e4 and re7eal su)Kect *atter to students. :(e4 are aware of t(e preconceptions and )ac=ground =nowledge t(at students t4picall4 )ring to eac( su)Kect and of strategies and instructional *aterials t(at can )e of assistance. In addition& t(e4 understand and sol7e t(e possi)le difficulties li=el4 to arise in t(e classroo* and *odif4 t(eir practice accordingl4. :(eir instructional repertoire allows t(e* to create *ultiple pat(s to =nowledge& in general& and to t(e su)Kects t(e4 teac(& in particular.I :(is was later assured )4 t(e :eac(er Education ,one ,ifferentl4 ProKect (2'1' & as it declared t(at pedagogical =nowledge is a =e4 to successful teac(ing. It also added t(at effecti7e *entoring for teac(ing enco*passes articulation a)out pedagog4 w(ic( reAuires ti*eta)ling& preparation& teac(ing strategies& and classroo* *anage*ent towards i*ple*enting practice and& ot(er aspects suc( as& de7eloping Auestioning s=ills& assisting in pro)le* sol7ing and pro7iding infor*ation and guidance for assess*ent. So& teac(er<s pedagogical =nowledge can )e su)su*ed into two categories8 *anage*ent of learning and *anage*ent of resources (:sui& 2''3 . .ccording to ./*a D :ale)ineKad (2'12& p23-2% & alt(oug(

1'F

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

*anage*ent of learning pri*aril4 in7ol7es classroo* *anage*ent& it is also concerned wit( out-of-classroo* *anage*ent. 1lassroo* *anage*ent refers to aspects of classroo* organi/ation& for e>a*ple& using pair or group wor=& *aintaining discipline& and dealing wit( dail4 )usiness (e.g.& collecting assign*ents . #ut-of-class *anage*ent refers to w(at teac(ers do )efore or after class to facilitate students< learning. Pe7iew of literature suggested t(at t(ere are *an4 factors contri)uting to )eginning teac(ers< de7elop*ent of pedagogical =nowledge and s=ills. 5owe7er& lesson planning and classroo* *anage*ent were areas t(at percei7ed as i*portant )4 researc(ers and c(allenging )4 )eginning teac(ers (1(o4 et al.& 2'13 . So& t(e *aKor concerns of t(e present researc( are t(e areas of lesson planning and classroo* *anage*ent. #7er t(e last decade& t(ere (a7e )een a considera)le nu*)er of teac(er de7elop*ent researc(es t(at in7estigated teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge in a 7ariet4 of areas of stud4. 5owe7er& t(ere (as )een an ac=nowledge*ent of t(e fact t(at in t(e field of teac(ing Englis( as a foreign language& teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge )ase is an area w(ic( (as )een neglected in t(e literature (Ping& 2''7 and Cari*i& 2'11 . :(is is *anifested )4 t(e s*all nu*)er of studies t(at tac=led t(is areaB Ladawi& 2''FB Cari*i& 2'11B ./*a D :ale)ineKad &2'12B 3iu &2'13B . :(us& :E23;:ES3 teac(er cognition is relati7el4 a new field of stud4. 1.2 Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) 1oining t(e ter*& pedagogical content =nowledge (P1C & is crucial for effecti7e teac(ing as it relates to t(e capa)ilit4 to represent and for*ulate content in a particular discipline in wa4s t(at are understanda)le to students (3in et al.& 2'12 . :(us& pedagogical content =nowledge is t(at =ind of teac(ing =nowledge w(ic( *a=es a distinction )etween t(e e>pert teac(er in a su)Kect area and t(e su)Kect e>pert w(o *asters onl4 t(e content =nowledge. 3ee (2''2 pointed out t(at general pedagogical =nowledge is )road and unattac(ed to specific =nowledge and it includes classroo* *anage*ent tec(niAues and instructional t(eories& )ut does not include t(e particular teac(ing strategies t(at co*prise instruction strategies. Pedagogical content =nowledge represents an effort to capture t(e Minstruction strategiesM teac(ers use w(en t(e4 teac( specific su)Kect *atter content. In addition& different ter*s are now used for t(e description of teac(ers< pedagogical content =nowledge or P1C& regarded teac(er =nowledge as going )e4ond w(at t(e training or t(e disciplinar4 content (as offered and co*prised of a Aualitati7el4 different )od4 of =nowledge w(ic( also includes e>perience (./*a D :ale)ineKad& 2'12 . -(ereas a teac(er@s =nowledge of t(e su)Kect area (content =nowledge *a4 )e personal and applied in *an4 personal situations and e>periences& t(ese e>periences in and of t(e*sel7es do not necessaril4 foster understanding of su)Kect or concepts for students. In ot(er words& effecti7e teac(ers cannot si*pl4 (a7e an intuiti7e or personal understanding of a particular concept& principle& or t(eor4. Pat(er& in order to foster understanding& t(e4 *ust t(e*sel7es understand wa4s of representing t(e concepts for students w(ic( is represented in t(e ter* P1C (5:EP ProKect& 2''2 . Coe(ler (2'11 finds t(at pedagogical content =nowledge is different fro* t(e =nowledge of a disciplinar4 e>pert and also fro* t(e general pedagogical =nowledge s(ared )4 teac(ers across disciplines. P1C is concerned wit( t(e representation and for*ulation of concepts& pedagogical tec(niAues& =nowledge of w(at *a=es concepts difficult or eas4 to learn& =nowledge of students< prior =nowledge& and t(eories of episte*olog4. It also in7ol7es =nowledge of teac(ing strategies t(at incorporate appropriate conceptual representations to address learner difficulties and *isconceptions and foster *eaningful understanding. .s for t(e ele*ents included in P1C& *ost researc(ers agreed on S(ul*an<s two =e4 ele*entsSt(at is& =nowledge of representations of su)Kect *atter and understanding of specific learning difficulties and student conceptions. In addition& t(ere appears to )e agree*ent on t(e nature of P1C. 2irst& as P1C refers to particular topics& it is to )e discerned fro* =nowledge of pedagog4& of educational purposes& and of learner c(aracteristics in a general sense. Second& )ecause P1C concerns t(e teac(ing of particular topics& it *a4 turn out to differ considera)l4 fro* su)Kect-*atter =nowledge )4 itself (,riel et al.& 1FF! . S(ul*an (1F!7 and $eal D +aCinster (1FFF stated t(at P1C included t(ose special attri)utes an effecti7e teac(er possessed t(at (elped (i*;(er guide a student to understand content in a *anner t(at was personall4 *eaningful. S(ul*an (1F!7 also wrote t(at P1C included Man understanding of (ow particular topics& pro)le*s& or issues are organi/ed& presented& and adapted to t(e di7erse interests and a)ilities of learners& and presented for instructionM (1F!7& p. ! . In t(is regard& Coe(ler (2'11 argued t(at (a7ing =nowledge of su)Kect *atter and general pedagogical strategies& t(oug( necessar4& were not sufficient for capturing t(e =nowledge of good teac(ers. Specificall4& )eing a teac(er wit( pedagogical =nowledge or Kust )eing a)le to spea= t(e language 4ou teac( (wit( content or su)Kect =nowledge are not sufficient for )eing an effecti7e teac(er of Englis(. Lut a teac(er of a su)Kect *ust also )e a)le to appl4 =nowledge of (ow to teac( specific aspects of Englis( to a specific group. :(is is w(at is called P1C. 6nfortunatel4& in *ost countries& E23;ES3 students;teac(ers spend *ost of t(eir ti*es stud4ing arts of t(e Englis( language& not (ow to teac( t(e language. :(is is assured )4 E(eng (2''F& p.7G B

11'

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

HIt is necessar4 to =now (ow student teac(ers 7iew t(e i*portance of Englis( su)Kect *atter as opposed to pedagogical =nowledge. Students w(o *aKor in Englis( spend *uc( *ore ti*e on t(e course stud4ing t(e language t(an on (ow to teac( it. E23 students wit( four 4ears< education in nor*al uni7ersities in 1(ina& for e>a*ple& spend *aKorit4 of t(eir ti*e learning language& wit( onl4 two courses of teac(ing pedagog4 and educational ps4c(olog4 two (ours a wee= for 1! wee=s (a ter* respecti7el4 and anot(er eig(t wee=s< teac(ing practice. :(e Tinferior status< of pedagogical =nowledge a*ong foreign language students< courses will dou)tlessl4 influence pre-ser7ice teac(ers< )elief towards pedagogical =nowledge& w(ic( will also affect t(eir teac(ing practice. So*e studies of teac(er )eliefs a)out su)Kect (a7e also argued t(at teac(ers can (a7e 7er4 different 7iews of t(eir su)Kect under different conte>tsI :(us& t(e researc(ers of t(e current stud4 agree wit( w(at was pointed out )4 Lorg (2''F and assured )4 La=er D +urp(4 (2'11 B t(e 7alue of an4 stud4 t(at fails to )ridge t(e crucial lin= )etween teac(er cognition and teac(ing practice is Auestioned. .nd t(at t(e *ain o)Kecti7e of teac(er cognition researc( is to generate a deeper understanding of t(e reasoning t(at underpins w(at teac(ers do in classroo*s. Suc( researc( reAuires e>ploration of connections )etween teac(ers< =nowledge& )eliefs& and t(eir actual classroo* )e(a7iors. 1.3 Studio-Based Learning: Definitions as!ects and rationale +ora D +ogile7s=4 (2'13 argued t(at teac(ers operate in a co*ple> and d4na*ic do*ainB t(e )ac=ground =nowledge and practices of t(eir students constantl4 c(ange& t(e tec(nologies and resources at t(eir disposal are perpetuall4 e7ol7ing& and t(e guidance and directi7es t(e4 recei7e are freAuentl4 updated. :(is calls for a repositioning of educational professionals8 fro* con7e4ors of =nowledge to designers of learning. .ccording to +iller (2''!& p.2 & Ha stud4 fro* t(e National :raining 3a)oratories in (2''' found t(at onl4 a)out 5 percent of t(e infor*ation deli7ered t(roug( lecture was retained. 1o*pare t(at wit( retention rates at 5' percent for discussion group and 7' percent for practice )4 doing. E7en (ig(er& at !' percent& was retention )4 students teac(ing ot(ersI. +iller went on to note t(at HIt is not w(at t(e student =nowsB it is w(at t(e4 can do wit( w(at t(e4 =now. -it( group wor=& 4ou (a7e a lot of social nor*ing going on. Uou do not (a7e t(e *is)e(a7iors or distractions 4ou *ig(t (a7e wit( instructional teac(ing. .ccordingl4& t(e design of learning spaces s(ould increase le7els of engage*ent& foster acti7e learning and teac(ing& and support t(e learning goals of (ig(er education institutions. 5owe7er& lecture continues to )e t(e *ost pre7alent teac(ing *ode in secondar4 and (ig(er education& despite o7erw(el*ing e7idence t(at it produces t(e lowest degree of retention for *ost learners (Sousa& 2'11 . :(e +aga/ine of -or=place Pesearc(& Insig(t& and :rends (2'1' stated t(at colleges s(are *an4 co**on pro)le*s8 classroo*s were )uilt for lectures& not learning 7er4 li*ited fle>i)ilit4 inside classroo*s student *o7e*ent is li*ited (fi>ed ta)let ar*s& c(airs and ta)les wit(out casters& etc. interaction )etween students and instructors is constrained )4 space and furniture tec(nolog4 is poorl4 integrated into t(e classroo* support for colla)orati7e learning is inconsistent or none>istent It could )e inferred fro* t(e a)o7e t(at t(e design of classroo*s s(ould )e fle>i)le enoug( to t(e e>tent t(at allows t(e teac(ers and learners to opt for t(e teac(ing st4les and acti7ities t(e4 find necessar4 in order to acco*plis( t(eir learning o)Kecti7es. .ccording to 3ei)off (2'1' B HIn contrast to t(e traditional lecture-oriented roo*& t(is increasingl4 popular =ind of space& =nown as a Mstudio classroo*&M e*p(asi/es group learning and colla)oration. In studio teac(ing& t(e instructor ser7es as a facilitator& )4 (anding out proKects& answering Auestions& pro7iding resources& and *o7ing around t(e roo* as necessar4. Students wor= in groups to learn& and acti7ities are structured to e*p(asi/e colla)orati7e& acti7e& student-)ased learning. -(ile t(e pedagog4 is not new& t(e need to create learning spaces to *eet t(e 7er4 specific needs of studio teac(ing (as caused a dra*atic re-t(in=ing a)out (ow to design new classroo*s. :(ese new =inds of spaces will not and s(ould not replace all traditional classroo*s& as )ot( configurations are necessar4 to *eet t(e wide range of learning acti7ities.I 2urt(er*ore& an i*portant feature of studio class is t(at students (a7e *ore control and responsi)ilit4 for outco*es t(an in traditional class. 3ecturers and :eac(ing .ssistants (:.s are *entors& acting as learning guides& pro7iding t(e learning en7iron*ent and *aterials needed for students to create t(eir own learning. 3ecturers (elp students to start on proKects and are on (and as resources for students to use (Per=ins& 2''5 . (See ta)le 2

111

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

+eeting :i*es 3a) E>ercises Nroup .cti7ities 3ecturer<s .ut(orit4& lecturer 3earning guide& class coordinator& a resource for Pole students w(en needed 3ecturer<s .)out 3 contact (ours per wee=B .)out G contact (ours per wee=B )ot( studio and :i*e generall4 onl4 in lecture sections lecture acti7ities :.s< Pole .ssist lecturers .id lecturer& acts as student resource& :.s< Pole .)out 3 contact (ours per wee=B .)out F contact (ours per wee=B )ot( .dopted fro* No= D :ur=e4 (2'11& p.52 . Perceptions of t(e Students toward Studio P(4sics. In t(e sa*e respect& Este4 (2'1'& p.1G pro7ided sur7e4 results on (is studio classroo* use descri)ing H(ow co*forta)le (is students were in doing t(e peer re7iew acti7itiesB w(et(er it pro*oted self-reflection& as well as (ow it affected t(eir sense of co**unit4& co*petition& *oti7ation& class participation& le7el of e>cite*ent& and presentation confidence.I :(e ter* Studio-Lased 3earning (SL3 is *eant to descri)e a general approac( to interaction wit( students t(at is instructor facilitated& student centered& and (ands on. -(en an audience is as=ed to descri)e w(at t(e4 do in a lecture (all& t(e4 in7aria)l4 suggest acti7ities suc( as8 listen& ta=e notes& c(at& sleep& read& and so on. -(en as=ed w(at t(e4 t(in= *ig(t (appen in a studio t(e4 usuall4 suggest8 paint& draw& sculpt& write& and ot(er acti7e pursuits. :(e difference is clear. :(e focus in a lecture (all is on t(e wor= of t(e instructor. :(e focus in a studio is on t(e wor= done )4 t(e student. :(at is indeed t(e =e4 distinction (-ilson D Jennings& 2''' . 5ence& t(e studio-)ased learning (SL3 *odel ai*s to pro*ote learning in a social and colla)orati7e conte>t (Nara4anan et al.& 2'12 . +oreo7er& +4neni (2''F defined studio-)ased learning (SL3 as an instructional tec(niAue t(at e*p(asi/es colla)orati7e& design-oriented learning. 5e also added t(at t(is pedagog4 is not newB it dates )ac= to old arc(itectural sc(ools w(ere t(e4 (a7e practiced t(is in t(e for* of design studios w(ere (a students created t(eir own wor= spaces& () students wor=ed in groups to sol7e pro)le*s& and (c students presented t(eir solutions to t(e class to o)tain feed)ac= fro* t(eir instructors and also fro* t(eir peers. .ccording to t(e Science Education Pesource 1entre (2''7 & studio teac(ing is an approac( to teac(ing t(at can )e used to replace t(e standard lecture approac(. It is )ased on sound pedagogical principles& is 7er4 fle>i)le& is popular wit( students& and leads to superior learning in *ost instances. 2urt(er*ore& +onson et al. (2''7 found t(at studio-)ased learning is a s(ared learning en7iron*ent in w(ic( a*)iguous pro)le*s are addressed iterati7el4 t(roug( *ulti-*odal anal4sis& proposition& and critiAue. :(is refers to t(e nature of discursi7e colla)oration )etween students in t(eir learning& as well as t(e p(4sical space in w(ic( t(at learning occurs. Essential in t(e definition of SL3 is t(e ter* Mstudio&M w(ic( *eans a dedicated& colla)orati7e wor= space in w(ic( no7ices colla)orate wit( e>perts. ,escri)ing studio courses& -ilson D Jennings (2''' stated t(at t(e studio classroo* is *ainl4 )ased on a learning en7iron*ent w(ic( was designed to facilitate students< a)ilit4 to interact wit( one anot(er& wit( t(e lecturer& and wit( t(e course *aterial during t(eir ti*e in lecture. So& t(e4 present )etter interacti7e learning en7iron*ents for students and a )etter teac(ing en7iron*ent for facult4. .lso& 1enna*o et al. (2'11& p.13 descri)ed t(e studio classroo*& as co**onl4 used in design-related curricula suc( as arc(itecture& landscape arc(itecture& interior design& and industrial design& consists of a space w(ere students are assigned indi7idual des=s t(at are& in *ost cases& a7aila)le to t(e* at all ti*es. In t(eir studio classes& students are presented wit( a design pro)le*& wor= indi7iduall4 or in groups to sol7e it& and su)Kect t(eir wor= to re7iews during for*al and infor*al critiAues. No= D :ur=e4 (2'11 declared t(at *an4 lecturers (a7e successfull4 used cooperati7e learning in t(eir classroo*sB studio teac(ing is a logical e>tension of t(at approac(. Studio classroo*s (a7e *an4 different *anifestations )ut all s(are co**on ele*ents. :(e4 in7ol7e longer& fewer& class sessions wit( focused& intense& student acti7it4. :a)les are arranged so students face eac( ot(er instead of t(e front of t(e classroo*. .lso& Lurroug(s (2''F e>plained t(at t(e p(4sical space of a studio pro7ides a dedicated& colla)orati7e wor=space w(ere students colla)orate wit( e>perts. In SL3& learners tal= to eac( ot(er as *uc( as or *ore t(an t(e teac(er tal=s to t(e learners. :(e discourse is 7iewed as part of t(e proposal *a=ing or design process. In addition& t(e 1entre for :eac(ing E>cellence& 1ornell 6ni7ersit4 (2'13 found out t(at studio classroo*s usuall4 (a7e following aspects8 112

:a)le 28 1o*parison of a Studio 1lass wit( a :raditional 1lass 2eatures :raditional 1lass Studio 1lass :wo or t(ree 5' or F'-*inute lectures and :wo ti*es per wee= in 5' *in for lectureB two one la) per wee= ti*es per wee= in F' *in for studio 1o*pletel4 separate fro* lectureB Not separated fro* studioB generall4 group generall4 indi7idual acti7ities acti7ities So*eti*es in la) sessions :(e focus of t(e studio

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

E>periential learning& or learning )4 doing. 3ectures are not separate& )ut integrated wit(in a studio session ( lectures are s(orter& around 2' *inutes . Students acting as acti7e learners wit( instructors as resources. :eac(er-student and student-student colla)orations. .ssessing student wor= )ased on )ot( t(e process of designing artifacts and presentation of t(e final product. Peflection on feed)ac= on t(e design process and final product is an i*portant part of learning. In a studio classroo*& t(ere are *an4 wa4s in w(ic( teac(ers can design instruction to pro*ote learning wit( ot(ers. Students can discuss concepts in pairs or groups and s(are w(at t(e4 understand wit( t(e rest of t(e class. :(e4 can de7elop argu*ents and de)ate t(e*. :(e4 can role-pla4 or di7ide up *aterials a)out a gi7en topic and t(en teac( ot(ers a)out t(eir piece. :oget(er& students and t(e teac(er can use a studio for*at in w(ic( se7eral students wor= t(roug( a gi7en issue& tal=ing t(roug( t(eir t(in=ing process w(ile t(e ot(ers critiAue and co**ent (Saa7edra D #pfer& 2'12 . 5iggins et al. (2''F )elie7e t(at properl4 conceptualised and deli7ered& studios can pro7ide students wit( confidence& self- estee*& su)stanti7e =nowledge a)out a topic and a range of generic s=ills including co**unications s=ills& creati7e pro)le* sol7ing and critical t(in=ing. :(us& studio classroo*s (a7e a (uge nu*)er of )enefits )ot( for teac(ers and learners. :eac(ing Natewa4 (2'13 stated t(e *ost i*portant of t(ese )enefits8 HStudio-)ased learning can )e (ig(l4 engaging for students& ena)ling t(e* to de7elop capa)ilities in a (olistic and aut(entic wa4. It situates learning in Auasi-professional acti7ities t(at ena)le students to integrate& reflect on and appl4 t(eir learning& and t(ere)4 learn *ore deepl4 (Ni))s& 1FF2 . -e now recognise colla)oration as )eing i*portant to creati7it4 in a professional conte>t& and see creati7it4 as )eing enacted and 7alued as *uc( in a particular disciplinar4 conte>t as in an interdisciplinar4 one (1si=s/ent*i(al4i& 1FFG . Studio-)ased assess*ent allows for learning to )e enric(ed )4 colla)oration and tea*-wor=.I Studio-)ased learning also encourages ris=-ta=ing and curiosit4& and suc( generic s=ills as co**unication& pro)le*-sol7ing& tea*-wor=& proKect *anage*ent and independent learning. Studio-)ased teac(ing focuses on pro)le*;proKect wor= and e>peri*entation in a (ands-on studio en7iron*ent (Posen& 2'13 . +oreo7er& Leic(ner D Saul (2''3 stated t(at after using t(e studio-)ased learning en7iron*ent& t(eir students< a)ilities to sol7e pro)le*s was i*pro7ed& conceptual understanding was increased& attitudes were i*pro7ed& and failure rates were drasticall4 reduced. Eollars et al. (2'12 (a7e (ig(lig(ted t(at studio- )ased learning offers *an4 ad7antages for student instructionB in addition to )eing an acti7e learning tec(niAue t(e construct-present-critiAue-respond c4cle wit(in SL3 addresses all si> cogniti7e le7els of Lloo*<s ta>ono*4. .n i*pedi*ent to t(e incorporation of SL3 in a t4pical class is t(e ti*e constraint i*posed )4 t(e usual one-(our long ti*e )loc= for *ost classes. .lso& Los*an et al. (2'12 agree wit( :uc=er D Pollo (2''5 t(at studios are in7alua)le learning and teac(ing conte>ts in *an4 creati7e discipline areas. .s a learning and teac(ing approac(& studios< *ain 7alue co*es fro* s(ifting t(e role of t(e student fro* passi7e recei7er of infor*ation to an acti7e and engaged learner. Lesides& t(e studio en7iron*ent is full of potential and possi)ilit4& )ut onl4 if t(e facult4 *e*)er is a)le to effecti7el4 engage wit( t(e students in t(at en7iron*ent to *a=e t(e learning e>perience so*et(ing *ore and different t(an could )e ac(ie7ed in a t4pical lecture class ( 5err*ann& 2'12 . So& studio teac(ing is not Kust anot(er =ind of classroo* acti7it4. It is not a la) session& nor is it a series of class proKects. It is an approac( to teac(ing and learning t(at gets students acti7el4 engaged in directing t(eir own learning. :(e instructor is not t(e focus of t(e class& as in traditional classroo*s (:(e Science Education Pesource 1entre& 2''! . ,oc(ert4D Lrown (2''1 and :(e Science Education Pesource 1entre (2''7 specified so*e c(aracteristics of t(e studio classroo*B Students wor= in groups to learn. .cti7ities generall4 e*p(asi/e colla)orati7e and cooperati7e learning. :(e instructors get students going on proKects and are on (and as resources. Pesponsi)ilit4 for learning is placed on t(e students. 1lass acti7ities )uild on eac( ot(er& pro7iding a d4na*ic and integrated learning en7iron*ent t(at e*p(asi/es personal intellectual de7elop*ent as well as content learning. ProKects can include discussions& de)ates& presentations& paper and pencil e>ercises& co*puter proKects& wor= wit( sa*ples& or an4 of a nu*)er of ot(er t(ings. ProKects *a4 )e *ultifaceted and can ta=e *ore t(an one class session.

113

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

Instructors pro7ide infor*ation& )4 wa4 of s(ort lectures& w(en needed or on de*and& )ut full-lengt( lectures are rare. Students plan and de7elop t(eir own learning proKects. Students appl4 t(e s=ills and =nowledge learned in concurrent su)Kects to t(e specific real life scenarios pro7ided )4 t(e proKects. Students wor= colla)orati7el4 wit( ot(er learners to de7elop =nowledge and understanding. Students wor= as *entors and coac(es. .lt(oug( t(e studio classroo* see*s to (a7e all t(ese pro*ising aspects and )enefits& few studies (a7e in7estigated its effect on t(e area of teac(ers< professional de7elop*ent suc( as t(e studies of Lrocato D 2ran/ 2''3B Lurroug(s et al.& 2''F and +at(ews& 2'1'. +ost of t(e researc( used it as a *eans to de7elop design& Englis(& arc(itecture& and science s=ills in a 7ariet4 of do*ains suc( as t(e studies of -ilson& 1FF7B Per=ins& 2''5B -(ite& 2''5B Nottfried et al.& 2''7B Este4& 2'1'B +usgra7e D Price& 2'1'B No= D :ur=e4& 2'11 and Es(un D #sei-Po=u& 2'13. 5ence& t(e researc(ers of t(e present researc( were *oti7ated to use a studio-)ased learning classroo* as t(e independent 7aria)le of t(is researc( to en(ance preser7ice teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and in7estigate t(e effect of t(is treat*ent on t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. '% Conte(t of the Pro!le) :(e *ain declared goal of E23 teac(er preparation progra*s at faculties of education in Eg4pt is de7eloping t(e =nowledge of t(eir students;teac(ersB content =nowledge& pedagogical =nowledge& and pedagogical content =nowledge. 5owe7er& in spite of t(eir stressed i*portance& pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge are not full4 de7eloped for students;teac(ers at t(e 2acult4 of Education in 5elwan 6ni7ersit4. :(is was apparentl4 affecting t(eir teac(ing perfor*ance and attain*ent of t(e o)Kecti7es of t(e su)Kect ad7ersel4 as was *anifested )4 a nu*)er of Eg4ptian pri7ate language sc(ools< refusal to e*plo4 *an4 of t(ose teac(ers. +oreo7er& )eing a part in students; teac(ers< trainers staff at t(e ,epart*ent of 1urriculu* and Instruction at t(e 2acult4 of Education in 5elwan 6ni7ersit4& t(e researc(ers too= part in training 7arious groups of E23 students;teac(ers. :(e researc(ers o)ser7ed t(at *ost of t(e second and t(ird 4ear students suffered fro* pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge-related pro)le*s t(at were o)7ious in t(eir lesson plans and teac(ing perfor*ance during t(e teac(ing practicu*. 1onseAuentl4& t(e researc(ers e>a*ined t(eir results of t(e pre7ious 4ear& and noticed t(at *ost of t(ose students (ardl4 passed e>a*s of t(e E23 teac(ing s=ills and E23 +et(odolog4 courses. :(erefore& t(e researc(ers of t(e present researc( decided to e*plo4 an untraditional training *et(od B a studio)ased learning classroo* to en(ance t(e pedagogical =nowledge of t(e second 4ear students;teac(ers in t(e acade*ic 4ear 2'12;2'13 and in7estigate (ow t(is training will reflect upon t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. *% State)ent of the Pro!le) :(e researc( pro)le* could )e su**ari/ed in t(e following state*ent8 t(e second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers& 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4 lac=ed t(e pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge necessar4 for t(e* as prospecti7e teac(ers of Englis(. :(us& in an atte*pt to sol7e t(is pro)le*& t(e present stud4 utili/ed a studio-)ased learning classroo* to de7elop t(e reAuired pedagogical =nowledge for t(ose students;teac(ers and in7estigated its effect on t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. +% The ,esearch -uestions :o tac=le t(is pro)le*& t(e present researc( atte*pted to answer t(e following *ain Auestion 8-(at is t(e effect of a studio-)ased learning classroo* on en(ancing t(e pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge of t(e second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers& 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4J :(e following su)-Auestions were deri7ed fro* t(e a)o7e *ain Auestion8 1. -(at is t(e effect of t(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* on en(ancing t(e pedagogical =nowledge of t(e second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers& 2acult4 of EducationJ 2. 5ow far will en(ancing t(e pedagogical =nowledge of t(e second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers& 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4 affect t(eir pedagogical content =nowledgeJ .% The ,esearch i)s :(is researc( ai*ed at8 1. ,esigning a studio-)ased learning p(4sical en7iron*ent. 2. ,esigning studio-)ased learning colla)orati7e acti7ities. 11%

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

3. %.

+easuring t(e effect of t(e proposed studio classroo* on E23 students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge. E>ploring t(e correlation )etween en(ancing pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge of t(e E23 students;teac(ers.

/% The ,esearch 0"1otheses :(e present researc( tested t(e following (4pot(eses8 1. :(ere is a statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* on t(e post-ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group. 2. :(ere is a statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* on t(e ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group. 2% ,esearch 3esign and 4aria!les 3esign# :(e present researc( used t(e two-group Auasi-e>peri*ental design. :(e participants were rando*l4 di7ided into two groups. :(e e>peri*ental group e>posed to studio-)ased learning classroo* w(ereas t(e control group e>posed to traditional lecturing. Inde1endent 4aria!le# :(is refers to t(e treat*ent i*ple*ented wit( t(e e>peri*ental group in t(is stud4 (t(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* 3e1endent 4aria!les# :(is referred to t(e de7elop*ent in t(e e>peri*ental group<s pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge targeted )4 t(e treat*ent. 5% ,esearch 3eli)itations Since it is )e4ond t(e li*its of a single researc( to consider a wide range of factors& t(e present researc( was confined to8 1. . sa*ple of second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers& 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4. 2. ,e7eloping and *easuring pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge a)out8 2irst& classroo* *anage*entB pre7enting and reacting to learners< pro)le* )e(a7ior. Second& lesson planningB ele*ents of lesson plans and designing lesson plans addressing learners< 7arious learning st4les. 3. :(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* e*plo4ed t(e following colla)orati7e acti7ities8 Pole pla4& galler4 wal=& case studies& t(in=-pair-s(are& group proKects& Kigsaw& and de)ates. 6% ,esearch Significance It is (oped t(at t(e present researc( results would contri)ute to8 1. 2urt(er affir*ation on t(e i*portance of de7eloping teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge in Eg4pt. 2. 3eading a *o7e towards instructors t(at adopt studio-)ased learning. 3. E23 prospecti7e teac(ers need fa*iliarit4 wit( new teac(ing ;learning *et(ods& a*ong w(ic( is t(e studio-)ased learning. %. ,e7eloping t(e teac(ing perfor*ance of E23 teac(ers graduated fro* 2acult4 of Education& 5elwan 6ni7ersit4. $7% ,esearch Procedures In order to ac(ie7e its ai*s& t(e present researc( went on t(e following steps8 1. Pe7iewing literature and pre7ious studies related to areas of t(e present researc(. 2. ,esigning t(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* on t(e p(4sical le7elB c(airs& ta)les& datas(ow set& ect. and on t(e instructional le7elB 7ideos& (andouts& ect . 3. ,e7eloping a pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test and a pedagogical content =nowledge rating ru)ric scale and ensuring t(eir relia)ilit4 and 7alidit4. %. .t t(e )eginning of t(e second ter* of t(e acade*ic 4ear 2'12;2'13& t(e researc(ers c(ose a researc( sa*ple of t(e second 4ear E23 students;teac(ers and rando*l4 di7ided t(e* into two groups& i.e. an e>peri*ental group (N?3! and a control group (N?3! . 5. .d*inistering t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test as a pre-test to t(e e>peri*ental and control groups )efore t(e treat*ent.

115

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

:raining t(e e>peri*ental group in t(e proposed studio-)ased learning classroo* w(ile t(e control group recei7ed traditional lecturing in t(e sa*e targeted =nowledge areasB classroo* *anage*ent and lesson planning. :(e e>peri*ent lasted for ! wee=s during w(ic( t(e e>peri*ental group participants were coac(ed to colla)orati7el4 perfor* role pla4& galler4 wal=& case studies& t(in=-pair-s(are& group proKects& Kigsaw& and de)ates. Infor*ation pertaining to classroo* *anage*ent and lesson planning were *ainl4 presented to t(e* t(roug( 7ideos& PowerPoint presentations& case studies or t(in=-pairs(are. .lso& s(ort (15 *inutes and long (G' *inutes presentations were deli7ered )4 t(e participants as group proKects. 7. .d*inistering t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test as a post-test to t(e e>peri*ental and control groups after t(e treat*ent. !. .t t(e )eginning of t(e first ter* of t(e acade*ic 4ear 2'13;2'1%& t(e researc(ers ad*inistered t(e pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric to t(e e>peri*ental and control groups during t(eir teac(ing practicu*. F. .nal4/ing data using suita)le statistical *eans. 1'. 1o*ing to t(e results and interpreting t(e*& reac(ing conclusions& introducing reco**endations& and gi7ing suggestions for furt(er researc(. $$% 3efinitions of Ter)s In lig(t of t(e researc( ai*s and t(e insig(ts gained fro* t(e re7iew of literature& t(e current researc( defines t(e )asic ter*s operationall4 for t(e sa=e of *easure*ent as follows8 11.1 Pedagogical Knowledge8 Pedagogical =nowledge is teac(er<s =nowledge a)out )road principles and strategies of classroo* *anage*ent and organi/ation t(at appear to transcend su)Kect *atter as well as =nowledge a)out learners and learning& assess*ent& and educational conte>ts and purposes. #perationall4& t(e pedagogical =nowledge refers to E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ awareness of two teac(ing;learning areas na*el4B classroo* *anage*ent and lesson planning. 11.2.Pedagogical Content Knowledge8 Pedagogical content =nowledge is a for* of practical =nowledge t(at is used )4 teac(ers to guide t(eir actions in (ig(l4 conte>tuali/ed classroo* setting. #perationall4& t(e pedagogical =nowledge refers to E23 prospecti7e teac(er@s a)ilit4 to con7ert t(eir pedagogical =nowledge into actions in t(e classroo* in order to produce effecti7e classroo* practice t(at (elps pro*ote learning. 11.3 Studio- Based Learning: Studio-)ased learning is a colla)orati7e& *entoring& (ands-on approac( to teac(ing and learning. #perationall4& studio classroo*s e*p(asi/e group learning and colla)oration. In studio teac(ing& t(e instructor ser7es as a facilitator& )4 (anding out proKects& answering Auestions& pro7iding resources& and *o7ing around t(e roo* as necessar4. Students wor= in groups to learn& and acti7ities are structured to e*p(asi/e colla)orati7e& acti7e& student-)ased learning. $'% ,esearch Instru)ents :(e researc(ers designed and used t(e following instru*ents to collect t(e reAuired data8 1. The Pedagogical Knowledge Pre8Post Test# it was designed to )e used as a pre;post test to assess t(e E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ pedagogical =nowledge in relation to 2 *ain topics. Eac( *ain topic included 2 su)-topics. 2irst& classroo* *anage*entB pre7enting and reacting to learners< pro)le* )e(a7ior. Second& lesson planningB ele*ents of lesson plans and designing lesson plans addressing learners< 7arious learning st4les. Eac( su)-topic was co7ered )4 ! *ultiple c(oice test ite*s. :(e total test score was 32 *ar=s w(ere two *ar=s were de7oted to eac( correct answer and /ero to t(e wrong one. :est ti*e was !' *inutes. :ec(nicall4& t(e test 7alidit4 was e7aluated )4 % :E23 e>perts w(o re7iewed t(e test and appro7ed its 7alidit4 in ter*s of its content and for*at. .ccording to t(e result of t(e test-retest procedure& t(e test pro7ed relia)le w(ere (r ? '.7F. 2. The Pedagogical Content Knowledge ,u!ric# it was designed to assess E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ pedagogical content =nowledge in )ot( researc( groups. :(e anal4tical ru)ric scope was li*ited to t(e participants@ perfor*ance related to t(e two targeted topicsB % su)-topics. Eac( su)-topic included 5 le7els (standards 8 tolera)le (3 scores & )eginning (5 scores & de7eloping (7 scores & acco*plis(ed (F scores & and e>e*plar4 (11 scores . So& t(e total score of t(e ru)ric was %% *ar=s. :o find out w(et(er or not t(e ru)ric was 7alid for w(at it was intended to *easure& t(e researc(ers su)*itted t(e first for* of t(e ru)ric to % :E23 e>perts to e7aluate itB in ter*s of content& for*at& and criteria. Su)*itting t(e ru)ric to t(e Kur4 *e*)ers resulted in *odif4ing it according to t(eir suggestions. .ccording to t(e result of t(e test-retest procedure& t(e ru)ric pro7ed relia)le w(ere (r ? '.!5.

G.

11G

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

$*% ,esearch ,esults :(e following ta)le s(ows t(at t(ere was no statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control and t(e e>peri*ental groups on t(e post-ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test. :a)le 3. HtI $alue of t(e ,ifference Letween t(e +ean Scores of t(e E>peri*ental and 1ontrol Nroups< Students on t(e Pre-.d*inistration of t(e Pedagogical Cnowledge :est Nroup N +ean Std. ,e7iation 1alculated t-7alue Significance le7el 1ontrol 3! 13 % .21G 1.21 (Non significant E>peri*ental 3! 1% 3.7 at '.'1 (:a)le 3 de*onstrates t(at t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (3.7 are see*ingl4 si*ilar to t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (% on t(e pre-ad*inistration of t(e Pedagogical Cnowledge :est. :(e difference )etween t(e two *ean scores is statisticall4 insignificant w(ere t(e calculated t 7alue is (1.21 . :(is result assures t(at t(e two groups are eAual in ter*s E23 teac(ers@ pedagogical =nowledge w(ic( in turn assures sa*ple (o*ogeneit4. :(e result is e>pected since t(e two groups did not recei7e an4 for*al education pertinent to t(e content of t(e Pedagogical Cnowledge :est. :a)le %. HtI $alue of t(e ,ifference Letween t(e +ean Scores of t(e E>peri*ental and 1ontrol Nroups< Students on t(e Post-.d*inistration of t(e Pedagogical Cnowledge :est Nroup N +ean Std. ,e7iation ,.2. 1alculated t-7alue Significance le7el Effect si/e 1ontrol 3! 15.! % (.''' 3.'% 13.1 7% Significant at '.'1 le7el 3arge E>peri*ental 3! 2!.7! %.5 .s displa4ed in (:a)le % & t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (2!.7! are (ig(er t(an t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (15.! on t(e post ad*inistration of t(e Pedagogical Cnowledge :est. :(e difference )etween t(e two *ean scores is statisticall4 significant w(ere t(e calculated t 7alue is (13.1 . .ccordingl4& t(e first (4pot(esis was 7erifiedB H:(ere is a statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio classroo* on t(e post-ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group.I :(is result re7eals t(at t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* (as a larger effect t(an t(e traditional lectures on en(ancing t(e pedagogical =nowledge of t(e E23 students; teac(ers. :(is is furt(er affir*ed )4 t(e large effect si/e (3.'% of t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* treat*ent. :a)le 5. HtI $alue of t(e ,ifference Letween t(e +ean Scores of t(e E>peri*ental and 1ontrol Nroups< Students on t(e .d*inistration of t(e Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge Pu)ric Nroup N +ean Std. ,e7iation ,.2 1alculated t-7alue Significance le7el Effect si/e 1ontrol 3! 2%.3 F.FG (.''' '.!3 7% Significant at '.'1 le7el 3.G 31.! 7.!% 3arge E>peri*ental 3! .s s(own in (:a)le 5 & t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (31.! are (ig(er t(an t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (2%.3 on t(e post ad*inistration of t(e Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge Pu)ric. :(e difference )etween t(e two *ean scores is statisticall4 significant w(ere t(e calculated t 7alue is (3.G . .ccordingl4& t(e second (4pot(esis was 7erifiedB H:(ere is a statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio classroo* on t(e ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group.I $+% 3iscussion of the ,esearch ,esults :(e statistical anal4sis results of t(e *ean scores of t(e pre-ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical =nowledge test indicated t(at t(ere was no significant difference )etween t(e e>peri*ental and t(e control group students in t(e targeted pedagogical =nowledge areas. +oreo7er& students;teac(ers< *ean scores in )ot( groups were low. :(erefore& it could )e stated t(at an4 7ariance t(at occurred )etween t(e two groups after t(e application was attri)uted to studio-)ased learning classroo* treat*ent. :(us& in t(e lig(t of t(e post- ad*inistrations of t(e test pedagogical =nowledge and t(e pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric results of t(e present stud4& t(e researc(ers could safel4 affir* t(at t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* utili/ed accounted for t(e following8 2irst& t(e statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio classroo* on t(e postad*inistration of t(e pedagogical =nowledge pre;post test in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group. :(e researc(ers of t(e current researc( )elie7e t(at t(e de7elop*ent of t(e targeted pedagogical =nowledge areas for t(e e>peri*ental group *ig(t )e due for t(e d4na*ic nature of t(e colla)orati7e acti7ities e*plo4ed in t(e studio 117

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

classroo*B na*el4& role pla4& galler4 wal=& case studies& t(in=-pair-s(are& group proKects& Kigsaw& and de)ates. .s t(e4 (a7e o)ser7ed t(at t(e participants of t(e e>peri*ental group (ig(l4 interacted wit( eac( ot(ers and wor=ed in (ar*on4 to ac(ie7e t(eir goals especiall4 during group proKects and case studies. +oreo7er& de)ates pro7ed to )e (ig(l4 engaging for *ost of t(e e>peri*ental group participants as t(e4 presented c(allenges to t(eir t(in=ing and co**unicating a)ilities. Second& t(e statisticall4 significant difference )etween t(e *ean scores of t(e control group (e>posed to traditional lectures and t(e *ean scores of t(e e>peri*ental group (e>posed to t(e studio classroo* on t(e ad*inistration of t(e pedagogical content =nowledge ru)ric in fa7or of t(e e>peri*ental group. .lt(oug( t(e effect si/e of t(e treat*ent on t(e students;teac(ers< pedagogical content =nowledge was large ('.!3 & t(e researc(ers e>pected t(at it would )e greater. :(is *ig(t )e due to t(e ti*e span t(at separated t(e studio-)ased learning classroo* training and t(e actual teac(ing practice of t(e two groups. :(is *ig(t also )e due to t(e s(ort duration of t(e treat*ent on pedagogical =nowledge (! wee=s or t(at teac(ers@ pedagogical content =nowledge naturall4 needs *ore ti*e to )e de7eloped and practiced regardless to t(e t4pe of learning or training e>perience. +oreo7er& de7eloping E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ pedagogical content =nowledge needs field e>perience under t(e super7ision of a :E23 e>pert. 5owe7er& t(ere is still e7idence to a possi)le positi7e correlation )etween en(ancing students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and de7eloping t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. :(is positi7e correlation needs *ore e*pirical researc( to )e confir*ed. $.% ,esearch Conclusions Lased on t(e results of t(is researc(& it could )e concluded t(at t(e present researc( pro7ided an e7idence t(at studio-)ased learning is *ore effecti7e t(an traditional lectures in de7eloping E23 students;teac(ers@ pedagogical =nowledge. 2urt(er*ore& t(ere is e7idence of interrelatedness )etween students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. :(e findings of t(is researc( pro7ided an indication to a positi7e correlation t(at e>ists )etween en(ancing students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and de7eloping t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge. $/% ,esearch ,eco))endations In t(e lig(t of t(e results of t(e present researc(& t(e following reco**endations are suggested8 Students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge are not less i*portant t(an t(eir content =nowledge& so t(e4 s(ould )e gi7en *ore attention in Eg4ptian E23 faculties of education. ,e7eloping E23 prospecti7e teac(ers@ pedagogical =nowledge and pedagogical content =nowledge 7ia studio-)ased learning is wort(w(ile and reAuires *ore in7estigation. Scrupulous e*pirical researc( is urgentl4 needed to in7estigate t(e connection )etween students;teac(ers< pedagogical =nowledge and t(eir pedagogical content =nowledge in a )roader range. 2aculties of education s(ould prepare fle>i)le p(4sical learning en7iron*ents t(at suit e*plo4ing 7arious instructional *et(ods in teac(er preparation. ,eferences .rQoRul& S. (2''7 . H6nderstanding foreign language teac(ers< practical =nowledge8 -(at<s t(e role of prior language learning e>perience"#. $ournal of Language and Linguistic Studies&3(1 . ./*a& +. D :ale)ineKad& +. (2'12 . H:eac(er<s Pedagogical Cnowledge and 3earner@s Success in E23 1onte>tsI& %L& 'oices ( )ndia& 2(G . .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;elt7oices.in;E$I2G;E$IV2GV2.pdf Ladawi & +. (2''F . 6sing Llended 3earning for En(ancing E23 Prospecti7e :eac(ers< Pedagogical Cnowledge and Perfor*ance. 1onference Paper8 Learning * Language - &+e S!irit of t+e ,ge& 1%-15& +arc( 2''F& .in S(a*s 6ni7ersit4 Nuest 5ouse& 1airo& Eg4pt. La=er& .. D +urp(4& J. (2'11 . HCnowledge Lase of Pronunciation :eac(ing8 Sta=ing #ut t(e :erritor4I& &%SL C,-,D, $./0-,L10%'/% &%SL D/ C,-,D,& 2!(2 . Lanegas& ,. (2'12 . Neneral Pedagogical Cnowledge in :eac(er Education. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.teac(ingenglis(.org.u=;)logs;dario-)anegas;general-pedagogical-=nowledge-teac(ereducation Leic(ner& P. D Saul& J. (2''3 . HIntroduction to t(e S1.3E-6P (Student-1entered .cti7ities for 3arge Enroll*ent 6ndergraduate Progra*s ProKectI& Paper su)*itted to t(e Proceedings of t+e )nternational Sc+ool of P+2sics 33%nrico 4er5i66& $arenna& Ital4. .7aila)le at8 www.ncsu.edu;per;.rticles;$arennaVS1.3E6PVPaper.pdf Lorg& S. (2''F . Introducing 3anguage :eac(er 1ognition. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.education.leeds.ac.u=;researc(;files;1%5.pdf 11!

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

Los*an& 1.& ,ede=or=ut& ..D ,redge& ,. (2'12 . H:(e 2irst Uear E>perience in 5ig(er Education and Planning Studio Pedagogies8 .n .ustralian 1ase Stud4I& C%B% &ransactions& F (1 & 3-1F. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;ce)e.cf.ac.u=;transactions;pdf;1ar4lLos*anF(1 .pdf Lrocato& C. D 2ran/& ,. (2''3 . H. +odel for Studio-Lased 3earning in :eac(er Education8 .pplication in Planning and +anaging 3earningI& %0)C& E,%!2G!7. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;eric.ed.go7;Jid?E,%!2G!7 Lurroug(s& S.& Lrocato& C. D 2ran/& ,. (2''F . HPro)le* Lased and Studio Lased 3earning8 .pproac(es to Pro*oting Pefor* :(in=ing a*ong :eac(er 1andidatesI& -ational 4oru5 of &eac+er %ducation $ournal& 1F (3 . 1enna*o& C. & Lrandt& 1. & Scott& L. & ,ouglas& S. & +cNrat(& +. & Pei*er& U. & D $ernon& +. (2'11 . H+anaging t(e 1o*ple>it4 of ,esign Pro)le*s t(roug( Studio-)ased 3earningI& )nterdisci!linar2 $ournal of Pro7le5-7ased Learning& 5(2 . .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;d>.doi.org;1'.7771;15%1-5'15.1253 1entre for :eac(ing E>cellence& 1ornell 6ni7ersit4. (2'13 . :eac(ing Studios. (ttp8;;www.cte.cornell.edu;teac(ing-ideas;la)s-studios-discussions;teac(ing-studios.(t*l 1(o4& ,.& -ong& ..& 3i*& C.& D 1(ong& S.& (2'13 MLeginning :eac(ers< Perceptions of t(eir Pedagogical Cnowledge and S=ills in :eac(ing8 . :(ree Uear Stud4&M ,ustralian $ournal of &eac+er %ducation& 3! (5 & .rticle 5. ,#I8 1'.1%221;aKte.2'1373!n5.G. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;ro.ecu.edu.au;aKte;7ol3!;iss5;5 1ogill& J. (2''! . HPri*ar4 :eac(ers< Interacti7e -(ite)oard Practice across #ne Uear8 1(anges in Pedagog4 and Influencing 2actorsI. %dD &+esis Cing<s 1ollege 6ni7ersit4 of 3ondon. .7aila)le at8 www.Kuliecogill.co* ,riel& J.& $erloop& N.& D$os& -. (1FF! . H,e7eloping Science :eac(ers< Pedagogical 1ontent CnowledgeI. $ournal of 0esearc+ in Science &eac+ing& 35 (G & G73WGF5. ,oc(ert4& +. D Lrown& .. (2''1 . Studio-Lased :eac(ing in Infor*ation :ec(nolog4. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.ascilite.org.au;aset-arc(i7es;confs;aset-(erdsa2''';procs;doc(ert4.(t*l Es(un& I. D +ensa(& +. (2'13 . HIn7estigation of Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge of Nraduate Social Studies :eac(ers in Senior 5ig( Sc(ools in t(e -estern Pegion of N(anaI& $ournal of %ducation and Practice& %(% & .7aila)le at8 www.iiste.org Es(un& E. D #sei-Po=u& P. (2'13 . H,esign Students Perspecti7es on .ssess*ent Pu)ric in Studio-Lased 3earningI& $ournal of /ni8ersit2 &eac+ing and Learning Practice& 1' (1 . .7aila)le at 8 (ttp8;;eric.ed.go7;JA?studioX)asedXlearningXteac(ingDid?EJ1''52!1 Este4& .. (2'1' . H:eac(ing tea*wor= and co**unication s=ills )4 using a studio-)ased learning *odel in a *ultidisciplinar4 course on ga*e designI& 9aster:s &+esis& 6ni7ersit4 of $ictoria. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;citeseer>.ist.psu.edu;7iewdoc;downloadJdoi?1'.1.1.17'.7G!!Drep?rep1Dt4pe?pdf 2renc(& ,. (2''5 . Su)Kect Cnowledge and Pedagogical Cnowledge. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.*at(s.*anc(ester.ac.u=;Ya7);pdf;,oug2renc(Su)KectCnowledge.pdf No=& :. D :ur=e4&I. (2'11 . HPerceptions of t(e Students toward Studio P(4sicsI& %uro!ean $ournal of P+2sics %ducation& 2 (1 . Nottfried& ..& Sweeder& P.& Lartolin& J.& 5essler& J.& Pe4nolds& L.& Stewart& I.& 1oppola& L. D 5oll& +. (2''7 . H,esign and I*ple*entation of a Studio-Lased Neneral 1(e*istr4 1ourseI& $ournal of C+e5ical %ducation& !% (2 . .7aila)le at8 www.J1E.,i715E,.org 5err*ann& +. (2'12 . H6sing Pro)le*-Lased 3earning in a Studio En7iron*ent to 2oster Interdisciplinar4 1olla)orationI& Proceedings of t+e ;t+ )nternational &ec+nolog2 %ducation and De8elo!5ent Conference 5-7 +arc(& $alencia& Spain. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;li)rar4.iated.org;7iew;5EPP+.NN2'126SI 5iggins& +.& .it=en-Pose& E. D ,i>on& J (2''F . H:(e pedagog4 of t(e planning studio8 a 7iew fro* down underI& $ournal for %ducation in &+e Built %n8iron5ent& %(1 &!-3'. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;ce)e.cf.ac.u=;Ke)e;pdf;+aril4n5iggins%(1 .pdf 5:EP ProKect :ea*. (2''2 . Pedagogic 1ontent Cnowledge. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.educ.ual)erta.ca;(tep;concepts;pc=.(t* Cari*i& +. (2'11 . H$ariations in E23 :eac(ers< Pedagogical Cnowledge Lase as a 2unction of :(eir :eac(ing 3icense StatusI& &+e $ournal of &eac+ing Language S<ills (J:3S &3(3 & 2all 2'11& Ser. G%;%. Coe(ler& +. (2'11 . Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;*=oe(ler.educ.*su.edu;tpac=;pedagogical-content-=nowledge-pc=; Conig& J. D Llo*e=e& S. (2'12 . H2uture :eac(ers< Neneral Pedagogical Cnowledge fro* a 1o*parati7e Perspecti7e8 ,oes Sc(ool E>perience +atterJI& =9) 9at+e5atics %ducation& %%& 3%1835%. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;lin=.springer.co*;article;1'.1''7Z22s11!5!-'12-'3F%-1 Cu(l*an& N. D Cne/e7ic& L. (2'13 . :(e :ES#3 Nuidelines for ,e7eloping E23 Standards. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.tesol.org;docs;default-source;pdf;t(e-tesol-guidelines-for-de7eloping-eflstandards.pdfJsf7rsn?'

11F

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

Cwong& 1.& Josep(& U.& Eric& 1.& D C(o(&3.(2''7 . H,e7elop*ent of +at(e*atics Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge in Student :eac(ersI. &+e 9at+e5atics %ducator& 1' (2 & 27-5%. 3ee& J. (2''2 . :eac(er Cnowledge8 :ransfor*ing 1ontent Cnowledge into Pedagogical Cnowledge. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;*sit.gsu.edu;socialstudies;courses;75%'V'2;pc=.doc 3ei)off& +. (2'1' . Studio 1lassroo*8 ,esigning 1olla)orati7e 3earning Spaces. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;ca*pustec(nolog4.co*;.rticles;2'1';'5;1F;Studio-1lassroo*-,esigning-1olla)orati7e-3earningSpaces.asp>Jp?1 3en(art& S. (2'1' . H:(e Effect of :eac(er Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge and t(e Instruction of +iddle Sc(ool Neo*etr4I & P+.D. Dissertation& :(e 2acult4 of t(e Sc(ool of Education& 3i)ert4 6ni7ersit4. .7aila)le at8 digitalco**ons.li)ert4.edu;cgi;7iewcontent.cgiJarticle?13!2... 3in& E.& -u& S.& D -ang& J. (2'12 . Pedagogical content =nowledge8 . co*parison )etween nati7e and nonnati7e Englis( spea=ing teac(ers in a 1(inese conte>t. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.(o==4odai.ac.Kp;international-c;conference;SS%-3VE*il4V3IN.pdf 3iu& S. (2'13 . HPedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge8 . 1ase Stud4 of ES3 :eac(er EducatorI& %nglis+ Language &eac+ing& G (7 . 3oug(ran& J.& Lerr4& .. D +ul(all&P. (2'12 . /nderstanding and De8elo!ing Science &eac+ers: Pedagogical Content Knowledge. (2nd ed. . Sense Pu)lis(ers& (1(apter 11 . +at(ews& J. (2'1' . H6sing a studio-)ased pedagog4 to engage students in t(e design of *o)ile-)ased *ediaI& %nglis+ &eac+ing: Practice and Criti>ue& F (1 . .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;education.wai=ato.ac.n/;researc(;files;etpc;files; 2'1'7Fn1art1.pdf +eiKer& P.& $erloop& N.& LeiKaard& ,. (2''1 . HSi*ilarities and ,ifferences in :eac(ers< Practical Cnowledge a)out :eac(ing Peading 1o*pre(ensionI& &+e $ournal of %ducational 0esearc+& F%(3 . .7aila)le at 8 (ttp8;;www.Kstor.org;disco7er;1'.23'7;275%231FJuid?2Duid?%Dsid?211'2!!5G77%!3 +iller& 5. (2''! . Pet(in=ing t(e 1lassroo*8 Spaces ,esigned for .cti7e and Engaged 3earning and :eac(ing. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.cte.(awaii.edu;+isc;SEVPet(in=ingVt(eV1lassroo*.pdf +onson& 1.& Poros& J.& Lrocato& C.& Prince& ,. DLrenner& ,. (2''7 . Pedagog4. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.studiosc(ool.*sstate.edu;pedagog4; +ora& U. D +ogile7s=4)& #. (2'13 . H:(e learning design studio8 colla)orati7e design inAuir4 as teac(ers< professional de7elop*entI& 0esearc+ in Learning &ec+nolog2&218 22'5%. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;d>.doi.org;1'.3%'2;rlt.721i'.22'5% +ulloc=& L. (2''G . H:(e Pedagogical Cnowledge Lase of 2our :ES#3 :eac(ersI& &+e 9odern Language $ournal& F'(1 & %!-GG. +usgra7e& E. D Price& J. (2'1' . HStrategies for Interactions8 Studio :eac(ing in .rc(itectural ,esignI& Connected 2?1?- 2nd )nternational Conference on Design %ducation& 6ni7ersit4 of New Sout( -ales& S4dne4& .ustralia. .7aila)le at8(ttp8;;connected2'1'.eproceedings.co*.au;papers;p2!F.pdf +4neni& 3. (2''F . H Sudio-Lased 1o*puter Supported 1olla)orati7e 3earningI& 9aster:s &+esis& Nraduate 2acult4 of .u)urn 6ni7ersit4& .la)a*a. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;iis.cse.eng.au)urn.edu;Y*4nenls;*4site;+4neniV+astersV:(esis.pdf Nara4anan& N.& 5und(ausen& 1.& 5endri>& ,. D 1ros)4& +. (2'12 . H:ransfor*ing t(e 1S 1lassroo* wit( Studio-Lased 3earningI& Proceedings of t+e @3rd ,C9 tec+nical s25!osiu5 on Co5!uter Science %ducation .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;dl.ac*.org;citation.cf*Jid?21571!!Ddl?.1+Dcoll?,3D12I,?2572F5F25D12:#CEN?F3F%5 73% National Loard for Professional :eac(ing Standards. (1FF! . -as(ington& ,18 .ut(or. .7aila)le8 (ttp8;;www.n)pts.org #<Neal& ,.& Pingler& ,.& D Podrigue/& ,. (2''! . H:eac(ers< Perceptions of t(eir Preparation for :eac(ing 3inguisticall4 and 1ulturall4 ,i7erse 3earners in Pural Eastern Nort( 1arolinaI& &+e 0ural %ducator. 2all 2''!. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.ruraleducator.net;arc(i7e;3'-1;3'-1V#Neal.pdf #/den& +. (2''! . H:(e Effect of 1ontent Cnowledge on Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge8 :(e 1ase of :eac(ing P(ases of +attersI& %ducational Sciences: &+eor2 * Practice& ! (2 & G33-G%5. Per=ins& ,. (2''5 . H:(e 1ase for a 1ooperati7e Studio 1lassroo*8 :eac(ing Petrolog4 in a ,ifferent -a4I. $ournal of Aeoscience %ducation& 53(1 & 1'1-1'F. Ping& S. (2''7 . H. Stud4 of Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge in 1ollege E23 :eac(ers< ,e7elop*entI& 9asterBs &+esis& [ufu Nor*al 6ni7ersit4& .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.dissertationtopic.net;doc;11%7227 Pa(i*i& +. (2''! . H-(at do we want teac(ing-*aterials for in E23 teac(er training progra*sJI& ,sian %4L $ournal .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.asian-efl-Kournal.co*;ptaV#ctV'!.pdf Posen& 3. (2'13 . Studio :eac(ing. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;fod.*su.edu;oir;studio-teac(ing Saa7edra& .. D #pfer& $. (2'1' . :eac(ing and 3earning 21st 1entur4 S=ills8 3essons fro* t(e 3earning

12'

Journal of Education and Practice ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline $ol.%& No.25& 2'13

www.iiste.org

Sciences. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;asiasociet4.org;files;rand-'512report.pdf Science Education Pesource 1enter. (2''7 . -(4 1(ange to Studio :eac(ingJ. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;serc.carleton.edu;introgeo;studio;w(4.(t*l Science Education Pesource 1enter. (2''7 . -(at is Studio :eac(ingJ. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;serc.carleton.edu;introgeo;studio;w(at.(t*l Science Education Pesource 1enter. (2''! . Pedagog4 in .ction. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;serc.carleton.edu;introgeo;studio;(ow.(t*l S(ul*an& 3. (1F!7 . Cnowledge and teac(ing8 2oundations of t(e new refor*. Car8ard %ducational 0e8iew& 57(1 & 1-22. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;tltKc.)logspot.co*;2'11;'%;s(ul*an-1F!7-=nowledge-and-teac(ingpc=.(t*l S*it(& J. (2''1 . H+odeling t(e Social 1onstruction of Cnowledge in E3: :eac(er EducationI. %L&$ournal& 55(3 . .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;eltK.o>fordKournals.org;content;55;3;221.s(ort Sousa& ,. (2'11 . 5ow t(e Lrain 3earns. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;carne4lent/.awardspace.co*;.l7erno;E,G%2Z2'1onnectingZ2't(eZ2'1urriculu*;sousaZ2'not es.pdf :eac(er Education ,one ,ifferentl4 (:E,, . (2'1' . .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;tedd.net.au;*entoring-for-effecti7e-teac(ing;pedagogical-=nowledge; :eac(ing Natewa4. (2'13 . .ssessing Studio-Lased 3earning. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;teac(ing.unsw.edu.au;printpdf;FGG :(e +aga/ine of -or=place Pesearc(& Insig(t& and :rends. (2'1' . HPet(in=ing 5ig(er Education SpacesI. Issue G'. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;3G'.steelcase.co*;wp-content;uploads;2'11;'2;3G'VIssueG'.pdf :sui& .. (2''3 . /nderstanding %D!ertise in &eac+ing: Case Studies of %SL &eac+ers& 1a*)ridge8 1a*)ridge 6ni7ersit4 Press& 2''3. Pp. >ii X 3'!. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.fe.(=u.(=;curric;a*4tsui;)=Vre7iews;docs;6nderstandingVe>pertiseVinVteac(ing;6nderstandi ngVe>pertiseVinVteac(ingV$asAue/.pdf :uc=er& P. D Pollo& J. (2''5 2air assess*ent and )lended learning in colla)orati7e group design proKects. In8 Proceedings of t+e Blended Learning in Science &eac+ing and Learning Conference. S4dne4& 6ni7ersit4 of S4dne4. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;science.uniser7e.edu.au;pu)s;procs;ws(op1';2''5:uc=er.pdf $alencia& J. (2''F . H.n e>ploration of 1olo*)ian E23 teac(ers< =nowledge )ase t(roug( teac(ers< reflectionI& Linguage5 * %nsino Pelotas& 12(1 &73-1'!. $eal& -. D +aCinster& J. (1FFF . Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge :a>ono*ies. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;wolfwe).unr.edu;(o*epage;crowt(er;eKse;7eal*a=.(t*l -(ite& J. (2''5 . .nal4sis of t(e Student .c(ie7e*ent Effects of Studio 1ourse I*ple*entation. .7aila)le at8(ttp8;;note)oo=.lausd.net;pls;ptl;docs;P.NE;1.V3.6S,;23,PV#PN.NIE.:I#NS;23,PVP31UV PESV,E$;P.PV,I$ISI#NV+.IN;PESE.P15V6NI:;P6L3I1.:I#NS;P#3I1UVPEP#P:S;S:6, I#1#6PSE2''%-'5Z2'2!G.P,2 -ilson& J. D Jennings& -. (2''' . HStudio 1ourses8 5ow Infor*ation :ec(nolog4 is 1(anging t(e -a4 -e :eac(& #n 1a*pus and #ffI& Proceedings of t+e )%%%& !! (1 & 72-!'..7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.Kac=*wilson.co*; .rticles:al=s;StudiosZ2'andZ2'1ontinuousZ2'Ed.(t* -ilson& J. (1FF7 . HStudio :eac(ing8 -(en t(e 2uture Leco*es t(e PresentI& /niSer8e Science -ews& 7. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;science.uniser7e.edu.au;newsletter;7ol7;wilson.(t*l Ea@/a@& +. (2'11 . :(e .cAuisition and ,e7elop*ent of E23 Pre-ser7ice :eac(ers@ Pedagogical 1ontent Cnowledge a)out 1lassroo* +anage*ent. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.acade*ia.edu;3!5F!G3; E(eng& 5. (2''F . H. Pe7iew of Pesearc( on E23 Pre-Ser7ice :eac(ers< Leliefs and PracticesI& $ournal of Ca57ridge Studies& % (1 & .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;Kournal.acs-ca*.org.u=;data;arc(i7e;2''F;2''F'1articleF.pdf Eollars& P.& 1arter& .. D 5und(ausen& 1. (2'12 . :(e I*pact of Studio-Lased 3earning on t(e ,eli7er4 of 1ourse Infor*ation. .7aila)le at8 (ttp8;;www.engr.u=4.edu;Yaseec(ed;papers;2'12;%GF1.pdf

121

This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science, Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing. More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTEs homepage: http://www.iiste.org CALL FOR JOURNAL PAPERS The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and collaborating with academic institutions around the world. Theres no deadline for submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/journals/ The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the journals is also available upon request of readers and authors. MORE RESOURCES Book publication information: http://www.iiste.org/book/ Recent conferences: http://www.iiste.org/conference/ IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial Library , NewJour, Google Scholar