Lee S. Shulman builds his foundation for teachi ng reform on an idea of teaching that emphasizes comprension and reasoning, transformation and reflection. "This emphasis is justified" he writes, "by the resoluteness with which research and policy have so blatantly ignored those aspects of teaching in the past". To articulate and justify this conception, Shulman responds to four questions: What are the sources of the knowledge base for teaching? In what terms can these sources be conceptualized? What are the processes of pedagogical reasoning and action? And What are the implications for teaching policy and educational reform? The answers -informed by philosophy, psychology, and a growing body of casework based on young and experienced practitioners- go far beyond current reform assumptions and initiatives. The outcome for educational practitioners, scholars,

CONOCIMIENTO Y ENSEÑANZA: FUNDAMENTOS DE LA NUEVA REFORMA 1 Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform

Lee S. Shulman builds his foundation for teaching reform on an idea of teaching that emphasizes comprehension and reasoning, transformation and reflection. "This emphasis is justified," he writes, ...

/pdf/knowledge-and-teaching-foundations-of-the-new-reform-1qsl0e2rio.pdf

Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform

Research in the area of educational technology has often been critiqued for a lack of theoretical grounding. In this article we propose a conceptual framework for educational technology by building on Shulman’s formulation of ‘‘pedagogical content knowledge’’ and extend it to the phenomenon of teachers integrating technology into their pedagogy. This framework is the result of 5 years of work on a program of research focused on teacher professional development and faculty development in higher education. It attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of teacher knowledge required for technology integration in teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted, and situated nature of this knowledge. We argue, briefly, that thoughtful pedagogical uses of technology require the development of a complex, situated form of knowledge that we call Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). In doing so, we posit the complex roles of, and interplay among, three main components of learning environments: content, pedagogy, and technology. We argue that this model has much to offer to discussions of technology integration at multiple levels: theoretical, pedagogical, and methodological. In this article, we describe the theory behind our framework, provide examples of our teaching approach based upon the framework, and illustrate the methodological contributions that have resulted from this work.

/pdf/technological-pedagogical-content-knowledge-a-framework-for-4g4dquqx44.pdf

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge

Running head: WHY MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION DOES NOT WORK Why Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching

Evidence for the superiority of guided instruction is explained in the context of our knowledge of human cognitive architecture, expert–novice differences, and cognitive load. Although unguided or minimally guided instructional approaches are very popular and intuitively appealing, the point is made that these approaches ignore both the structures that constitute human cognitive architecture and evidence from empirical studies over the past half-century that consistently indicate that minimally guided instruction is less effective and less efficient than instructional approaches that place a strong emphasis on guidance of the student learning process. The advantage of guidance begins to recede only when learners have sufficiently high prior knowledge to provide "internal" guidance. Recent developments in instructional research and instructional design models that support guidance during instruction are briefly described.

/pdf/why-minimal-guidance-during-instruction-does-not-work-an-3q3gc2rbj6.pdf

Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching

Este articulo fue un discurso presidencial en la reunion de America Educational Research Association de Chicago el ano 1985. -- Curioso sobre el por que el publico a menudo tiene una baja opinion sobre el conocimiento de los profesores, Shulman observa la historia de evaluaciones docentes. En la segunda mitad del 1800, las evaluaciones para quienes deseaban ensenar se basaban casi por completo en contenido. Para el ano en que el autor escribe el articulo, en 1985, la evaluacion era completamente distinta. En lugar de enfocarse en contenido, se enfocaba en topicos como planificacion de clases, sensibilizacion cultural, y otros aspectos de la conducta docente. Mientras los topicos usualmente tenian raices en la investigacion, claramente no representan el amplio espectro de habilidades y conocimientos que un docente necesita para ser efectivo. Mas especificamente, para los anos 80', la evaluacion docente parecia preocuparse tanto por los conocimientos, como el siglo anterior se preocupaba por la pedagogia.

http://www.fisica.uniud.it/URDF/masterDidSciUD/materiali/pdf/Shulman_1986.pdf

Lee S. Shulman

Papers

Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching

Those who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching