1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.131

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 174–178

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

WCLTA 2010

Development of instrument measuring the level of teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) in

environmental education

Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullaha *, Lilia Halima aUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor 43600, Malaysia

Abstract

Since 1998, Environmental Education has been implemented in Malaysian curriculum across subject matter. During this period, it was found that there were no significant changes produced in students’ level of awareness, attitudes and behavior. Lack of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) among teachers might be a primary factor contributing to ineffective implementation of Environmental Education. This paper discusses the development of an instrument that is measure the level of teachers' PCK on Environmental Education. Development processes involve three steps that include: a) determining constructs of PCK; b) developing the items; and c) analyzing the items for its validity and reliability. The instrument was piloted with 50 secondary teachers. The pilot data were analyzed to determine the alpha value for each item and construct using SPSS 11.5. Expert opinions were also obtained to validate the instrument in term of its content. Evidence of content validity and reliability are presented. Based on the first pilot study, it is suggested that second pilot test to be conducted using factorial analysis method to confirm factors that make up the PCK. © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Environmental Education; Pedagogical Content Knowledge; instrument development

1. Introduction

Environmental issues is now discussed and debated among parties all over the world. The natural environment is seems to be deteriorating in an alarming ways. In Malaysia, the level of environmental knowledge among students reported to be high but still not sufficient to contribute to the change in attitude and their behavior (Mageswary et al. 2006). Studies conducted by Norlila (2007) shows 3R practice among students is at the moderate level while Nachimuthu (2008) said 5R practice among them is at low level.

To overcome this problem, environmental knowledge should be given to people through programs or activities that demonstrate the benefit they get by taking action towards environment preservation and conservation. This is because benefits to oneself are essential for most people’s awareness of environmental issues to be translated into action on them (Harris, 2006).

Therefore, environmental education needs to be improved in so that the environmental knowledge can be offered more effective. As Harris (2006) argued, one of the strategies for moving sentiments and behaviors toward

*Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah E-mail address: sharifahshereen87@yahoo.com

Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah and Lilia Halim / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 174–178 175

environmental preservation is through increasing local educational effort. This opinion also shared by Olofsson and hman (2006). According to them, environmental concern is positively associated with education. Ignatow (2006)

associates education with environment through ecological environmental worldviews concept. This concept explains humans are dependent on, rather than separated from nature; and science can help humans to balance their interactions with nature.

Teachers play important role to ensure their students get adequate knowledge to preserve and conserve the environment. However, study by Che Kalbi (1999) and Khor (2006) showed that teachers' knowledge on the environment is between moderate to high level. But according to Rohiza (2004) those teachers might master on particular environmental issues only; while for Khor (2006), the level of teachers’ knowledge are at satisfactory but not for knowledge about the concept of environment and sustainability. Tiwi et al. (2006) added, there are many individuals who have knowledge and awareness on the environment but still have an irresponsible attitude towards the environment.

This situation is worrying. Teachers are the driving force in determining the effectiveness of teaching and learning (Vandervoot et al., 2004; Darling-Hammond, 2006; Ballard & Bates, 2008). It is necessary for teachers to have knowledge about the environment in order to deliver Environmental Education to students effectively. One of the knowledge needed by teacher is Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) (Shulman, 1987; Rusilawati & Zainon, 2009; van Direl & Berry, 2010) for specific subject and discipline. So, the purpose of this study is to develop an instrument that measures the level of teachers’ PCK in Environmental Education.

2. Pedagogical Content Knowledge

PCK represents the combined knowledge of subject content and pedagogy that forms an understanding of how topics, problems, or issues organized, communicated and used in the teaching according to students’ interests, abilities (Shulman, 1987; Nor Aishah &Yap, 2002) and prior knowledge (Lilia et al., 2001; Loughran, 2003). This definition reflects the elements of art in the field of education. PCK is the knowledge base needed by teachers to guide them to make decisions or take any action in teaching in the classroom (Atay et al., 2010). Mastery of PCK will lead the teachers to face and address the difficulties of teaching in the classroom, and try to test, evaluate their teaching practices (Bucat, 2004) by answering basic didactical questions.

3. Methodology

In the process to develop an instrument to measure teachers’ PCK in Environmental Education, five phases were involved. The phases were:

3.1 Phase 1: Identifying indicators or constructs of PCK We first started the study by reviewing and analyzing the literature for constructs that formed the concept of

PCK. From various conceptions given by the scholars, we synthesize our own conception about the constructs to represent the scope of PCK needed by teachers in order to teach Environmental Education in classroom.

3.2 Phase 2: Developing items for each construct Items then were developed for each construct. At first, the total number of items developed was 87 items. However, this number was reduced after reliability test was conducted.

3.3 Phase 3: Conducting reliability test

176 Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah and Lilia Halim / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 174–178

The instrument was piloted with 50 secondary science teachers. Data was analyzed using SPSS 11.5. According to Chua (2006), the items considered to have strong correlation between items when the alpha value for the construct is above 0.60. Several items were deleted to ensure each construct ranged in this value.

3.4 Phase 4: Checking items validity The face and content validity of the instrument was performed by an expert in science pedagogy and environmental education respectively.

3.5 Phase 5: Improving the items Items that had low correlation values but are considered important were not removed instead the language of the

items was improved for better readability.

4. Result and Discussion

PCK is one of the important knowledge field needed by teacher for teaching any disciplines to their students. Under PCK itself, teachers need to be acquainted with particular knowledge. Difference scholars have their own ideas in explaining constructs that form PCK concept. According to Gess-Newsome (1999), PCK comprises of overlapping of numerous knowledge fields such as content knowledge, context knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. Gess- Newsome views teaching as an action from the integration of knowledge across all these three constructs. For Carlsen (1999), PCK consist of four constructs, which are (a) students’ general misconception; (b) specific curriculum knowledge; (c) teaching strategies for specific topic; and (d) teaching objectives. Tuan et al. (2000) and Jang et al. (2009) have almost similar opinion regarding the constructs of PCK. They listed out components of PCK to be subject matter knowledge, knowledge of teaching objectives and context, instructional and concept representation strategies, and knowledge on students as the area of knowledge in PCK. de Jong (2009) further adds knowledge on evaluation strategies knowledge as one of components of PCK. This study, adopts a comprehensive view of PCK namely adopting the components of PCK delineated by Tuan et al. (2000) and Jang et al. (2009) along with the knowledge of evaluation strategies as teachers’ PCK in Environmental Education.

In term of item development, we build them upon consideration of Malaysian Environmental Education concepts stated by Curriculum Development Center (1998). However, items on environmental issues were referred to the Environmental Education Prototype by Hungerford et al. (1994). For the first two construct, the items were in the form of multi-choice questions. Each item has five choices of answer. Last choice answer for every item is “I do not know the answer for this question.” This option of answer is given to differentiate between teachers’ knowledge and their misconception of the items. For the other three constructs, items were developed using the Likert’s scale. The range of the scale was from one to five (1=Never; 2= Very rare; 3= Rarely; 4= Often; 5= Very often). Teachers were asked to rate the statements according to their practice. As stated by Schmidt (1996), teachers’ practices in teaching Environmental Education is influenced by their level of knowledge.

In the third phase, alpha values for each construct calculated and shown as in Table 1.

Table 1. Result of reliability test (n=50)

Construct N of items Alpha Cronbach Curriculum knowledge 10 0.2133 Subject matter knowledge 44 0.8844 Knowledge of students 8 0.9231 Teaching strategies knowledge 17 0.9386 Knowledge of teaching and learning evaluation 7 0.9246

Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah and Lilia Halim / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 174–178 177

According to Chua (2006) when the alpha value is lower than 0.6, particular items under the construct must be

deleted until they reach that value. Based on Table 1, the first construct is the only one which does not reach the suggested rate. In order to increase the alpha value for this construct, four items were deleted. After these items were deleted, the alpha value was 0.5913. Even though this value is lower than 0.600, all six items left were considered important and will be improved.

For the construct related to ‘Subject Matter Knowledge’, even though the Cronbach value is high, the researchers felt it was necessary to reduce the number of items. This is because teachers are not willing to answer lengthy questionnaire as being observed during the pilot study. Their high commitment to their job and packed class-schedule might be the barrier for them to cooperate to this study. So, 22 items from this construct were deleted. Items deleted were selected based on the lowest value of corrected item-total correlation. Finally, the total number of items left in this instrument is 60 items. So, the estimation time for teachers to complete the questionnaire is 60 minutes.

For the purpose of face and construct validity, opinion by a professor in Science PCK field and an expert in Environmental Education field were obtained. Based on their opinion, spelling error corrected; items sentences simplify to make sure teachers could understand the questions; and to ensure that the instrument measure what it should be measuring.

Based on these studies, there are several things that can be considered to improve the instrument. This study only adopts a part of the Classical Model in developing the instrument. According to Barron (2004), there are six phases in the development of an instrument. The phases are: (i) choosing a domains and indicators; (ii) develop a prototype of instrument; (iii) piloting prototype instrument and get feedback; (iv) determine the construct validity of instruments; (v) determine the validity of the contents of instruments; and (vi) determine the reliability of the instrument. This suggests that other than using Alpha Cronbach method to determine the instrument reliability, the items in the instrument should be tested using the factorial analysis test to determine the constructs validity. The factorial analysis test will ensure that the items developed are arranged according to the appropriate constructs (Chua, 2009).

5. Conclusion

This study has produced an instrument that can measure the level of teachers’ PCK in Environmental Education. Several considerations were made during the instrument development process. The number of items was reduced to enhance teachers’ commitment to cooperate in answering the questionnaire in the actual study. In addition, this instrument not only can be used to identify what teachers know and what teachers do not know, but also to identify teachers’ misconception especially regarding their subject matter knowledge and knowledge about the context. Finally, this instrument could contribute to studies on teachers’ professional development. Gaps in teachers’ knowledge that is identified can be used as guidelines for planning a more effective Environmental Education programs for teachers.

References

Atay, D., Kaslioglu, O. & Kurt, G. (2010). The pedagogical content knowledge development of prospective teachers through an experiential task. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2, 1421–1425.

Ballard, K. & Bates, A. (2008). Making a connection between student achievement, teacher accountability, and quality classroom instruction. The Qualitative Report. 13(4), 560-580.

Bucat, R. (2004). Pedagogical content knowledge as a way forward: Applied research in Chemistry Education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice. 5(3), 215-228.

Carlsen, W. S. (1999). Domains of teacher knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Che Kalbi Mohd Ali. (1999). Tahap pengetahuan isu-isu alam sekitar di kalangan guru pelatih kursus diploma perguruan Malaysia semester 5 Maktab Perguruan Kota Bharu. Unpublished master’s thesis. University Malaya.

Chua, Y. P. (2006). Asas Statistik Kaedah Penyelidikan. Malaysia: McGraw-Hill. Chua, Y. P. (2009). Analisis regrasi, faktor analisis dan analisis SEM. Malaysia: McGraw-Hill.

178 Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah and Lilia Halim / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 174–178

Curiculum Development Centre. (1998). Buku panduan guru: Pendidikan Alam Sekitar merentas kurikulum KBSM. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful Teacher Education: Lessons from Exemplary Programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

de Jong, O. (2009). Exploring and changing teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge: An overview. In O. de Jong, & Lilia Halim. Teachers’ Professional Knowledge in Science and Mathematics Education: Views from Malaysia and Abroad. Selangor, Malaysia: Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (Chapter 1)

Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical Content Knowledge: An Introduction and Orientation. In: Gess-Newsome, J. & Lederman, N. G. Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Netherland: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 11-12

Harris, P. G. (2006). Environmental Perspectives and Behavior in China: Synopsis and Bibliography. Environment and Behaviour. 38(1), 5-21

Hungerford, H. R., Volk, T. L. & Ramsey, J. M. (1994). A Prototype Environmental Education Curriculum for The Middle School. USA: UNESCO

Ignatow G. (2006). Cultural models of nature and society: Reconsidering environmental Attitudes and Concern. Environment and Behavior. 38(4), 441-461

Jackson, S. L. (2003). Research Methods and Statistics: A critical thinking approach. United States of America: Wadsworth

Jang, S. J., Guan, S. Y. & Hsieh, H. F. (2009). Developing an instrument for assessing college students’ perceptions of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 1(1), 596-606

Khor, C. Y. 2006. Keprihatinan Alam Seitar di Kalangan Guru-guru prasekolah di pulau pinang. Unpublished master’s thesis. University putra Malaysia

Lilia Halim, Abd Razak Habib, Abd Rashid Johar & T. Subahan Mohd Meerah. (2001). Tahap Pengetahuan Pedagogi Kandungan Guru Pelatih Fizik dan Bukan Fizik Melalui Pengajaran Eksplisit dan Implisit. Jurnal Pendidikan. 26(5), 65-80

Loughran, J., Mulhall, P. & Berry, A. (2003). In search of Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Science: Developing ways of Articulating and Documenting Professional Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 41(4), 370-391

Mageswary, K., Zurida, I. & Norita, M. (2006). Knowledge, Beliefs, desires and behavior of chemistry pre-service teachers towards the environment. Proceeding of The 2006 International Organization of Science and Technology Education, Penang, Malaysia. 487-494

Nachimuthu, N. S. L. M. (2008). Pendidikan Alam Sekitar Merentas Kurikulum: Suatu Kajian Tentang Amalan Tindakan 5R Di Kalangan Pelajar Tinkatan 6 Di Bandar Kluang, Johor. Unpublished master’s thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Nor Aishah Buang & Yap, P. M. (2002). Kesediaan guru-guru perdagangan di wilayah persekutuan dari aspek pengetahuan kaedah pengajaran dan sikap terhadap pengajaran subjek pengajian keusahawanan. Jurnal Teknologi. 36(E), 1-16

Norlila Talib. (2007). Pelaksanaan Pendidikan Alam Sekitar di Sekolah-sekolah Menengah Daerah Seremban. Unpublished master’s thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Olofsson, A. & hman, S. (2006). General beliefs and environmental concern: Translantic Comparisons. Environment and Behavior. 38(6), 768-790

Rohiza Jamaluddin. (2004). Pencapaian guru sains sekolah menengah dalam pernyataan tentang isu alams sekitar. Unpublished master’s thesis. University Malaya

Schmidt, F. (1996). Statistical Significance Testing and Cumulative Knowledge In Psychology. Implications for Training Researchers Psychological Methods. 1(2), 115-129

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review. 57(1), 1-21

Tiwi Kamidin, Nor Aznan Mahmood & Tay Teck Pin. (2006). Penglibatan Guru Pelatih KPLI Maktab Perguruan Batu Lintang dalam Amalan Gaya Hidup Mesra Alam. Jurnal Penyelidikan. 7: 1-15

Tuan, H. L., Chang, H. P. & Wang, K. H. (2000). The development of an instrument for assessing students’ perceptions of teachers’ knowledge. International Journal of Science Education. 22(4), 385-398

van Driel, J. H. & Berry, A. 2010. Pedagogical content knowledge. International Encyclopedia of Education. 656-661

Vandervoot, L. G., Amrein-Beardsley, A. & Berliner, D. C. 2004. Students of National Board Certified Teachers Outperform Peers on National Test. Education Policy Analysis Archieves. 12(46).