Evidence of the Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge Related to Chemical Bonding during a Course for Preservice Chemistry Teachers

  • Roko Vladušić Faculty of Science, University of Split, Croatia
  • Robert Bucat School of Molecular Sciences, University of Western Australia, Austraila
  • Mia Ožić Faculty of Science, University of Split, Croatia
Keywords: chemical bonding, Chemistry Education course, pedagogical content knowledge, preservice chemistry teachers


The impression that many preservice chemistry teachers demonstrate issues in the application of their pedagogical content knowledge in teaching practice, especially in the area of fundamental chemistry topics, served as motivation for changes to the Chemistry Education 2 course curriculum. In order to stimulate pedagogical content knowledge, the course has been changed in the following areas: intending learning outcomes, the language of chemistry instruction, awareness of “Johnstone’s triangle” of operations, and common alternative conceptions. To obtain evidence of preservice teachers’ in-practice pedagogical content knowledge about chemical bonding, especially pedagogical content knowledge related to the revised areas of the Chemistry Education 2 course, we designed and conducted a case study based on detailed monitoring of one preservice teacher’s pre-teaching, teaching and teaching evaluation activities. The findings demonstrate evidence of growth of the preservice teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge of chemical bonding, with particular characteristics indicating that the source of this growth is almost certainly the revised Chemistry Education 2 curriculum.


Download data is not yet available.


Adams, K. (2012). Beginning chemistry teachers use of the triplet relationship during their first three years in the classroom. Doctoral dissertation. Arizona State University. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/83f8/fbba04de63e46eff7f0eae18f5f6bc7994ed.pdf

Barker, V., & Millar, R. (2000). Students’ reasoning about chemical reactions: What changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1171–1200.

Bezinović, P., Marušić, I., & Ristić Dedić, Z. (2012). Handbook for observation and improvement of teaching. Zagreb: Education and Teacher Training Agency. Retrieved from https://www.azoo.hr/photos/izdanja/opazanje-web-1536878204.pdf

Boo H. (1998). Students understanding of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 569–581.

Bromme, R. (1997). Kompetenzen, funktionen und unterrichtliches handeln der lehrer [Competencies, functions and teaching of teaching]. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule (pp. 177–212). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Carlson, J., Stokes, L., Helms, J., Gess-Newsome, J., & Gardner, A. (2015). The PCK summit: A process and structure for challenging current ideas, provoking future work, and considering new directions. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Science Education (pp. 14–27). New York, NY: Routledge.

Cochran, K. F., De Ruiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263–272.

Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners’ mental models of ionic bonding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 464–86.

De Jong, O., & van Driel, J. (2004). Exploring the development of student teachers’ PCK of the multiple meanings of chemistry topics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(4), 477–491.

Geddis, A. N., Onslow, D., Beynon, C., & Oesch, J. (1993). Transforming content knowledge: Learning to teach isotopes. Science Education, 77(6), 575–591.

Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Science Education (pp. 28–42), New York, NY: Routledge.

Joki, J., & Aksela, M. (2018). The challenges of learning and teaching chemical bonding at different school levels using electrostatic interactions instead of the octet rule as a teaching model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3) 932–953.

Johnstone, A. H. (1982). Macro - and microchemistry. School Science Review, 19(3), 71–73.

Magnusson S., Krajcik J., & Borko H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome, N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Science & Technology Education Library, vol. 6. Dordrecht: Springer.

Markic, S., & Childs, P. E. (2016). Language and the teaching and learning of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 434–438.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

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

Sibanda, D. (2018). What sequence do we follow in teaching concepts in chemistry? A study of high school physical science teachers’ PCK. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), 196–208.

Taber, K. S. (2002). Chemical misconceptions – prevention, diagnosis and cure: Theoretical background (Vol. 1). London, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry.

Taber, K. S. (2003). Understanding ionisation energy: Physical, chemical and alternative conceptions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(2), 149–169.

Vladušić, R., Bucat, B. R., & Ožić, M. (2016a). Understanding ionic bonding – a scan across the Croatian education system. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 685–699.

Vladušić, R. (2017). Pedagogical content knowledge about chemical bonding with particular focus on language issues in Croatia. Doctoral dissertation. Split: Faculty of Science, University of Split.

Vladušić, R., & Ožić, M. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ understandings of symbolic representations used in chemistry instruction. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 244–251.

Vladušić, R., Bucat, B. R., & Ožić, M. (2016b). Understanding of words and symbols by chemistry university students in Croatia. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 474–488.

Van Driel, J. H., de Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86(4), 572–590.

Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.

Yin, Robert, K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.