Although teacher educators have achieved some success in improving teachers' understanding of the nature of science (NOS), helping teachers teach NOS has proved a much greater challenge. Currently, there are few examples in the literature of teachers who effectively teach NOS, and fewer still that rely on student outcomes as a measure of teachers' effectiveness. Much remains to be understood regarding the sources, nature, and development of teachers' pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in regard to NOS. Using S. Magnusson, J. Krajcik, and H. Borko's (1999) framework, we examined the PCK for NOS of three elementary teachers who have been successful in improving their students' understanding of NOS. We relied on interviews, questionnaires, classroom observations, and classroom artifacts collected over a 3-year period to characterize their PCK for NOS. Although each had robust knowledge of instructional strategies for teaching NOS, teachers lacked the requisite knowledge of assessment that would provide a feedback loop to support continued development of their knowledge of learners and lead to improvement in their teaching of NOS. Our findings highlight a need for professional development that focuses

Science education doctoral programs often fail to address a critical piece-the explicit attention to the preparation of future science teacher educators. In this article, we argue that, in addition to developing skills and a knowledge base for research, doctoral students must be given the opportunity to observe, practice, and reflect on the pedagogical knowledge necessary to instruct science teachers. In particular, we contend that the construct of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) can be adapted to the context of knowledge for teaching science teachers. We use the PCK construct to propose a model for the development of knowledge for teaching science teachers, grounded in our experiences as doctoral students and faculty mentors. We end by recommending a vision for doctoral preparation and a new standard to be included in the ASTE Professional Knowledge Standards for Science Teacher Educators.

No abstract

No abstract

People's risky decisions are susceptible to the social context in which they take place. Across three experiments using different paradigms, we investigated the influence of three social factors upon participants' decisions: the recipient of the decision‐making outcome (self, other, or joint), the nature of the relationship with the other agent (friend, stranger, or teammate), and the type of information that participants received about others' preferences: none at all, general information about how previous participants had decided, or information about a specific partner's preference. We found that participants' decisions about risk did not differ according to whether the outcome at stake was their own, another agent's, or a joint outcome, nor according to the type of information available. Participants did, however, adjust their preferences for risky options in light of social information.