Teachers play a critical role in the preparation of future science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors and professionals. What teachers know about their discipline (i.e., content knowledge) has been identified as an important aspect of instructional effectiveness; however, studies have not yet assessed the content knowledge of aspiring chemistry teachers in the United States. The Praxis Chemistry Subject Assessment is the most nationally representative measure of teacher content knowledge, used in 39 U.S. states in the past decade. In the presented study, we report findings concerning (i) the demographics of Praxis Chemistry Subject Assessment examinees (i.e., prospective chemistry teachers); and (ii) the longitudinal trends in exam performance across several demographic test-taker characteristics. These findings reveal substantial differences in performance and pass rates among examinees of different genders, races/ethnicities, undergraduate majors, undergraduate GPAs, and geographic locales in which they intend to teach. We establish potential leaks in the teacher pipeline that may impact the quality and diversity of chemistry teachers in the United States and suggest ways to improve the chemistry teaching workforce.

Acquiring sufficient content knowledge to lead effectively in the classroom is one of the greatest challenges for beginning teachers. National and state agencies have made significant investments in content-specific induction supports, but these efforts have not been informed by any empirical evidence regarding the topic-level content knowledge of novice teachers. Here we analyze category-level data from the Praxis Chemistry Subject Assessment from May 2006 to June 2016 to determine the areas of general strength and weakness among examinees and explore differences in categorical performance by test-taker demographics. Examinees have generally performed well in the area of “Atomic and Nuclear Structure” and appear to have struggled most in the area of “Solutions and Solubility; Acid–Base Chemistry”. Across categories, estimates of academic preparation (e.g., undergraduate GPA, undergraduate major, and graduate major) have explained a large proportion of variance in examinee performance, although demographic characteristics such as gender and race or ethnicity were more explanatory in certain categories, such as “Atomic and Nuclear Structure”. Chemistry majors were the top performers in almost all categories, and education majors underperformed, often at the level of non-STEM majors, across all topics. The findings from this work should inform both professional development efforts for beginning teachers as well as instructional reform at the undergraduate level.

A generally agreed upon tenant of the physics teaching community is the centrality of subject-specific expertise in effective teaching. However, studies which assess the content knowledge of incoming K-12 physics teachers in the U.S. have not yet been reported. Similarly lacking are studies on if or how the demographic makeup of aspiring physics educators is different from previously reported analyses of the actual high school physics teaching workforce. Here we present findings about the demographics and subject knowledge of prospective high school physics teachers using data from Praxis physics subject assessments administered between 2006 and 2016. Our analysis reveals significant variations in exam participation and performance between men and women, as well as those with different undergraduate majors and academic performance over the past decade. Findings from this work inform understandings and decisions about the quality, recruitment, and preparation of the high school physics teaching workforce.

No abstract

Demographic and performance data from examinees who took the Praxis® Biology Subject Assessment exam from 2006 to 2015 were compared. Findings revealed substantial differences in average performance and pass rates between examinees of different genders, races, undergraduate majors, undergraduate grade point averages, and census regions.