A multiple case study of liberal studies teachers’ professional knowledge in Hong Kong

Abstract

Teacher knowledge is essential to effective teaching. According to Shulman (1986), the three kinds of fundamental professional knowledge that influence effective teaching are curricular knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge. With sufficient understanding of the subject nature and curriculum, subject content, and the appropriate use of teaching pedagogies, teachers become competent in their classroom teaching. Liberal Studies (LS), one of the core subjects in the New Senior Secondary (NSS) curriculum in Hong Kong, was implemented in 2009. Its interdisciplinary nature and issue-enquiry approach to teaching are new to many teachers. Since most LS teachers were disciplinary-trained before teaching the subject, it is questionable whether they have a comprehensive understanding of LS knowledge that would enable them to teach the subject effectively in classrooms. Therefore, this research examines the competence of LS teachers in terms of their curricular knowledge, content knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge of the subject. It aims to answer three research questions: (1) What professional knowledge do LS teachers have about their subject?(2) How does LS teachers’ knowledge affect their classroom practices? and (3) In LS teachers’ views, what are effective ways for them to acquire LS professional knowledge? A multiple case study approach is adopted in this research. Seven in-service LS teachers with various academic backgrounds and teaching experience from different schools were selected as the cases. Data were collected by a series of in-depth interviews, lesson observations, and official documents. Findings show that LS teachers have insufficient LS knowledge; specifically, they lack understanding about interdisciplinarity, inconsistently focus on content-related teaching issues, and have only a superficial understanding of inquiry learning. Their lack of professional knowledge stems from several sources, including ambiguous curriculum guidelines, teachers’ personal experiences and beliefs about teaching and learning, pressure related to public examinations, and unsupportive school administrations. These findings indicate that both school administrators and policymakers can help improve the competence of LS teachers. In terms of school levels, school administrators can provide more opportunities for LS teachers to exchange knowledge by arranging in-school collaboration time and reducing teaching loads. At the government level, it is necessary that policymakers clarify the subject’s rationale and objectives, and monitor its sustainable implementation by collecting information about LS teachers’ competence. In addition, professional development should be provided continuously to LS teachers. Apart from professional development programs, it is suggested that policymakers can train the trainers and provide guidelines for LS teachers, to evaluate their classroom teaching at the school levels.