OPEN ACCESS

EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education

ISSN 1305-8223 (online) 1305-8215 (print)
2017 13(1):201-222
DOI 10.12973/eurasia.2017.00612a

Physics Teacher Knowledge Aimed in Pedagogical

Studies in Finland and in South Korea
Heidi Krzywacki
University of Helsinki, FINLAND
Byeong-Chan Kim
Kyung Hee University, Seoul, SOUTH KOREA
Jari Lavonen
University of Johannesburg, SOUTH AFRICA & University of Helsinki, FINLAND

Received 15 May 2016 Revised 14 August 2016 Accepted 21 September 2016

ABSTRACT
This paper analyzes the pedagogical studies of Finnish and South Korean physics teacher
education programs that guide teacher educators to support student teachers to build
readiness for acting as professional teachers in a secondary school classroom. Research on
the domains and origin of teachers professional knowledge provides a framework for
analyzing the programs and the potential support of the program for becoming a
professional teacher. First, the aims of the pedagogical studies are categorized, resulting in
ten themes that characterize the programs. Second, the programs are analyzed in the
framework domains of teacher knowledge and the origins the knowledge is suggested to
learn. The domains of knowledge include the knowledge needed in consuming and
producing educational research, general pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content
knowledge. Distribution among the four domains of teacher knowledge varies in Finnish
and South Korean programs, reflecting the differences in the national education cultures.
Pedagogical studies in Korean physics teacher education are more theoretically oriented
than their Finnish counterparts. However, the Finnish and Korean programs do bear
similarities, such as an emphasis on reflection and a research orientation, as a part of their
pedagogical studies.
Keywords: physics teacher education, secondary school physics, teacher knowledge

INTRODUCTION
Finnish and South Korean (henceforth, simply Korean) science education have received
interest from teacher educators, researchers, journalists, and education policymakers all over
the world since the release of the first Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
results in 2002. This interest is a consequence of the results (ranking among countries) achieved
by Finnish and Korean 16-year-old students in PISA Science (OECD, 2007; 2010). Teacher
education, as well as teacher quality, has been regarded as one of the reasons behind the

Authors. Terms and conditions of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) apply.
Correspondence: Jari Lavonen, University of Johannesburg, South Africa & University of Helsinki, Finland
jari.lavonen@helsinki.fi
H. Krzywacki et al.

State of the literature

Not only domains of teacher knowledge but also origin of knowledge matter in teacher
education
Teacher students learn from practice but reflection is an essential part of learning process

Contribution of this paper to the literature

It is possible to produce high quality teachers with different teacher education programs
Teacher education is embedded in a particular societal and cultural context that needs to be
taken into consideration while comparing and developing the programs

students good performance (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Rockoff, 2004) although, for example,
the socio-economic status of the school district and classroom size do make this relationship
complex (Nye, Konstantopoulos, & Hedges, 2004).

Auguste, Kihn, and Miller (2010) analyzed teacher education in Finland and Korea in
order to identify good teaching practices and the influence of teacher education on PISA
results. According to their findings, successful recruitment procedures and the cultural respect
for teachers set solid grounds for high-quality teacher education and quality of teachers. In
both countries, teachers are educated at university level programs. However, Auguste and
colleagues (2010) did not conduct a careful analysis of the content and structure of the teacher
education programs. Althogh, the culture and traditions of education are different and the
comparison of two very different programs is challenging, we decided to compare the
pedagogical studies of physics teacher education programs at one Finnish and one Korean
university, both of which were located in their capital cities. Because of the differences in
context and history of education, we avoid making heavy conclusions and suggestions for
other contexts (Lederman & Lederman, 2015).

Our aim is to discuss and compare pedagogical studies of physics teacher education
programs in Finland and Korea by analyzing intentional instruction agendas or curricula. The
analysis of curricula has been an important area of education research (e.g., Carlsen, 1999;
Grossman, 1990; Hashweh, 2005). Even if curriculum analysis hardly provides information
about actual practice and the hidden curricula of teacher education as such, it is important to
discuss the outlines of teacher education programs that teacher educators follow while making
decisions concerning instructional practices, content, and learning materials, as well as student
assessment. In addition to the domains of teacher knowledge, the origins of teacher knowledge
is essential for elaborating how teacher knowledge is designed to accumulate over the courses
and teaching practices of a teacher education programs.

This paper addresses the question: How do pedagogical studies, as part of physics teacher
education, aim to build student teachers knowledge in Finland and Korea?

202
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

TEACHER KNOWLEDGE
The framework for analyzing the Finnish and Korean teacher education programs is
based on the domains and origin of teacher knowledge views. However, from the students
perspective, contents and activities related to separate knowledge domains and the origins of
this knowledge intertwine in the implication of the program; the latest occurs in teaching
practice when student teachers assume the teachers role in the classroom.
Domains of Teacher Knowledge
The structural analysis of teacher knowledge and the classification of teacher knowledge
domains provided here are a framework for comparing the pedagogical studies of physics
teacher education programs in Finland and Korea. A well-known approach for describing a
teachers knowledge base dividing it into subject-matter (content) knowledge, pedagogical
content knowledge (PCK), and general pedagogical knowledge (GPK) (Carlsen, 1999; Gess-
Newsome & Lederman, 1999; Grossman, 1990; Hashweh, 2005; originally based on the work
by Shulman, 1986, 1987). We follow this simple model of teacher knowledge in our analysis,
even though the original model has been augmented; for example, Gess-Newsome and
Lederman (1999) introduced teachers contextual knowledge and defined it as knowledge of the
context of teaching. However, the simple model better works in our study because we will
analyze teacher education programs where the sentences are short and lack context.

Content (subject matter) knowledge constitutes a knowledge domain related to expertise in

a particular subject, such as physics. It includes conceptual and procedural knowledge in the
given domain. Furthermore, a teacher needs to understand the nature of knowledgethat is,
the epistemological and ontological aspects of the subject. However, content knowledge is not
the focus of this research.

Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is a knowledge domain that distinguishes teachers

from other subject specialists (Carlsen, 1999; Shulman, 1987). PCK is the synthesis of all
knowledge needed for the teaching and learning of a certain topic (Grossman, 1990). Thus, it
is always related to subject-matter knowledge (see e.g., Grossman, 1990; Nilsson, 2008).
According to Gess-Newsome (1999), the following areas have been associated with PCK: (1)
teaching or instructional strategies, assessment strategies, and collaboration strategies; (2)
knowledge about student interest, motivation, and the learning of conceptual and procedural
knowledge and skills; (3) knowledge of science learners, like student thinking, misconceptions,
and cognitive and affective demands of tasks and activities; (4) knowledge about resources
available to support teaching and learning; curriculum knowledge and goals for student
learning (see also Abell, Rogers, Hanuscin, Lee, & Gagnon, 2009). When a teacher employs
PCK in the planning and implementation of a lesson, he is focusing on a question that he wants
students to be able to answer, and how he facilitates the development of student
understanding. In European tradition, especially in Germany, France, and the Nordic
countries including Finland, the term didactics, or more precisely, didactical

203
H. Krzywacki et al.

transformation (in German, didaktische Transformation), is associated with processes similar to

those discussed under the PCK domain (Kansanen, 2002).

The third main category of teacher knowledge is general pedagogical knowledge (GPK)
(Gore & Gitlin, 2004). It has a special reference to broad principles and strategies of classroom
management and organization that appear to transcend subject matter. Hativa, Barak and
Simhi (2001) proposed that GPK includes pedagogical principles and classroom strategies with
no relation to subject matter. Morine-Dershimer and Kent (1999) argue that general
pedagogical knowledge consists of the following general knowledge areas related to
pedagogy: (1) classroom management and organization, (2) instructional models and
strategies, and (3) classroom communication and discourse.

Basic academic competencies, such as research skills, are not emphasized in the original
knowledge domains introduced by Shulman (1986, 1987). However, for example, the teacher
leadership movement emphasizes teachers as consumers of research-based knowledge in
order to be able to act as curriculum specialists (Harris, 2003; Lieberman, 1992 ;). In both the
Finnish and Korean traditions, teachers are regarded as autonomous academic professionals
who are both consumers and producers of educational research knowledge (Jakku-Sihvonen
& Niemi, 2006; Kim, B. C., 2001). Therefore, in the context of Finnish and Korean teacher
education programs, one knowledge area should be included in the model of teacher
knowledge: knowledge or competence to consume and produce educational, research-based
knowledge.

The Origins of Teachers Knowledge

The origin of teacher knowledge is connected to the dilemma of the way of knowing.
In a form of a question, we can conceive of it as From where does teacher knowledge arise?
Here, we follow Hiebert, Gallimore, and Stigler (2002), who distinguish practical and
professional knowledge in order to describe the ends of the continuum regarding the origin of
teacher knowledge (see also Cohen, 2008; Korthagen, 2007; Pendry & Husbands, 2000).

Professional knowledge is built on research-based, scientific information on teaching

and learning; furthermore, it is characterized by its generalizability and scientific character.
Students become familiar with this knowledge by utilizing research literature and carrying
out small-scale educational research projects. Gitlin and colleagues (1999) state that student
teachers conceptions of research should form the basis for research-based teacher education
and pave the way for making research a part of teacher education. One possibility is combining
research activities with practical experience through a research project completed as part of
teaching practice (Brinkman & van Rens, 1999). This would also serve to strengthen the skills
needed for professional development and lifelong learning. However, since student teachers
only partly understand what an authentic research process is like, it is challenging to provide
research-based knowledge in a form that is easy for them to utilize. Cohen (2008) elaborates
on the learning process, noting that it requires both consuming and producing educational
knowledge (see also Pendry & Husbands, 2000).

204
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

Hiebert and colleagues (2002) identify three essential features of teachers practitioner
knowledge: (1) it is linked with practice and grounded in a real-life context, addressing specific
problems related to processes that really exist in the classroom; (2) it is specific, detailed, and
concrete; (3) it is integrated, meaning that it is linked with practice and organized by the
particularities of practice. Van Driel and colleagues (2001) conceptualize experienced teachers'
practical knowledge as action-oriented and person-bound. This knowledge integrates
experiential knowledge and formal knowledge with personal beliefs. Since physics student
teachers hardly have any teaching experience before their initial teacher education courses, it
is not easy to adopt strategies such as peer coaching or collaborative action research, which
can be quite valuable when employed as a part of in-service teacher education.

It is possible to transform practitioner knowledge into professional knowledge through

special procedures and activities organized and supported in teacher education. The idea is to
make teacher knowledge public and commonly shared and, consequently, to support student
teachers learning from their experiences. Hiebert and colleagues (2002) emphasize that, in
order to fulfill the requirement of taking place in the public domain, the representation of
knowledge must allow for communication and reflection with others. Therefore, reflection
should be supported in various ways, for example, by carrying out guided small-group
discussions during teaching-practice periods. Reflection refers to a process in which an
experience is recalled, considered, and evaluated, usually in relation to a broader purpose
(Zimmerman, 2002). Similarly, Rodgers (2002) describes reflection as a meaning-making
process comparable to a research process and lists phases of reflection: setting aims and
recognizing the problem(s), observing ones own behavior in practice, describing
observations, and analyzing observations and experiences. The emphasis on reflection
characterizes of the pedagogical studies of teacher education in both Finland and Korea
(Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006; Yun, 2002).

A professional teacher is often viewed as both a critical user and producer of educational
knowledge (Gitlin et al., 1999; Pendry & Husbands, 2000; Reis-Jorge, 2005). A teacher is a user
of educational knowledge when theory and practical experience are combined, or when
educational situations are interpreted based on theoretical knowledge. The capacity to
produce educational knowledge is needed when a teacher builds on knowledge that is based
on her practical experience. Still, as Reis-Jorge (2005) notes, it is challenging for students to
advance from consuming educational research to applying research knowledge and skills in
school practice. In order to develop readiness to consume and produce educational
knowledge, student teachers should be required, for example, to conduct their own small-scale
educational research projects (Gore & Gitlin, 2004).

205
H. Krzywacki et al.

THE FINNISH EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT

The teaching profession in Finland is highly appreciated, and it continues to appeal to
and attract young people. This situation is explained by the fact that Finnish teachers are
considered professionals who take responsibility for planning and evaluating activities,
besides teaching in the classroom (Kansanen, Tirri, Meri, Krokfors, Husu, & Jyrhm, 2000;
Simola, 2005). In the Finnish education system, decision-making power is decentralized to the
local level, and each municipality is responsible for planning the local curriculum, together
with schoolteachers, in accordance with the National Core Curriculum (NCCBE, 2014) and for
monitoring the quality of education. The culture of trust means that educational authorities
and national-level educational policymakers believe in teachers and their knowledge of how
to provide the best possible education for children and youth. For example, there have been
no national or local school inspectors since the late 1980s, neither national-level assessments
of basic education nor systematic evaluations of teachers (Sahlberg, 2011).

The Finnish education policy has aimed to promote educational equality that challenges
teachers in a special way. All learners, despite their various backgrounds and abilities, are
typically placed in heterogeneous classrooms; thus, teachers are called upon to support the
learning of all students (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006; Laukkanen, 2008). Moreover, equality
is promoted through a basic education system that is free of charge (i.e., schoolbooks and other
learning materials, school meals, transportation, and health care are provided to everyone).
Neither private schooling nor tutoring explains the good learning outcomes of Finnish pupils
in general, whereas the private education sector has a great impact on learning outcomes in
Korea (Kim, Lavonen, & Ogawa, 2009).

Physics Teacher Education

Finnish secondary physics teachers of grades 712 hold a five-year masters degree (300
cp1).Secondary teachers typically teach two subjects, such as physics and mathematics, in
lower and upper secondary schools. Physics teacher education is organized in cooperation
between the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Education at the University of Helsinki. The
program comprises studies in two main areas: subject matter-related courses taught in the
subjects departments, and pedagogical courses (60 cp) overseen by the Department of Teacher
Education. In the secondary teacher education program, students take a major (140 cp) and a
minor (60 cp) in the subjects they intend to teach. They are expected to acquire a solid
understanding of content knowledge of physics, especially the subjects conceptual
framework, on the basis of undergraduate courses at the subject department (Evagorou,
Dillon, Viiri & Albe, 2015; Lavonen et al., 2007). Unlike the Korean system, in Finland, there is
no special teacher examination to earn a teacher credential other than the university
graduation diploma.

1One credit point (cp) equals approximately 27 work hours, including lectures, small-group work, and
self-directed learning.

206
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

The one-year pedagogical studies (6o cp2) foster a solid ground for functioning as a
teacher. Courses can be classified into four categories: general education, educational research,
subject pedagogy, and teaching practice (see Table 1). Students apply research methodology
in their small-scale educational thesis. Moreover, different dimensions of the teaching
profession, such as the social, philosophical, psychological, sociological, and historical bases
of education, are discussed. The aim is not only to develop students awareness of various
themes, but also to reflect broadly on ones own personal conceptions of teaching and learning.
The potential for lifelong professional development is considered essential (Lavonen et al.,
2007; Lavonen & Krzywacki, 2011).

THE KOREAN EDUCATION CONTEXT

The national-level school curriculum in Korea emphasizes quality of education and all
citizens equal opportunities for education (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
[MEST], 2009). The curriculum sets the basis for education in all school subjects. Regional
guidelines allow some flexibility for schools and their teachers to customize their programs.

The teaching profession is popular in Korea as in Finland; only 5% of all applicants are
accepted into the teacher education programs (OECD, 2004). However, despite the popularity
of the teaching profession and the careful selection of eligible students, some concerns about
the quality of teachers remain (Lee, 1995; Park, 2002; Yun, 2002). With this in mind, the Korean
government has set three major goals for improving standards for the profession. First,
teachers need to build the competence required to be autonomous experts. Second, school
education should satisfy the publics demand for high quality. Third, a teachers career should
mean a stable and consistent position. In practice, the current movement in Korea is to increase
teacher empowerment and upgrade their professional competence. After graduating from a
university, pre-service teachers are required to pass a competitive examination administered
by either a metropolitan or provincial office of education in order to obtain a teaching position
(MEST, 2009).

In contrast to the Finnish system, the Korean teacher evaluation system has existed since
2010, aiming to improve teachers professional competence. Teachers who receive poor
evaluations are required to undergo additional training to address their particular needs
(MEST, 2010). Teachers with high professional expertise can apply for leading positions at
schools. Professional excellence can also be awarded with the nomination as a master teacher,
one who acts as a peer mentor developing and disseminating effective teaching methods
(MEST, 2009).

Basic and secondary education are free in Korea. However, the proportion of private
expenditures on education in Korea is the highest among OECD member countries (OECD,
2005). Both students and their parents consider extra private education a vital part of the

2 One credit point (cp) equals 27 hour-long lessons comprising lectures and small-group work, apart
from self-directed learning.

207
H. Krzywacki et al.

system (Kim & Kim, 2002). The effectiveness of a teacher and a school are assessed through
the evaluation of students learning outcomes (Bullough, Clark, & Patterson, 2003; Goe, Bell,
& Little, 2008).

Physics Teacher Education

Korean physics teachers are educated in four-year-long bachelors degree programs
(130150 cp3), usually provided by a college of education. The degree includes studies in liberal
arts (20%) and elective studies (20%), and the remaining 60% of coursework is focused on the
students major subject, including courses in subject-matter knowledge, the teaching of
physics (in this case), general education, and teaching practice. The teacher education program
at Seoul National University aims to educate competent and respected teachers who have a
firm understanding of theoretical and experimental physics (Department of Physics Education
at SNU, 2011). The pedagogical studies includes general studies (36 cp) and a set of special
courses (21 cp), including pedagogical theory and teaching practice, as well as an educational
thesis. The pedagogical portion of the program takes approximately one year to complete and
is equal in length to the Finnish pedagogical studies (see Table 1).

METHOD
This paper aims to analyze the pedagogical studies of Korean and Finnish physics
teacher education programs by analyzing the programs curriculum documents. Data analyses
began with an inductive approach (Patton, 2002). The special focus makes it possible to
juxtapose the programs, despite the fact that the organizations devoted to teacher education,
including the credit points of the courses, differs. In practice, the aims set for the teacher
education programs in both countries were examined and categorized, first, in terms of
common themes emerging from the data. The expressions were categorized into ten themes
characterizing the special emphasis of the programs. For example, there were aims focusing
on the planning, implementation, and assessment of teaching; societal issues related to school
and education; and the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in teaching
and learning. However, the comparison of the outcome of the analysis is difficult because in
Korean program there are several optional courses. Therefore, the comparison tell what topics
two programs aims to introduce to students not what an individual student might learn.

The second phase of the analysis involved a discussion of the program themes within
the framework of teacher knowledge. All expressions were categorized in terms of both the
domains and origin of teacher knowledge. Three subsets of teacher knowledge domains were
used: 1) teaching and learning in general, which is associated with GPK, 2) teaching and
learning a specific physics topic, which concerns PCK, and 3) educational research and
research methodology (Res), which we added as a new domain of teacher knowledge that is

3 One credit point (cp) equals 16 hour-long lessons comprising lectures and small-group work, apart
from self-directed learning. Therefore, in a one-credit-point course, a student participates one hour per
week during and entire semester.

208
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

addressed in both Korean and Finnish teacher education programs. Each expression was also
categorized in accordance with the idea of distinguishing between practitioner and
professional knowledge regarding the origin of teacher knowledge (Hiebert et al., 2002).

Some issues emerged during the analysis, since not all expressions were clearly related
to only one knowledge domain. For example, practical knowledge did not emerge only during
teaching practice periods, but also along with the theoretical courses. Therefore, all
expressions referring to knowledge construction through practical experience and reflection
were associated with practitioner knowledge, in terms of the origin of teacher knowledge.
Furthermore, we noticed that the theoretical approach also occurs during teaching practice,
for example, when elaborating on the reasons behind pedagogical decisions in the classroom
through conceptualization. We also made a clear distinction between the aims associated with
GPK and PCK. For instance, the expression Student teachers learn to design physics lessons
by taking into consideration the research on teaching and learning is considered PCK, since
the emphasis is on the representation of content knowledge and understanding specific
learning difficulties and student preconceptions (cf., Van Driel, Verloop, & de Vos, 1998).

In order to increase the validity and reliability (trustworthiness) of the analysis, three
researchers analyzed the documents together. For example, the main categories emerging
from the aims of Finnish and Korean physics teacher education (Table 2) were analyzed and
discussed together, in order to yield an appropriate number of categories that still describe the
original curricula documents. This discussion was challenging because the documents were
written in the countries domestic languages, Finnish and Korean. The coding of all unites
(typically sentences) in the curricula were also discussed together, in order to find agreement
among the researchers.

RESULTS
We discuss the teacher education programs in two phases in order to address the focus
of the study (i.e., to examine how physics teacher education promotes the development of
teacher knowledge). We start by describing the structure and themes of teacher education
programs in order to clarify their core ideas. Then, the aims of the curricula are analyzed
against the framework of three teacher knowledge domains (GPK, PCK, and Res) and the
origin of teacher knowledge.

The pedagogical studies of physics teacher education programs in Finland and Korea
include general theoretical parts, as well as teaching practice periods. The Finnish teacher
education program comprises six separate courses and three teaching practice periods,
whereas the Korean program consists of 17 separate courses and two teaching practice periods
(see Table 1). The amount of time spent focused on pedagogical studies is relatively the same
in both countries, about one year. The meaning of the credit points varies between Finland and
Korea. In Finland, one credit point (cp) is equal to 27 hours of work, including about 1/3 time
of lectures and workshops and 2/3 self-directed learning. In Korea, one credit point is equal

209
H. Krzywacki et al.

to 16hour-long lessons, comprising lectures and small-group work, and apart from self-
directed learning. One Finnish cp is about 2/3 of a Korean cp.
Table 1. Structure of Teacher Education Programs in Finland and Korea
University of Helsinki Seoul National University
(Finland) (Korea)
General courses on Psychology of development and Compulsory (4 cp)
learning, 4 cp (Psy) Understanding special education and special needs
education, teaching and students, 2 cp (Spe)
learning Special needs education, 4 cp (Spe) Understanding the nature of teaching profession, 2
cp (Work)
(GPK) Societal, historical and philosophical
foundations of education, 5 cp (Phil) Optional (14 cp)
Introduction to education, 2 cp (Intro)
Educational psychology, 2 cp (Psy)
Philosophy and history of education, 2 cp (Phil)
Educational sociology, 2 cp (Socio)
Curriculum, 2 cp (Cur)
Educational evaluation, 2 cp (Eval)
Administration and management in education, 2 cp
(Admi)
Educational methodology and technology in
education, 2 cp (Tech)
Guidance and counseling, 2 cp (Guid)
Total 13 cp Total 18 cp

Pedagogy of physics Optional (8 cp)

Introduction to physics teaching, 10 cp (Cur) Physics education, 3 cp (Phy_edu)
(PCK) Evaluation and development of Textbooks and teaching in physics education, 3 cp
teaching, 7 cp (Eval) (Book)
Teaching practice and analysis of secondary school
physics education, 3 cp (Prac_anal)
History of physics concepts, 3 cp (Phy_con)
Total 17 cp Logic and essay in physics, 3 cp (Phy_loc)
Total 8 cp
Educational research Teacher as a researcher seminar, 10 cp (Sem) Research on physics education (0 cp) (Phy_res)
that comprises:
research methodology in education (3 cp)
teacher as a researcher seminar(3 cp)
minor thesis in pedagogy (4 cp)
Total 10 cp

Total 0 cp (accepted without credits)

Teaching practice Basic teaching practice in Teacher Training

School, 7 cp (B_prac) Teaching practice, 2 cp (Prac)
Applied practice, 5 cp (Ap_prac) Voluntary activity in education, 2 cp (Vol_prac)
Master's level practice in Teacher
Training School, 8 cp (Ad_prac)

Reflection, supported by portfolio assessment

work as part of teaching practice (Ref)
Total 20 cp
Total 4 cp

Grand total 60 cp 30 cp
1 credit point (cp) = ~27-hours of work, including 1 credit point (cp) = 16 hours lesson, including lectures
lectures, small-group work, and self-directed and small-group work, apart from self-directed learning
learning
Note: Course acronyms are indicated in parentheses.

210
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

The organization of the pedagogical courses also differs; for example, due to the big
number of separate courses. In Korea, individual courses comprise less content and shorter
length than those in Finland. Furthermore, Korean courses are named meticulously in relation
to their content. In contrast, there are typically several aims set for individual Finnish teacher
education courses. For example, the course Introduction to Physics Teaching covers several
topics, such as teaching and learning physics, student interest and motivation in physics,
national and local curricula including curriculum planning, teaching and assessment methods,
and the use of ICT in physics education. Optional studies are included in the Korean teacher
education program, whereas the courses in Finland are all compulsory for everyone.

Further elaboration on the aims of the teacher educational programs reveals a multifold
picture of the core idea of teacher education in both countries. In the following sections, we
discuss the main themes emerging from the aims set for individual courses. It is noteworthy
that the course list includes overlapping themes and approaches; thus, some themes are
addressed in several parts of the program. Six categories of the aims are addressed in both
Finnish and Korean teacher education curricula, and several common themes emerge (see
Table 2). The numerical and percentage distributions of the aims across the main themes are
shown in order to juxtapose the pedagogical parts of the teacher education programs. For
example, the role of education in society is considered an important theme, especially in Korea
(27%), and to a lesser extent in Finland (19%). Consequently, student teachers become aware
of the different dimensions of the teaching profession in their own country through both
theoretical coursework and practice.

One of the common categories is reflection, which is perceived as an essential part of the
teaching profession (Finland 17%, Korea 18%). As defined by Zimmerman (2002), reflection
refers to an activity in which an experience is recalled, considered, and evaluated in order to
learn as a professional. The aims concerning reflection and reflective activities are distributed
over several courses and teaching practice periods in both the Finnish and Korean teacher
education programs.

211
H. Krzywacki et al.

Table 2. Main Categories Emerging from the Aims of Finnish and Korean Physics Teacher Education,
Definitions of the Categories, and Examples of Original Expressions
Main Category Definition Examples of Original Expressions

Student teachers learn to Fin (24%) Student teachers

design a local curriculum, - develop readiness to understand different views of learning. (Psy)
plan lessons, teach, and - become familiar with issues of group development. (Psy)
support students learning - learn interaction skills. (Psy)
of knowledge, skills, and - learn to design physics teaching by considering research knowledge on
attitudes. In addition, they teaching and learning. (Cur)
Planning
learn to use versatile - learn how to evaluate student learning. (Eval)
instruction,
methods of teaching and Kor Student teachers
teaching, and
assessment. Both the (34%) - learn to apply basics of educational psychology to instruction. (Psy)
assessment
national core curriculum - are able to select the appropriate textbooks, contents, and methods. (Book)
and research-based - learn the fundamentals of theory and practice of the physics educational
knowledge about learning curriculum. (Cur)
and development should be - learn techniques to guide and provide counseling. (Guid)
considered at all phases of - learn methods for applying educational evaluations in school. (Eval)
the process.
Fin (19%) Student teachers learn to
- analyze the historical and societal basis of the school system. (Phil)
Student teachers gain
- cooperate with various interest groups collaborating with the school, such
educational knowledge
as parents. (Eval)
about different perspectives
- contribute to the development of the local-level curriculum. (Eval)
Role of education on the role of education in
- discuss critical collaboration with different interest groups. (Ad_prac)
in society society, such as the school
Kor Student teachers
institute as part of society
(27%) - learn about the characteristics and relevance of different fields of
and the curriculum as an
educational knowledge. (Intro)
education policy document.
- understand the relevance of education to society. (Socio)
- learn about the conceptualization of three educational perspectives. (Intro)
Fin (16%) Student teachers learn
Student teachers learn how - to apply research-based knowledge in physics teaching.
to apply research-based - how to utilize research methodology. (Sem)
Educational
knowledge in their teaching Kor (7%) Student teachers
research
and how to carry out a - learn to frame a research theme related to physics education.
small-scale educational - produce a thesis, including both the empirical sections and a research
research program. literature review under the guidance of academic advisors.
(Phy_res)
Use of Fin (4%) Student teachers develop their readiness to employ ICT in the teaching and
information and learning of physics. (B_prac)
Student teachers learn how
communication Kor (2%) Student teachers learn how to apply methods, techniques, and theories of
to use ICT in teaching and
technologies educational technology in schoolwork. (Tech)
learning.
(ICT) in teaching
and learning
Fin (17%) Student teachers learn to analyze their personal development as teachers.
Student teachers learn to (Cur)
reflect. Reflection refers to
Kor Student teachers learn to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of each
Reflection an activity in which an
(18%) theory on teaching practice. (Socio)
experience is recalled,
considered, and evaluated.

Student teachers gain Fin (7%) Student teachers learn how to work in multiprofessional collaboration at
some teaching experience schools and to assume professional responsibility. (Ad_prac)
and understand that
School practice Kor (6%) Student teachers play an active role as educational volunteers and acquire
multiprofessional
teaching experience. (Vol_prac)
collaboration is part of
school work.

212
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

It is also noteworthy to pay attention to special themes that emerge in only one of the
teacher education programs. Special themes cover 14% of Finnish and 9% of Korean programs.
Discussing the different needs of students and considering how to support various learners
comprise a special theme in Finnish teacher education, which aims to emphasize the
importance of providing equal learning opportunities to various kinds of learners. Moreover,
the nature of science, especially concerning physics as a school subject, is also discussed as a
topic in the course Introduction to physics teaching in Finland (see Table 3).

Table 3. Special Themes Addressed Only in Finnish Physics Teacher Education

Main Category Definition Examples of Original Expressions
Student teachers learn to consider the
Different needs Student teachers learn to
different needs of students and to
of students - identify different kinds of learners. (B_prac)
identify students learning difficulties.
(11%) - identify pupils' learning difficulties. (Spe)

The nature of Student teachers learn to design

Student teachers learn to design subject (physics)
the subject physics lessons and take into account
lessons by considering the epistemological and
(physics) the nature of science.
ontological assumptions of the subject. (Eval)
(3%)

On the other hand, the pedagogical courses in the Korean teacher education program
address issues related to educational reality and school context, as well as a teachers attitude
(see Table 4). Interestingly, the latter category concerns the view of an ideal (physics) teacher
and his commitment to the teaching profession.

Table 4. Special Themes Addressed only in Korean Teacher Education

Main
Definition Examples of Original Expressions
Category

Educational Student teachers learn about educational Student teachers understand the characteristics
reality (4%) practice, reality, and school context. They of physics education and discuss practices from
also learn how to solve problems at school. an educational perspective. (Intro)

Teacher's Student teachers learn about an ideal

Student teachers learn about the profound
attitude teacher's attitude, role and duties, as well as
attitude of an ideal teacher. (Prac)
(5%) mission and professionalism.

The Finnish and Korean teacher education programs are shown in a somewhat different
light in terms of the domains and origin of teacher knowledge. As illustrated in Table 5, the
emphasis on different domains of teacher knowledge varies. Generally, the aims of the Finnish
program are more equally distributed among the three domains of teacher knowledge than
those of its Korean counterpart. The Finnish teacher education curriculum is grounded on the
balanced structure of GPK, PCK, and research knowledge. In contrast, Korean teacher
education seems to be grounded more strongly on GPK (71%) than is the case in Finland (49%),

213
H. Krzywacki et al.

which confirms the results published by Kim, Ham, and Paine (2011), Park (2000), and Yun
(2002). In essence, the main themes of GPK are the same in both programs, except that the
needs of different kinds of learners form a special theme discussed only in Finnish physics
teacher education.

Both Finnish and Korean teacher education programs place approximately the same
emphasis on PCK. According to our analysis, issues related to planning instruction, teaching
and assessment, and aims regarding reflection, are discussed not only at a general level, but
also in the context of physics education. In the Finnish program, other themes, such as the use
of ICT in teaching and learning physics and the different needs of students, are also discussed
from the special perspective of teaching and learning physics.

Interestingly, the emphasis on educational research and carrying out a research project
is greater in the Finnish (16%) teacher education program than in the Korean (4%) one.
However, the research category provides information only about activities that aim either to
produce research or to learn about the research process itself. Many expressions of using and
applying research knowledge were associated with other domains of teacher knowledge, such
as PCK.

Table 5. Numerical and Percentage Distributions of the Aims across the Main Categories in Finnish
and Korean Teacher Education
Numerical and percentage distributions of the aims
Main category Finland South Korea
GPK PCK Res Total GPK PCK Res Total
1. Planning instruction, 7 11 18 24% 11 10 21 34%
teaching and assessment
2. Role of education in society 14 14 19% 17 17 27%
3. Educational research 12 12 16% 4 4 7%
4. Use of ICT in teaching and 3 3 4% 1 1 2%
learning
5. Reflection 7 6 13 17% 7 4 11 18%
6. School practice 5 5 7% 4 4 6%
7. Different needs of students 4 4 8 11% 0
8. The nature of the subject 2 2 3% 0
(physics)
9. Educational reality 0 2 2 4%
10.Teacher's attitude 0 3 3 5%
37 26 12 75 45 14 4 63
49% 35% 16% 100% 71% 22% 6% 100%

Finally, we discuss the Finnish and Korean teacher education programs by comparing
the distribution of teacher knowledge domains against the categorization of knowledge origin
(see Table 6). In Finland, 53% of the aims are associated with professional knowledge and 47%
with practitioner knowledge. The corresponding results concerning Korean teacher education
comprise 73% and 27%, respectively. The Finnish system seems to be rather balanced in terms

214
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

of the origin of teacher knowledge, while a professional approach to teacher knowledge

dominates the Korean teacher education program. The findings are partly a consequence of
the roles of teaching practice and research orientation in the programs. Teaching practice
constitutes 20 credit points of Finnish teacher education, which forms one-third of the
pedagogical studies (60 cp) (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006; Pehkonen, Ahtee, & Lavonen,
2007). In the Korean program, only four credit points are allocated for teaching practice, which
is equal to one-seventh of the program (30 cp).

Table 6. Comparison of Numerical and Percentage Distributions of Teacher Knowledge Domains

against the Origins of Teachers Knowledge
Origin of Teacher Together
GPK PCK Res
Knowledge
Finland 22 29% 8 11% 5 7% 35 47%
Practitioner
Korea 7 11% 6 10% 4 6% 17 27%
Finland 15 20% 18 24% 7 9% 40 53%
Theoretical
Korea 38 60% 8 13% 0 0% 46 73%
Finland 37 49% 26 35% 12 16% 75
Total
Korea 45 71% 14 22% 4 6% 63

Finnish physics teachers pedagogical studies include a relatively small amount of aims
concerning the practitioners approach to PCK. Instead, PCK is approached rather
theoretically, whereas the practitioner approach is likely associated with general themes of
education. The Korean approach to PCK is more balanced concerning practitioner and
theoretical approaches, although no special stress is laid on PCK in the program. Both Korean
and Finnish student teachers are expected to be involved with the research process in
accordance with the aims of their programs, such as using educational research and engaging
with research activities as part of teacher education (cf., Pendry & Husbands, 2000). The core
of the pedagogical studies in Korea is founded on general pedagogical themes that are
approached theoretically (60%). Research knowledge is included in both Finnish and Korean
teacher education, but only the Finnish program provides a theoretical approach to research
themes.

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

We have examined and compared the pedagogical studies in Finnish and Korean
physics teacher education programs by analyzing what kind of knowledge construction they
aim to support. Notably, it is impossible to examine the actual amount of lesson hours
allocated to particular themes by analyzing and categorizing the aims of the pedagogical
studies. Instead, the classification lets us discuss the importance of each category that reflects
a particular subset of aims and provides a fruitful ground for elaborating on special features,
as well as the organization of initial teacher education. The analysis helps us understand what
aims the programs emphasize. We have focused on the pedagogical studies in teacher

215
H. Krzywacki et al.

education that aim directly to improve pre-service teachers professional abilities (Kim et al.,
2011; Shulman, 1986).

The organization of pedagogical studies as part of the physics teacher education

program varies to some extent between Korea and Finland. Both Finnish and Korean teacher
education seem to place the same emphasis on pedagogical studies in relation to the overall
program. However, it is also noteworthy that the Korean program is carried out at the four-
year bachelors degree level, whereas Finnish physics teachers acquire their qualifications for
the teaching profession during a five-year masters level program. However, the amount of
time spent on pedagogical studies in the program is almost the same, even though the
calculation of credit points differs. Finnish teachers are claimed to have a profound starting
point as professionals due to the emphasis on initial teacher education. Even Finnish students
success in the PISA testing is perceived as a consequence of the high quality of their
schoolteachers (Hautamki et al., 2008; Sahlberg, 2008). However, the role of Korean teachers
in Korean students success has not been emphasized as much. An explanation is that Korea
currently has the worlds largest system of supplementary private cram schools and tutors
(Baker & LeTendre, 2005; Kim, Lavonen, & Ogawa, 2009), which that hardly exist in the
Finnish education system.

In general, pedagogical studies of physics teacher education programs can be organized

as fostering primarily either higher competence levels in particular themes or by their general
stance towards the teaching profession (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Grossman,
1990; Hargreaves, 1994; Levin, 2008). Teacher educators who emphasize the role of teachers as
deliverers of information tend to support developing a thorough knowledge base, while those
who stress the reflective and investigative role are likely to rely on a reflective and research-
based approach, with less emphasis on particular contents (Hargreaves, 1994; Levin, 2008). In
practice, the question of depth versus breadth involves the degree of specialization and the
integration of courses (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Grossman, 1990). The
distribution of and emphasis on courses differ greatly between Korean and Finnish teacher
education. The number of courses is greater in Korea than in Finland, where the amount of
separate courses has been reduced based on student feedback (Lavonen & Krzywacki, 2008).
It seems that, in Finland, this reduction has led to a need to consider carefully the core ideas
and compose a coherent whole in general, while Korean teacher education aims to cover a
broader range of topics. The Korean program comprises several individual courses. For
example, the themes concerning educational sociology, philosophy, and history are discussed
in separate courses in Korea, whereas the Finnish program addresses the same themes in a
single integrated course.

The emphasis placed on different teacher knowledge domains reflects the national
education cultures of both countries, and the basis of both Korean and Finnish teacher
education programs has been developed over several decades (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006;
Kang, 1995). A comparison of the programs reveals distinct approaches to the different
domains of teacher knowledge. Pedagogical studies in Korean teacher education clearly

216
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

prioritize GPK, while the Finnish program is based on a rather balanced distribution among
the three domains of teacher knowledge. Furthermore, some themes reveal the special
emphasis of the Finnish education system, such as focusing on how to address the various
needs of students. The theme of differentiation and special needs education is included in the
Finnish program as a result of the national education policy that stresses equality.

It is also possible to characterize teacher education programs by elaborating on missing

themes. For example, Korean teacher education lacks the theme of special needs education,
which is not highlighted in the national education policy. Moreover, neither Korean nor
Finnish teacher education programs have set special goals related to collaboration with
parents and various societal interests. However, these issues are dealt with slightly during
teaching practice periods. Only a small number of goals are related to the use of ICT in teaching
and learning. It is noteworthy that the European Commission (2010) emphasizes the
significance of both school partnerships and collaboration and the utilization of technological
applications in schools.

Most of the differences are consequences of the historical development of teacher

education in both countries (Kang, 1995; Kansanen, 1993; Kwak, 1998). The pedagogical
studies as a part of the Finnish teacher education program have focused on PCK, on
didactics to be precise, since the master-level teacher education qualification was established
at the end of the 1970s (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006; Simola, 1998). From the beginning, the
balance between PCK and GPK has been attained in Finnish teacher education. Furthermore,
the research orientation has been regarded as a guiding principle of the Finnish program,
where student teachers learn about and through research (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006;
Lavonen & Krzywacki, 2008; Teacher Education Development Program, 2001). The research
orientation is realized over several courses and during the teaching practice period by using
and producing educational research (cf., Korthagen, Loughran, & Russel, 2006). Activities aim
not only to produce and understand research, but also to build readiness for lifelong learning
and taking a critical stance towards teaching. Second, through an emphasis on research,
teachers are educated on how to research or reflect on their own practice and improve it
(Evagorou et al., 2015). Consequently, the emphasis on research orientation helps strike a
balance between the aims focusing on professional and practitioner knowledge. Student
teachers become familiar with research through various activities that are founded on recent
educational research. All three teacher knowledge domains have been emphasized equally in
Finnish teacher education, with no radical changes over the years.

The Korean education policy on teacher education has been different due to its
continuous process of change. However, its development has not concerned the balance
among different teacher knowledge domains (Kang, 1995; Kwak, 1998; Park, 2000). Since the
1970s, Korean teacher education has aimed primarily at developing GPK, which is regarded
as essential for the profession (Kang, 1995; Kim, 2005; Yun, 2002). However, research
knowledge and skills have not been considered a crucial part of bachelor-level teacher

217
H. Krzywacki et al.

education (Park, 2000; SNUCE, 2009). Student teachers are required to complete a minor thesis,
but research knowledge plays a rather insignificant role in the program.

The pedagogical studies of physics teacher education programs appear quite different if
approached in terms of the origin of teacher knowledge (Hiebert et al., 2002). Several scholars
have stressed the importance of finding a balance between professional (theoretical) and
practitioner knowledge (see e.g., Grossman, 1990; Hargreaves, 1994; Richardson, 1997).
University-level education has traditionally aimed at helping students to gain professional
knowledge, for example, through the reading different texts, articles, and research literature.
On the other hand, practitioner knowledge is acquired through student teachers practical
experience during teaching practice periods only (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005;
Levin, 2008). Pedagogical studies in both Korea and Finland include a limited amount of this
kind of practical experience. Since practitioner knowledge is unlikely absorbed
straightforwardly from practical experience, reflective activities play an essential role in both
Korean and Finnish teacher education.

Reflective activities require students to assume an active role by setting personal goals
apart from the official general aims for teaching practice. Student teachers are encouraged to
note observations of their own activities, both inside and outside the classroom, and, finally,
to reflect on these notions against the original aims (cf., Rodgers, 2002). Supervision helps to
approach practical experience from different perspectives, and their degree of independence
increases along with their progress. The emphasis on professional or practitioner knowledge
in a teacher education program is a consequence of the philosophical stance towards learning
in general (Hargreaves, 1994; Richardson, 1997). The Finnish teacher education program
emphasizes subjectivity in building knowledge and skills, so that student teachers are
expected to integrate subject-matter knowledge, PCK, and GPK into their own personal
pedagogical theories (Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006; Pehkonen et al., 2007). In contrast, the
Korean teacher education program is based on the idea of teachers as deliverers of knowledge
(Kang, 1995; Kim, 2005; Park, 2000; Yun, 2002). Consequently, the Korean program seems to
stress a solid ground for a broad range of knowledge and skills that teachers should acquire
(Lee, 1995). This knowledge is also tested with a written examination when a teacher applies
for a position at a public or private school. The result is the emphasis on professional
knowledge in the Korean program.

The outcome of the content analysis of Finnish and Korean pedagogical studies of
physics teacher education programs could be easily reflected in terms of an ideal professional
or an effective teacher. In both countries, teachers hold high status; therefore, teacher
professionalism is recognized (Mller, Norrie, Hernndez, & Goodson, 2010). Nonetheless, in
Korea, an ideal teacher is regarded as effective, rather than professional, due to the emphasis
on the comparison of student learning outcomes and ranking to evaluate teachers (Williamson
& Walberg, 2004). The Korean education system is close to the accountability approach, where
testing is organized in order to identify effective and ineffective schools and teachers.

218
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

To conclude, the domains and origins of teacher knowledge make it possible to elaborate
on the structure and organization of the pedagogical studies of physics teacher education
programs and thus to juxtapose two different teacher education programs representing
distinct traditions. The domains of teacher knowledge and the emphasis of separate domains
provide a perspective on teacher education, but a deeper examination is possible only by
explaining teacher education through the origin of knowledge. The programs educate teachers
based on different education contexts, which is advisable to keep in mind when drawing
conclusions from the analyses. Actually, the analyses of the programs reflect, to a large extent,
the countries educational contexts. As Lederman and Lederman (2015) argue, because of the
differences in context, we must conclude that there is no single best way to educate future
physics teachers.

REFERENCES
Abell, S. K., Rogers, M. P., Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Gagnon, M. J. (2009). Preparing the next
generation of science teacher educators: A model for developing PCK for teaching science
teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-90.
Auguste, B., Kihn, P., & Miller, M. (2010). Closing the talent gap: Attracting and retaining top third graduates
to a career in teaching: An international and market research-based perspective. Washington, DC:
McKinsey.
Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World culture and the future
of schooling. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Brinkman, F. G., & van Rens, E. (1999). Student teachers research skills as experienced in their
educational training. European Journal of Teacher Education, 22(1), 115125.
Bullough Jr., R. V., Clark, D. C., & Patterson, R. S. (2003). Getting in step: Accountability, accreditation
and the standardization of teacher education in the United States. Journal of Education for Teaching:
International Research and Pedagogy, 29(1), 3551.
Carlsen, W. (1999). Domains of teacher knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.),
Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp.
133144). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cohen, D. (2008). Knowledge and teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 34(3), 357378.
College of Education at Seoul National University (SNUCE) (2009). Introduction to College of Education
at Seoul National University. Seoul: SNUCE.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Educational Policy Analysis and Archives, 8(1), 1-45, DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should
learn and be able to do. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Department of Physics Education at Seoul National University (SNUDPE) (2011). Introduction to
Department of Physics Education at Seoul National University. Seoul: SNUDPE.
European Commission (2010). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications.
Brussels: Directorate-General for Education and Culture, European Commission. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/principles_en.pdf
Evagorou, M., Dillon, J., Viiri, J, & Albe, V. (2015) Pre-service science teacher preparation in Europe:
Comparing pre-service teacher preparation programs in England, France, Finland and Cyprus.
The status of preservice science teacher education: A global perspective. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 26(1), 99-115.

219
H. Krzywacki et al.

Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess-

Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its
implications for science education (pp. 317). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.). (1999).Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The
construct and its implications for science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gitlin, A., Barlow, L., Burbank, M., Kauchak, D., & Stevens, T. (1999). Pre-service teachers thinking on
research: Implications for inquiry oriented teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education 15,
753769.
Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis.
Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Gore, J., & Gitlin, A. (2004). [Re] visioning the academic-teacher divide: Power and knowledge in the
educational community. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 10(1), 3558.
Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher. Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers
College Press, Columbia University.
Hargreaves, D. (1994). The new professionalism: Synthesis of professional and institutional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 10(4),
423438.
Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership as distributed leadership: heresy, fantasy or possibility? School
Leadership & Management, 23(3), 313-324.
Hashweh, M. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content
knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(3), 273292.
Hativa, N., Barak, R., & Simhi, E. (2001). Exemplary university teachers: Knowledge and beliefs
regarding effective teaching dimensions and strategies. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(6), 699-
729.
Hautamki, J. et al. (Eds.) (2008). PISA: Analyses reflections explanations. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would
it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher 31(5), 315.
Jakku-Sihvonen, R., & Niemi, H. (2006). The Bologna process and its implementation in teacher
education. In R. Jakku-Sihvonen & H. Niemi (Eds.), Research-based teacher education in Finland
Reflections by Finnish teacher educators (pp. 1750). Turku: Finnish Educational Research
Association.
Kang, H. G. (1995). Teacher education. Seoul: Gyohak-yeongu Publications. [in Korean]
Kansanen, P. (1993). Some general reflections on essence of didactics. Didaktisk Tidskrift 3, 1729.
Kansanen, P. (2002). Didactics and its relation to educational psychology: Problems in translating a key
concept across research communities. International Review of Education, 48(6), 427441.
Kansanen, P., Tirri, K., Meri, M., Krokfors, L., Husu, J., & Jyrhm, R. (2000). Teachers' pedagogical
thinking. Theoretical landscapes, practical challenges. American University Studies xiv 47. New York:
Peter Lang Publishing.
Kim, B. C. (2001). Comparative analysis on teacher education program between Korea and U.S.A. The
Journal of Educational Administration, 19(4), 201228. [in Korean
Kim, M., Lavonen, J., & Ogawa, M. (2009). Experts' opinion on the high achievement of scientific literacy
in PISA 2003: A comparative study in Finland and Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science
& Technology Education, 5(4), 379393.
Kim, N. S. (2005). Teacher education. Seoul: Hakjisa Publication. [in Korean]
Kim R. Y., Ham, S. W., & Paine, L. W. (2011). Knowledge expectations in mathematics teacher
preparation programs in South Korea and the United States: Towards international dialogue.
Journal of Teacher Education, 62(1), 4861.

220
 EURASIA J Math Sci and Tech Ed

Kim, Y., & Kim, M. (2002). Analysis of educational situation of cram schools designed to prepare students for
college entrance examination. Seoul: Korea Educational Development Institute.
Korthagen, F. (2007). The gap between research and practice revisited. Educational Research and
Evaluation 13(3), 303310.
Korthagen, F., Loughran, J., & Russel, T. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher
education programs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 10201041.
Kwak, Y. W. (1998). Educational reform and developmental issues of college of education. Korean
Teacher Education, 15(1), 88108. [in Korean]
Laukkanen, R. (2008). Finnish strategy for high-level education for all. In N. Soguel & P. Jaccard (Eds.),
Governance and performance of education systems (pp. 305324). AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Springer.
Lavonen, J., & Krzywacki, H. (2011). Teachers professional knowledge in Finnish secondary teacher
education. Paper presented at the International Conference on Teacher Education, April 2011.
Taichung, Taiwan: National Taichung University.
Lavonen, J., & Krzywacki, H. (2008). Research-based approach in pedagogical studies within Finnish
science teacher education: Student teachers experiences and evaluation. In B. Cavas (Ed.),
Proceedings of the XIII IOSTE Symposium on The Use of Science and Technology Education for Peace and
Sustainable Development, 2126 September 2008 (pp. 8995). Kuadas/Turkey Izmir: Dokuz Eylul
University.
Lavonen, J., Krzywacki, H., Aksela, M., Krokfors, L., Oikkonen, J., & Saarikko, H. (2007). Pre-service
teacher education in chemistry, mathematics and physics. In E. Pehkonen, M. Ahtee, & J. Lavonen
(Eds.), How Finns learn mathematics and science? (pp. 4967). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2015). The Status of Preservice Science Teacher Education: A Global
Perspective. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(1), 1-6.
Lee, J. J. (1995). Position of college of education at university and structure of curriculum. Secondary
Education of Kyung Sang University, 7, 3872. [in Korean]
Levin, B. (2008). Investigating the content and sources of teacher candidates personal practical theories
(PPTS). Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 5568.
Lieberman, A. (1992). Teacher leadership: What are we learning? In C. Livingston (Ed.), Teachers as
Leaders: Evolving Roles (pp. 159-166). Washington, D.C., United States: National Education
Association.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) (2009). Education in Korea 20092010. Seoul:
MEST.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST). (2010). Educational policies in Korea. Seoul:
MEST.
Morine-Dershimer, G., & Kent, T. (1999). The complex nature and sources of teachers pedagogical
knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content
knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 2150). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Mller, J., Norrie, C., Hernndez, F., & Goodson, I. (2010). Restructuring teachers worklives and
knowledge in England and Spain. Compare, 40(3), 265-277.
NCCBE (2014). The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. Helsinki: National Board of Education.
Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/ops2016
Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding: The complex nature of pedagogical content knowledge
in pre-service education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 12811299.
Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237257.
OECD (2005). OECD in Figures 2005 edition. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/document/62/0,2340,en_2649_34489_2345918_1_1_1_1,00.html

221
H. Krzywacki et al.

OECD (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrows world, volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD.
OECD (2010). PISA 2009: Volume 2: Data. Paris: OECD.
Park, S. I. (Ed.). (2002). Reforming schools in Korea: Beyond the "equalisation policy" debate. Seoul:
Korea Development Institute. [in Korean]
Park, S. W. (2000). Paradigm of teacher education at college of education. Journal of Educational
Administration, 18(2), 275298. [in Korean]
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Pehkonen, E., Ahtee, M., & Lavonen, J. (2007). How Finns learn mathematics and science. Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
Pendry, A., & Husbands, C. (2000). Research and practice in history teacher education. Cambridge Journal
of Education, 30(3), 321334.
Reis-Jorge, J. M. (2005). Developing teachers knowledge and skills as researchers: A conceptual
framework. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(3), 303319.
Richardson, V. (Ed.). (1997). Constructivist teacher education. Bristol: Falmer Press.
Rockoff, J. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data.
American Economic Review, 94(2), 247-252.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers
College Record, 104(4), 842856.
Sahlberg, P. (2008). Rethinking accountability in a knowledge society. Journal of Educational Change,
10(2), 12.
Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher,
15(2), 414.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of new reform. Harvard Educational Review,
57, 122.
Simola, H. (1998). Constructing a school-free pedagogy: Decontextualization of Finnish state
educational discourse. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(3), 339356.
Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and
teacher education. Comparative Education, 41(4), 455470.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (2001). Professional development and reform in
science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
38(2), 137158.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers pedagogical content
knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673695.
Williamson, M. E., & Walberg H. J. (Eds.). (2004). Testing student learning, evaluating teaching effectiveness.
Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University.
Yun, J. I. (2002). Developing the quality of education and direction of teacher education system. Paper
presented at the 36th Seminar of Korean Teacher Education Association. (pp. 727). [in Korean]
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64
70.

http://iserjournals.com/journals/eurasia

222