学科核心素养和素养导向的教学对教师提出了新的挑战，经典PCK关注将学科知识转化为学生容易理解的形式，强调教授知识的方法与策略。但素养是价值观、品格和能力的融合，其教学与知识传授有很大的不同，故PCK的内涵和构成要素需要进一步丰富。本研究在经典PCK的基础上，提出素养导向学科教学知识（PCCK）的概念，对PCCK的构成模型，具体内涵，水平与测评开展了系统的研究，并将这些研究结果应用于教师培训中。

本研究围绕经典PCK的研究进行了文献综述，从PCK的内涵与构成、特定学科和领域的PCK构成、PCK的测评等几个方面展开，主要支持后续PCCK构成与测评的研究。除此之外，还对学科核心素养和素养导向教学的相关研究文献进行了梳理，包括学科核心素养的内涵与特征、化学学科观念和认识方式、学习进阶、促进素养发展的策略等方面，这部分综述贡献了PCCK的发展点，为PCCK模型和水平特征的分析提供支持。

关于PCCK的构成模型与内涵解析，本研究通过文献研究、案例分析和理论阐释，在梳理学科核心素养特征的基础上提出了素养导向学科理解（CCK）的概念。从学科研究对象、认识方式和学科观念三方面阐释了学科知识的认识价值；从学科能力、实际应用和态度责任三方面阐释了学科知识的育人价值，基于此建构了CCK的构成模型。并结合无机元素化合物和电解质溶液两个主题举例分析了CCK的具体内涵。在CCK的基础上，通过案例分析、文献和理论阐释梳理了包含单元规划、学习诊断、问题解决、认识发展、活动育人等要素的素养导向课程理解与教学策略（CPK）。将CCK和CPK融合形成PCCK的构成模型，并阐述了PCCK相较于经典PCK的发展点，在教学设计编码分析中初步检验了PCCK模型的合理性。

关于PCCK的水平与测评，本研究在已有PCK水平研究的基础上，对《教师培训课程指导标准》和《普通高中化学课程标准》（2017年版）中的水平特征进行了分析与概括，预设PCCK的四级水平特征，从低到高分别是“知识结论导向”、“知识理解导向”、“一般思路方法与能力导向”和“主题独特认识和育人价值导向”。并邀请专家对PCCK模型及水平预设的合理性进行了论证。在此基础，本研究设计了PCCK测评工具，结合Rasch模型和专家建议进行了多轮次的检验，工具的任务信度和样本信度均符合要求，题目-样本的分布、样本与模型的匹配性、选项区分度等指标均良好，最终的测评工具包含37个任务，较好地覆盖了PCCK模型的各个要素。利用实证数据进行探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析，对PCCK模型和工具的结构效度进行了验证。通过分阶Wright图对PCCK水平进行了检验和调整。

关于PCCK的水平现状，本研究收集了来自不同地区，包含不同职称、教龄和学历背景的411个教师样本数据，分析了这一样本群体中PCCK的水平现状。测评结果显示大部分教师处于一般思路方法与能力导向的教学水平（水平3），该水平的教师认为基于知识形成的一般方法和能力最重要，例如科学探究、分类法等，但尚不能分析具体的发展点。教师教学中示范一般思路方法，通过知识应用活动培养学生的能力，但因为不明确具体发展点导致教学指导和点评不到位。真正达到素养导向教学水平（水平4）的教师比例约为22%，在CCK和CPK要素上表现较差。在CPK各二级要素中，教师在认识发展、问题解决要素上表现较差，具体表现为学生活动缺乏挑战性和水平梯度，不能突出内容的认识价值，相当比例的教师仍以启发讲授为主；所选真实情境不能与学科内容很好地融合，容易顾此失彼；较少基于真实问题解决逻辑设计和开展教学。

本研究还分析了职称、教龄、学历等因素与教师PCCK的关系。结果显示，职称和学历水平越高，PCCK能力值越高，且存在显著性差异。教龄的影响较为复杂，教龄少于3年教师的PCCK各项能力值最低，教龄4~20年教师的PCCK能力值无显著性差异。

本研究还应用PCCK构成模型和测评工具开展了专题培训，进一步检验PCCK模型和测评工具的实用性。通过测评数据和访谈、课堂实录分析了教师PCCK的发展情况。结果显示，培训后教师的PCCK总水平和各要素水平均有显著提升，但不同要素提升的幅度有差异，活动育人要素的提升相对较小。说明PCCK模型可以用于支持培训内容的设计，测评工具可以反映教师的发展变化。

       Based on the existing studies of PCK, the literature review of this study is carried out from several aspects such as the connotation and composition of PCK, the development of PCK, and the assessment of PCK, which mainly supports the subsequent study on the composition and evaluation of PCCK. Based on this, this study analyzes the researches about discipline key competences, including the connotation and characteristics of discipline key competences, and the relationship between content knowledge and discipline key competences, the discipline characteristics and the strategy for competence-oriented teaching. This part mainly supports the connotation of PCCK. In addition, it also summarizes the related studies on learning progression, focusing on the themes, progression variables, levels and construction methods of learning progression. On the one hand, it enrich the curriculum elements in the study of PCCK connotation, and on the other hand, it supports the performance level study of PCCK.

       As for the connotation and composition of PCCK, this study makes clear the constituent elements of PCCK through the analysis of the constituent elements of PCK, the connotation of the discipline key competences and the characteristics of the competence-oriented teaching, and constructs the connotation of each constituent element by combining with the teaching cases of the thematic cognition model. In this study, PCCK is considered to consist of three first level elements, namely, "the content knowledge", "the competence-oriented understanding of the discipline" and "the curriculum understanding and teaching strategy for competence-oriented teaching". Among them, content knowledge with literacy function is the foundation and the carrier of discipline key competences. The competence-oriented understanding of the discipline is the link between content knowledge and development of discipline key competences. The curriculum understanding and teaching strategy for competence-oriented teaching are supportive and directly promote teachers' teaching. The curriculum understanding and teaching strategy for competence-oriented teaching which including five secondary elements, respectively is " curriculum unit and learning progression designing based on CCK", "learning diagnosis of the discipline concept and cognitive mode", " question and activity design based on real problems solving ", "the cognitive development strategy highlighting viewpoint collision" and "the teaching strategy enhance the educational function".

       About the current level of PCCK, this study collected data from 411 teacher samples from different regions, including different professional titles, teaching years and educational backgrounds, and analyzed the current level of PCCK in this group.The evaluation results show that most teachers are at the level of general thinking methods and ability-oriented teaching (Level 3). Teachers at this level think that general methods and abilities based on knowledge formation are the most important, such as scientific inquiry, classification, etc., but they still cannot analyze specific development points.Teachers demonstrate general ideas and methods in teaching and cultivate students' abilities through knowledge application activities. However, due to unclear specific development points, teaching guidance and comments are not in place.The proportion of teachers who really reach the level of quality-oriented teaching (level 4) is about 22%, and their performance in CCK and CPK elements is poor.Among CPK's second-level elements, teachers performed poorly in terms of cognitive development and problem solving elements, which was specifically reflected in the lack of challenge and level gradient in student activities, and the inability to highlight the cognitive value of content. A significant proportion of teachers still focused on enlightening and teaching.The chosen real situation cannot be well integrated with the subject content, and it is easy to overlook one or lose the other.Less design and teaching based on real problem solving logic.

       This study also analyzed the relationship between professional title, teaching age, educational background and teacher PCCK.The results showed that the higher the professional title and educational level, the higher the PCCK ability value, and there was a significant difference.The influence of teaching years is more complex, teaching years less than 3 years of teachers PCCK ability value is the lowest, teaching years 4 to 20 years of teachers PCCK ability value has no significant difference.