Teaching General Didactics in Teacher Education

Author(s):

Ilmi Willbergh(presenting / submitting)Turid Skarrre Aasebø(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

10. Teacher Education Research

Format:

Paper

Session Information

10 SES 02 C,

Paper Session

Time:

2015-09-08

15:15-16:45

Room:

209.Oktatóterem [C]

Chair:

Edgar Krull

Contribution

A multiple-case study (Stake, 2005) in four Norwegian Lower Secondary schools found, by method of classroom observation, three different types of ‘teaching communication’: ‘Dialogic teaching communication’, ‘storytelling teaching communication’ and ‘reproducing teaching communication’ (Aasebø, Midtsundstad, & Willbergh). ‘Teaching communication’, is defined as teachers’ and students’ talk about subject matter in whole-class teaching. The previous study explored how different school cultures give different opportunities for students to experience meaning in teaching. In this paper we will explore the following research question: How are the different forms of ‘teaching communication’ reflected in teacher education in the two regions?

The theoretical foundation of this study lies within the German Didaktik tradition, or Allgeimeine Didaktik (Westbury, Hopmann, & Riquarts, 2000) which was established as the leading professional language of teachers and teacher education in the nineteenth century in Germany and the Nordic countries (Hopmann, 2007). School as an institution promoted the need for autonomous teachers to adapt the national curriculum to the local schools. Didactics is in this way understood as a teacher’s professionalized art of argument and deliberation over how to construct interpretations of curriculum perceived as meaningful by the students. Hence, the purpose of teaching is to make visible interpretations of subject matter, making a connection to the life world and experiences of students and their future prospects (Herbart & Stern, 2002; Willbergh, 2015)6). Classroom interpretations of subject matter are unique (Aasebø, 2011). ‘Dialogic teaching communication’ is the most fruitful form of ‘teaching communication’ from a Bildung-centred perspective.

The set of concepts developed in the previous study consisted of the content aspect (the ‘what’) and the speech aspect (the ‘how’) of verbal communication (Aasebø et al.). The content aspect in ‘teaching communication’, as an adapted or expressed curriculum (‘what do they talk about’), is considered to have more or less ‘diverse’ or ‘homogeneous’ interpretations. The speech aspect (‘how do they talk and who is talking’)’ is considered to be more or less ‘conversing’ or ‘lecturing’. These concepts of ‘teaching communication’ will also be used in the observation of talk on subject matter in teacher education classrooms.

To practice meaningful teaching in the future we assume that teacher students need knowledge on general didactics and Bildung. In addition, as in the case of children in school, for teaching in teacher education to be experienced as meaningful for teacher students, talk about subject matter should allow for students to participate with their experiences when interpreting subject matter.

Method

The empirical study is conducted by using qualitative methods (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). In the first part of the study two secondary schools from a county in Norway with high scores on national tests and two secondary schools from a county with low scores on national tests participated in the study. Data was collected in 2012 and 2013. From each school two teachers were selected for observation and interviews, eight teachers in total. The data was mainly collected by observation of classroom communication between teachers and students about subject matter. Two researchers followed each teacher in their lessons in theoretical subjects over a week, which sometimes involved several grades and classes. Only talk as whole-class activity in the classroom was observed (and not low individual talk between teacher and students. The eight teachers and their principals have also been interviewed individually and the teaching staff has been collectively interviewed in focus groups. Meaning construction was considered to be characterized by the presence and frequency of teachers’ and students’ 1) verbally exploring the subject matter (by referring to students’ experiences, culture and society), 2) participation in terms of initiation of dialogue on the subject matter by asking questions about experiences, examples, reasoning, alternatives, interpretation, imagination, etc., and 3) use of the participation by repeating, using or expanding students’ statements on the subject matter. In the second part of the study we will study how and if the different form of teaching communication that we have found in the two regions is reflected in the teacher education in the two regions. It is only one teachers education institution situated in each og the two counties, and the both teaching education institution serves as the main institution for educating teachers in the region (Langfeldt, Forthcoming). The study of teacher education in the two counties will be conducted in the spring 2015 and will consist of three parts. 1) Analyses of curriculum and text books to discover what teacher students learn about didactic issues. 2) Observation of how teaching communication as the communication about subject matter in the teaching education in the same ways as we carried out the observation in the school, to analyse how teaching is practiced. 3) Interviews with teaching students about teaching.

Expected Outcomes

According to Knudsen (Knudsen, Forthcoming), in Norway schooling is constructed within regional mindsets. He argues that we have two dominant models: the Western and the Eastern. These two models are represented in the sample of our study. The Western model is traditionally the most Bildung-centered. We expect to find the largest degree of ‘dialogic teaching communication’ in teacher education in the Western region, and also that knowledge on on general didactics and Bildung is central here.

References

Aasebø, Turid Skarre. (2011). Anti-schoolness in context: The tension between the youth project and the qualifications project. Social Psychology of Education, 14, 503-518. doi: doi: http://dx.doi.org10.1007/s11218-011-9153-3 Aasebø, Turid Skarre, Midtsundstad, Jorunn H., & Willbergh, Ilmi. Meaningful teaching in the age of accountability: Restrained by school culture? Forthcoming journal publication. Guba, Egon G., & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage. Herbart, Johann Friedrich, & Stern, Jeffrey. (2002). Allgemeine pädagogik. With an introduction by jeffrey stern. Bristol: Thoemmes. Hopmann, Stefan Thomas. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6, 109-124. Knudsen, Jon P. (Forthcoming). Skolen som regionalt prosjekt. In G. Langfeldt (Ed.), Skolens kvalitet bestemmes lokalt. Resultater fra forskningsprosjektet lærende regioner. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Langfeldt, Gjert. (Forthcoming). Skolens kvalitet bestemmes lokalt. Resultater fra forskningsprosjektet lærende regioner. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Stake, R.E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbooks of qualitative research (Third ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Westbury, Ian, Hopmann, Stefan Thomas, & Riquarts, Kurt. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice : The german didaktik tradition. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. Willbergh, Ilmi. (2015). The problems of ‘competence’ and alternatives from the scandinavian perspective of bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2014.1002112

Author Information

Ilmi Willbergh (presenting / submitting)

University of Agder

Kristiansand

Turid Skarrre Aasebø (presenting)

University of Agder

Dep of Education