This paper considers the contributions of the first three papers to this symposium in relation to their historical roots, epistemological traditions and recent developments. In particular, it explores differences between research traditions in relation to teaching and learning with special attention given to the Germanic and Francophone traditions. These traditions are seen as offering tools and ways of thinking that help to recognize and hold the complexity of teaching-studying-learning processes and also provide a relational framework that enables the study of both teaching and learning at the heart of teaching-studying-learning processes. A key theme running through this analysis is that of complexity associated with teaching-studying-learning processes – both in terms of conceptual tools for holding complexity and also ways of thinking that address complexity. A key tool for the analysis of the complex relations between teacher, student and content knowledge in teaching-studying-learning processes is the ‘didactic triad’ and associated with this are ways of thinking that might be described as ‘didactical thinking’. Such approaches provide the basis of an integrative and relational model for considering the relationships teachers, students and subject matter. Furthermore ‘didactical thinking’ offers an alternative to the dominant discourse that surrounds discussions about education policy in the West. These are typified by a world view which sees the social and cultural world as an `objective’ structure and the task of curriculum being simply to present this structure to students, on the assumption that culture and society can be reduced simply to facts to be learned. In contrast, within the didactic tradition, the social and cultural world is ‘subjectified’ and it is seen that there are things to be learned, but students are to be encouraged to find their own path. In turn, parallels can be drawn between these traditions and Eastern ways of thinking based on an understanding of the nature of wholes and through a process of seeing, and therefore thinking and acting, holistically. The paper also considers how some of these ideas have influenced research and development in relation to the application of an integrative didactical design-based research framework. Finally, it reflects on recent examples of research and development projects at the national level in which some of these ideas have been applied.

Hudson, B. (In preparation) European Didactics Traditions: Insights for Teaching and Learning. In J. Chi-Kin Lee and K. Kennedy (Eds.) European Didactics and Chinese Curriculum: Curriculum Thoughts in Dialogue, Routledge. Hudson, B. (2016) Epistemology and Methodology of Curriculum: Didactics. In D. Wyse, L. Hayward and J. Pandya (Eds.) SAGE Handbook of Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, Sage Publications. (In preparation) Hudson, B. (2015) Butterflies and Moths in the Amazon: Developing Mathematical Thinking through the Rainforest, Education and Didactique (In preparation). Hudson, B., Henderson, S. and Hudson, A., (2014) Developing Mathematical Thinking in the Primary Classroom: Liberating Teachers and Students as Learners of Mathematics, Journal of Curriculum Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.979233 Hudson, B. and Meyer, M. (2011) Introduction: Finding common ground beyond fragmentation. In B. Hudson and M. Meyer (Eds.) Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics, Learning and Teaching in Europe, Verlag Barbara Budrich, Opladen and Farmington Hills, 9-28. Hudson, B. and Schneuwly, B. (2007) Editorial. In Hudson, B. and Schneuwly, B. (Eds.) Special Issue of the European Educational Research Journal (EERJ) on Didactics: Learning and Teaching in Europe, Vol. 6, No. 2, 106-108. Hudson, B. (2002) Holding complexity and searching for meaning – teaching as reflective practice, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1): 43–57.