At the outset of the establishment of the Network 27 on Didactics, Learning and Teaching, the field of didactics, learning and teaching, and teacher education was characterized by its fragmentation. Thus, there was a strong motivation to overcome this fragmentation by searching for common ground (Hudson/Schneuwly 2007; Hudson/Meyer 2011). In a similar way the German discourse on teacher education regards the fragmentation of the whole course of teacher education as a constant challenge (Korthoff/Terhart 2013; Blömeke 2009). This fragmentation between distinct phases and institutions, but also between the various disciplines involved lead to a fragmentation of the professional pedagogical, general and subject-specific didactical knowledge and to a lack of a common terminology which impedes a coherent course of teacher education (Grammes 1998; Reusser 2008). In addition, some observe a trend in the recent discourse which promotes cross-disciplinary work instead of disciplinary teaching (e. g. Dussel 2020). At the same time, there are still references to positions which emphasize the importance of specialized knowledge and warn against a risk of deprofessionalization (Young/Moller 2016; Reh/Caruso 2020). The efforts to develop a general subject didactic (Bayrhuber et al. 2017; Rothgangel et al. 2020) might also be interpreted as a response to these lines of discussion (Reh/Caruso 2020).

Against this backdrop, we can formulate as a core challenge in teacher education, how to link the knowledge of the subject-specific didactics in teacher education to develop professional practical competencies across the disciplines as well as to deepen the subject-specific knowledge?

This question was also an initial point for the project presented in this paper. In this project we have set up an interdisciplinary team which consists of members of the didactic departments in the social sciences, geography and German.  Our aim is the development of interdisciplinary multimedia online learning units for teacher education which address selected core aspects of both subject and general didactics: subject-specific concept of education (Bildung), subject-specific culture of exercises, language in specific subjects, fostering of competencies, structuring lessons, and media. These multimedia online learning units contain various materials as short video clips, podcasts, interview sequences with teachers and students, appropriate specialist literature, further reading suggestions, and training and reflection exercises. The materials should be suitable to be used in courses of teacher education as well as for the purpose of independent studies. By using the learning units pre-service teachers should deepen their subject-specific competencies and also develop an interdisciplinary didactical perspective.

The course of the project follows a step plan for the discussion and development of the learning units (for more details see the paragraph on methodology). In our paper, we will present preliminary results of the first phases of our projects and further questions and perspectives for the following phases.

Specifically, we will focus on results, questions, perspectives relating to the question to the common ground and subject-specific characteristics within the selected core aspects:

What do we learn from these results about the aim of fostering professional practical competencies across the disciplines in the context of teacher education? In general, what can we learn about the aim of an interdisciplinary perspective in teacher education as such? More specifically, in which aspects can an interdisciplinary perspective in teacher education support the development of subject-specific competencies? In which aspects does it support an interdisciplinary didactical perspective? Finally, how can we integrate these results in the online learning units for teacher education?

By embedding the whole project into the course of teacher education, we adopt an approach of action research for higher education didactics (Altrichter/Posch 2007; Reason/Bradbury 2008; Noffke/Somekh 2009). The methodological procedure follows a “spiral of cycles” (Elliot 1991, 69) what means consecutive steps of exploration, discussion, development, implementation, and evaluation that repeatedly follow each other. In the first phase, we integrate selected core aspects of the learning unit as focal points into subject-specific courses of teacher education and organize additional interdisciplinary workshops. In the second phase we continue with the detailed work on these learning units in which we also implement interdisciplinary courses related to these key themes. While the subject-specific courses focus on subject-specific characteristics of these core aspects, the interdisciplinary workshops and courses include the collective work on lesson planning and teaching materials as well as developing models to depict the common ground and subject-specific characteristics within these aspects. By the integration of the discussion and the development of the learning units into subject-specific and interdisciplinary courses and workshops in teacher education we intend to include as many various perspectives on the specific issues been negotiated (Posch/Zehetmeier 2010). During the subject-specific and interdisciplinary courses and workshops one part of the team serves as participant observers and documents the discussions in the working phases. Moreover, we document all materials produced by the participating pre-service teachers in the working phases. Additionally, we enrich these sources and materials with guided expert interviews about the six thematic foci of the online learning modules which we conduct with students and teachers. Within our interdisciplinary team, we conduct comparative analyses of all documents and materials in relation to the subject-specific discourses. On that basis, we identify similarities and differences between the various perspectives as well as a possible common ground and subject-specific characteristics within the six thematic foci of the online learning units. Parallel to these discussions we will develop the learning units and evaluate the implementation of materials and exercises in progress.

The first aim of our project is the development of the multimedia online learning units and the generation of appropriate materials and exercises. Moreover, we intend accompanying research and an interdisciplinary discussion to contribute to the theoretical discourse on a possible common ground and subject-specific particularities in lesson planning (Hopman 2007; Hudson 2007). The selected core aspects of the learning units enable a topical comparative analysis as regards subject matter. Based on that, we can identify thematic aspects that facilitate or complicate the discussion of a common ground and an integrative didactical perspective. The discussions within the courses and workshops in teacher education as well as the conducted interviews enable the consideration of various, also practice-related, perspectives. Based on that, we can identify the needs of pre-service teachers and develop appropriate materials and exercises for the online learning units. In doing so, we finally can contribute to the ongoing discussion how to integrate subject didactic research into the practice of teacher education.

Altrichter, Herbert/Posch, Peter (2007): Lehrerinnen und Lehrer erforschen ihren Unterricht. Unterrichtsentwicklung und Unterrichtsevaluation durch Aktionsforschung. Bad Heilbrunn. Bayrhuber, Horst/Abraham, Ulf/Frederking, Volker/Jank, Werner/Rothgangel, Martin/Vollmer, Helmut Johannes (2017): Auf dem Weg zu einer Allgemeinen Fachdidaktik. Allgemeine Fachdidaktik Band 1. Münster, New York. Blömeke, Sigrid (2009): Lehrerausbildung in Deutschland. In: PÄD-Forum: unterrichten erziehen 37/28 (1): 5-8. Dussel, Ines (2020): The Shifting Boundaries of School Subjects in Contemporary Curriculum Reforms. Towards a Post-Disciplinary Curriculum? In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 66, 5: 666-689. Elliot, John (1991): Action research for educational change. Buckingham. Grammes, Tilman (1998): Kommunikative Fachdidaktik. Politik – Geschichte – Recht – Wirtschaft. Opladen. Hopmann, Stefan (2007): Restrained Teaching: the common core of Didaktik. In: European Educational Research Journal, 6, 2: 109-124). Hudson, Brian (2007): Comparing Different Traditions of Teaching and Learning: what can we learn about teaching and learning? In: European Educational Research Journal, 6, 2: 135-146. Hudson, Brian/Meyer, Meinart A. (Eds.) (2011): Beyond fragmentation: Didactics, Learning and Teaching in Europe. Opladen, Farmington Hills. Korthoff, Hans-Georg/Terhart, Ewald (2013): Teacher education in Germany. Traditional structure, strengths and weakness, current reforms. In: Scuola Democratica 3: 1-9. Noffke, Susan E./Somekh, Bridget (Eds.) (2009): The SAGE Handbook of Educational Action Research. Los Angeles et al. Posch, Peter/Zehetmaier, Stefan (2010): Aktionsforschung in der Erziehungswissenschaft. In: Enzyklopädie Erziehungswissenschaft Online. Weinheim, München. DOI: 10.3262/EEO07100148. Reason, Peter/Bradbury, Hilary (Eds.) (2008): The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Los Angeles et al. Reh, Sabine/Caruso, Marcelo (2020): Entfachlichung? Transformation der Fachlichkeit schulischen Wissens. Zur Einführung. In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 66, 5: 611-625. Reusser, Kurt (2008): Empirisch fundierte Didaktik – didaktisch fundierte Unterrichtsforschung. Eine Perspektive zur Neuorientierung der Allgemeinen Didaktik. In: Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 10, Sonderheft 9: 219-237. Rothgangel, Martin/Abraham, Ulf/Bayrhuber, Horst/Frederking, Volker/Jank, Werner/Vollmer, Helmut Johannes (Eds.) (2020): Lernen im Fach und über das Fach hinaus. Bestandsaufnahmen und Forschungsperspektiven aus 17 Fachdidaktiken im Vergleich. Allgemeine Fachdidaktik Band 2. Münster New York. Young, Michael/Muller, Johann (2016): Curriculum and the specialization of knowledge. Studies in the sociology of education. New York, London.