Conceptualisations of Action in Didaktik and Teaching and Learning Research
Author(s):
Clemens Wieser (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2012
Network:
27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching
Format:
Paper

Session Information

27 SES 05 B, Parallel Paper Session

Parallel Paper Session

Time:
2012-09-19
11:00-12:30
Room:
ESI 3 - Aula 7
Chair:
Yolande Muschamp

Contribution

Concepts for teaching – presented as models, theories or schemes – aim to scaffold teacher action. In contrast to this aim, research on teaching practice has highlighted that teachers do not rely much on scaffoldings provided in these models (Wahl 2001), consequently pointing to a missing link between concepts and practice of teaching. This missing link is caused by a problem present in both Didaktik and teaching and learning research. In the European educational debate, conceptualisations of teaching have been criticised because they “render the complexity of educational reality not only largely unreflective, but even difficult to perceive as sites of reflection” (Jörg, Davis & Nickmans 2007, 148). Concepts for teaching often do not correspond with the everyday actions of teachers. To understand the gap present between concepts for teaching and teaching action, I analysed how action has been conceptualised in Didaktik and teaching and learning research. Both paradigms are subject to change and continuous further development in several European research traditions. A comparative European perspective offers the unique opportunity to analyse advances in conceptualising action in both paradigms. Analysis shows that many theories in both Didaktik and teaching and learning research traditionally do not conceptualise action. However, some current research programs aim to comprehend action through ontological assumptions and readjusted methodological frameworks. These research programs assume that teaching and learning is framed by double contingency (Vanderstraeten 2002) and takes place as situated and performative action and interaction (Breidenstein 2008, 207; Wiesemann 2008, 165) in respect to a specific phenomenon (Gruschka 2005; Terhart 2002, 83). 

Method

For analysis, concepts for teaching developed in both Didaktik and teaching and learning research have been considered theoretical manifestations of competing paradigms. Drawing from a post-Kuhnian analytical matrix developed in philosophy of science (Schurz 1993), these concepts represent theoretical systems and contain specific components. The theoretical core comprises characteristic assumptions on the object of investigation and models that describe mechanisms and relationships between these assumptions. Assumptions and models are established as axioms and constitute the ontological framework of a theory. The methodological component of a theory contains rules for investigation of the object and epistemological assumptions that determine relationship of object and researcher as well as research focus. The programmatic component illustrates how phenomena and relationships associated with the object will be explained, usually generalising from showcase projects. Concepts of Didaktik and teaching and learning research were fragmented into ontological components, methodological components and programmatic components. Theoretical assumptions in each of these three components have been described and compared to explore and contrast assumptions on action made in both paradigms.

Expected Outcomes

Analysis shows that current concepts programmatically aim to suggest strategies for teaching, but miss to conceptualise teaching and learning as interaction between teachers and learners. However, some emergent research approaches aim to build links between concepts and practice of teaching. These approaches share the assumption that research on teaching and learning has to examine classroom interaction in its natural setting in schools and leave experimental research designs. Even though this assumption has methodological implications in favour of qualitative research, ontological assumptions vary. The hermeneutical approach (Gruschka 2011) is rooted in the German tradition of philosophy of education and analytically employs several of its traditional categories such as Vermittlung (impartment of knowledge), Erziehung (education) and Bildung. Gruschka uses these categories for analysis of classroom interaction and conceptually develops Didaktik as an action theory (Gruschka 2005). The ethnographic approach (Breidenstein 2010) ontologically frames schooling as a system that creates a cultural order to stabilise conditions for classroom interaction. This system influences classroom interaction, itself conceptualised as a system that reproduces social order through rituals (Wulf 2010). Both approaches introduce concepts for empirical analysis of classroom interaction. The conclusion will highlight complementary ways of using both approaches for analysis.

References

Breidenstein, G. (2008): Allgemeine Didaktik und praxeologische Unterrichtsforschung [Didaktik and praxeological classroom research]. In: Sonderband der Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft: Neue Perspektiven der Didaktik, 201-218. Breidenstein, G. (2010). Überlegungen zu einer Theorie des Unterrichts [Observations on a theory of classroom teaching]. In Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 56(6), 869-887. Gruschka, A. (2005). Auf dem Weg zu einer Theorie des Unterrichtens. Die widersprüchliche Einheit von Erziehung, Didaktik und Bildung in der allgemeinbildenden Schule. Vorstudie [Towards a action theory of teaching. The paradox unity of education, Didaktik and Bildung in schooling]. Frankfurt/Main: Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaften der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität. Gruschka, A. (2011). Pädagogische Forschung als Erforschung der Pädagogik. Eine Grundlegung [Educational research as research on educational action]. Opladen: Budrich. Jörg, T., Davis, B. & Nickmans, G. (2007): Towards a new, complexity science of learning and education. In: Educational Research Review 19(2), 145-156. Terhart, E. (2002). Fremde Schwestern. Zum Verhältnis von Allgemeiner Didaktik und empirischer Lehr-Lern-Forschung [Uncanny sisters. The relationship of Didaktik and teaching and learning research]. In Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 16(2), 77-86. Vanderstraeten, R. (2002). Parsons, Luhmann and the Theorem of Double Contingency. In Journal of Classical Sociology 2(1), 77-92. Wahl, D. (2001). Nachhaltige Wege vom Wissen zum Handeln [Sustainable ways from knowledge to action]. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 19(2), 157-174. Wiesemann, J. (2008): Was ist schulisches Lernen? [What is learning in school?]. In: Breidenstein, G. & Schütze, F. (Ed.): Paradoxien in der Reform der Schule. Ergebnisse qualitativer Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden. 161-176. Wulf et. al. (2010). Ritual and Identity: The Staging and Performing of Rituals in the Lives of Young People. London: Tufnell Press.

Author Information

Clemens Wieser (presenting / submitting)
University of Vienna
Department of Education
Wien

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.