Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Didaktik —An Appropriate Framework for the Professional Work of Science Teachers ?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching

Abstract

In the perception of science teachers and in the activities of researchers in science education a marginalization of content is currently taking place. This has been induced by both the shift to give priority to concepts of cognitive psychology in research on teaching and learning and the processes of standardization in the many countries participating in large-scale international studies like TIMSS and PISA. In this situation Didaktik can be a corrective, providing a bridge between content-related issues on the one hand and pedagogical aspects on the other. In the central and northern European pedagogical community Didaktik does not have a negative connotation (as didactic has in the English-speaking countries)—Didaktik as a scientific discipline constitutes the platform of reflections on and discussions about goals and contents of Bildung. Bildung is more than education. Some scholars translate Bildung with “formation”, covering the forming of a personality and the product of this formation. Bildung encompasses knowledge in a holistic view of the personality of an individual whereas scientific literacy emphasizes the capability to use this knowledge effectively. In science education, Bildung can be approached by learning environments in which students have the chance to decide for themselves which aspects of a phenomenon they intend to investigate and which methods they plan to apply. The decision processes and their implementations are of equal significance as the results of students’ work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bologna (1999). The European higher education area. The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bologna_Declaration_of_19_June_1999. Accessed 2 Nov 2009.

  • Buck, P., & v. Mackensen, M. (2006). Naturphänomene erlebend verstehen [Understanding and experiencing natural phenomena]. (7th revised edition). Köln: Aulis.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vos, W. (2002). Ausschau halten nach einer Versuchsanordnung, bei der nichts die Aufmerksamkeit von der Hauptsache, der Umwandlung von Substanzen, abzieht [Searching an experimental setting in which nothing withdraws the attention from the main issue, that is the conversion of substances]. chimica didactica, 90, 209–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPG (2006). Thesen für ein modernes Lehramtsstudium im Fach Physik [Statements about a modern teacher training in physics]. Bad Honnef: Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., Komorek, M., & Wilbers, J. (1997). Studies on educational reconstruction of chaos theory. Research in Science Education, 27, 339–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., Niedderer, H., & Schecker, H. (2007). Teaching physics. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 599–629). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2001). Science content as problematic—issues for research. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education—past, present, and future (pp. 27–41). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2007). Values in the measurement of students’ science achievement in TIMSS and PISA. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in science education (pp. 215–229). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischler, H. (1994). Concerning the difference between intention and action.—Teachers’ conceptions and actions in physics teaching. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers’ minds and actions. Research on teachers thinking and practice (pp. 165–180). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunstone, R. (2001). The education of physics teachers: Contents plus pedagogy plus reflective practice. In R. Pinto & S. Surinach (Eds.), Physics teacher education beyond 2000 (pp. 27–33). Paris: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world. What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358–389). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S. (2000). Klafki’s model of Didaktik analysis and lesson planning in teacher education. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective pracice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 197–206). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kattmann, U., Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., Komorek, M. (1995). A model of educational reconstruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessels, J. P. A. M., & Korthagen, F. A. J. (1996). The relationship between theory and practice. Back to the classics. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (1998). Characteristics of critical-constructive Didaktik. In B. B. Gundem & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and, or curriculum. An international dialogue (pp. 307–330). New York: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (2000a). The significance of classical theories of Bildung for a contemporary concept of Allgemeinbildung. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 85–107). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (2000b). Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation of instruction. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139–159). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klette, K. (2008). Didactics meets classroom studies. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 10(Special Issue 9), 101–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, S, Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Neubrand, M., & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary Mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 716–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Dubberke, T., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, et al. (2007). Linking aspects of teacher competence to their instruction. Results from the COACTIV project. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools (pp. 39–59). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2000). Time for science education. How teaching the history and philosophy of pendulum motion can contribute to science literacy. New York: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merzyn, G. (2003). Stimmen zur Lehrerausbildung [Voices about teacher education]. Hohengehren: Schneider.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuweg, G. H. (2004). Tacit knowing and implicit learning. In M. Fischer, N. Boreham, & B. Nyhan (Eds.), European perspectives on learning at work: The acquisition of work process knowledge (pp. 130–147). Cedefop Reference Series; 56. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://www.wipaed.jku.at/images/stories/forschung/tacitknowing.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuweg, G. H. (2005). Emergenzbedingungen pädagogischer Könnerschaft [Conditions for the emergence of pedagogical expertise]. In H. Heid & G. Harteis (Eds.), Verwertbarkeit. Ein Qualitätskriterium (erziehungs-)wissenschaftlichen Wissens? [Usability: A criterion for the quality of (pedagogical) scientific knowledge?] (pp. 205–228). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordenbo, S. E. (2002). Bildung and the thinking of Bildung. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 36, 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006). Organisation for economic co-operation and development: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA): Assessing Scientific, Reading and Mathematical Literacy. A Framework for PISA 2006. http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/display.asp?sf1=identifiers&st1=9789264026407. Accessed 2 Nov 2009.

  • Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Garden City: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirley, D. (2008). The coming of post-standardization in education: What role for the German Didaktik tradition? Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 10(Special Issue 9), 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirley, D. (2009). American perspectives on German educational theory and research: A closer look at both the American educational context and the German Didaktik tradition. In K. H. Arnold, S. Blömeke, R. Messner, & J. Schlömerkemper (Eds.), Allgemeine Didaktik und Lehr-Lernforschung: Kontroversen und Entwicklungsperspektiven einer Wissenschaft von Unterricht (pp. 195–209). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • v. Hentig, H. (1996). Bildung. München: Hanser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, D., Nentwig, P., & Schanze, S. (2007). Making it comparable. Standards in science education. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenschein, M. (2000a). Teaching to understand: On the concept of the exemplary in teaching. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 161–175). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenschein, M. (2000b). The law of free fall as an ‘exemplary theme’ for the mathematicizability of certain natural processes. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 285–293). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahl, D. (2001). Nachhaltige Wege vom Wissen zum Handeln. [Sustainable ways from knowing to acting]. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 19, 157–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westbury, I. (1998). Didaktik and curriculum studies. In B. B. Gundem & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and, or curriculum. An international dialogue (pp. 47–78). New York: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westbury, I. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: What might Didaktik teach curriculum? In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 15–39). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, M. (2003). Ruins of Bildung in a knowledge society: Commenting on the debate about the future of Bildung. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 35(2), 167–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Helmut Fischler

Authors
  1. Helmut Fischler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fac. Education, Centre for Science, Mathematics &, Monash University, Clayton, 3800, Victoria, Australia

    Deborah Corrigan

  2. Dept. Education & Professional Studies, King's College London, Stamford Street 150, London, SE1 9NH, United Kingdom

    Justin Dillon

  3. Fac. Education, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, 3800, Victoria, Australia

    Richard Gunstone

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fischler, H. (2011). Didaktik —An Appropriate Framework for the Professional Work of Science Teachers ?. In: Corrigan, D., Dillon, J., Gunstone, R. (eds) The Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation