Skip to main content
Log in

Keyword: Didactics in Europe

Stichwort: Didaktik in Europa

  • Schwerpunkt
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite seeing great diversity in the European didactic landscape, the author searches for ground that is common to this diversity. He looks back to the “Pampaedia” of the founding father of didactics, Jan Amos Comenius, and attempts a constructive new start with the so-called didactic triangle in order to satisfy the scientific quest for certainty and security. Yet neither approach is convincing. The author therefore searches for elements that can be used in the construction of a future systematic approach by taking Gérard Sensevy’s Joint Action Theory in Didactics as an example. Application of this theory to the analysis and evaluation of four national reports on didactics, i.e. on Sweden, the UK, Spain, and Russia, runs into difficulties, although the reports yield interesting information for the delineation of comparative didactics. The Joint Action Theory is compared with the dialectical didactic theory of Lothar Klingberg, opening up further perspectives for comparative didactics in Europe. The four national reports, the systematic didactics of Sensevy and the example of dialectical analysis help identify the common ground for the future of European didactics.

Zusammenfassung

Der Autor sieht in der europäischen Didaktiklandschaft große Unterschiedlichkeiten, aber er bemüht sich um ein gemeinsames Fundament unterhalb dieser Ebene der Unterschiede. Er gibt zunächst einen historischen Rückblick auf die „Pampaedia“ des Gründungsvaters der Didaktik, Johann Amos Comenius. Und er versucht einen konstruktiven Anfang mit dem sogenannten Didaktischen Dreieck, um so dem wissenschaftlichen Bedürfnis nach Gewissheit und Sicherheit zu genügen. Die beiden Zugangsweisen können aber noch nicht überzeugen. Der Autor sucht deshalb nach Bausteinen, die sich für einen zukünftigen systematischen Zugang eignen. Er nimmt dafür die Didaktische Theorie Gemeinsamen Handelns von Gérard Sensevy als Beispiel. Eine Anwendung dieser Theorie für die Analyse und Bewertung von vier Länderberichten zur Didaktik aus Schweden, Großbritannien. Spanien und Russland führt zu Schwierigkeiten, aber die Berichte geben interessante Informationen für Kriterien einer komparativen Didaktik. Ein Vergleich der Didaktischen Theorie Gemeinsamen Handelns mit der dialektischen didaktischen Theorie Lothar Klingbergs wird anschließend skizziert, wodurch sich weitere Perspektiven für die vergleichende Didaktik in Europa ergeben. Die vier Länderberichte, die systematische Didaktik Sensevys und das Beispiel für die dialektische Analyse umgrenzen das gemeinsame Fundament einer zukünftigen europäischen Didaktik.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For chairs in general didactics (mostly combined with school pedagogy at German universities and teacher training colleges), see Richert (2011).

  2. “Privatdozenten”, i.e. scientific staff qualified for a professorship but waiting for a chair, and empty chairs are included, but scientific staff below the status of professor are excluded even though people in this group are very often research-oriented.

  3. The figures for Denmark represent all staff, not only the professorial positions.

  4. For more detailed information concerning the heavily disputed introduction of the comprehensive basic school, see Domisch (2009).

  5. Pampaedia was printed in 1960. The manuscript had been found by Dimitrij Tschižewskij in the library of the Orphanage in Halle, founded by the Pietist August Hermann Francke.

  6. St. Paul’s 2nd letter to the Corinthians (The Jerusalem Bible, 1969, Chap. 5, Verses 17 and 18).

  7. Wolfgang Klafki made such a mistake when he developed his theory of categorical formation out of his historical analyses without a clear cut distinction between history and systematic development (see Klafki 1958/1963, p. 291).

  8. This means a second, parallel critique of Klafki’s PhD thesis. Describing in which way Pestalozzi devised his elementary method cannot justify a systematic conception of elementary education.

  9. It is worth noting that there is a chair for systematic didactics and instruction research held by Sigrid Blömeke, Humboldt University, but she does not work in the field. What she does is instruction research, teacher research etc.

  10. For more information, see Zierer 2010.

  11. Dick et al. (2009, pp. 1–6) define “system” and “systematic”, but this did not help me because they are assessment-driven researchers constructing their object, instructional design, as if we were still in the behavioristic époque of Ralph W. Tyler and Edward Lee Thorndike. They write: “A system is technically a set of interrelated parts, all of which work together toward a defined goal” (p. 1). This definitely does not describe what happens in classrooms.

  12. Klaus Zierer (2010) suggests that all didactic models in Germany are eclectic. He gives the word a positive touch and develops the thesis that the practice of teaching and learning requires this kind of scientific behaviour.

  13. One should know that an international association inspired by progressive education was founded after the First World War, but this association, the “New Education Fellowship”, has played no role in the didactics network of the European Educational Research Association in recent times. The Fellowship still exists, but it has obviously reduced the scope of its activities (see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Education_Fellowship).

  14. I thank my brother Hilbert Meyer for pointing this information out.

  15. I thank Matthias Trautmann for cooperation and for an earlier version of the example.

References

  • Allemann-Ghionda, C. (2004). Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft. Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blankertz, H. (1975). Theorien und Modelle der Didaktik (9th rev. ed.; 14th ed. 2000). München: Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck, G. (1984). Rückwege aus der Entfremdung. Studien zur Entwicklung der deutschen humanistischen Bildungsphilosophie. Paderborn: Schöningh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caillot, M. (2007). The building of a new academic field: The case of French didactiques. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 125–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlgren, I. (2011). From teaching to learning: The end of teaching or a paradigmatic shift in teachers’ work? In B. Hudson & M. A. Meyer (Eds.), Beyond fragmentation: didactics, learning and teaching in Europe (pp. 31–46). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevallard, Y. (2007). Readjusting didactics to a changing epistemology. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 131–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comenius, J. A. (1960). Pampaedia. Lateinischer Text und deutsche Übersetzung. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer (Edited by D. Tschižewskij, H. Geissler, & K. Schaller).

  • Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education [1916]. London: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (2008). The child and the curriculum. Including the school and society [1902]. New York: Cosimo Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2009). The systematic design of instruction (7th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domisch, R. (2009). Keine Mythen, sondern fundierte Schulreformen. Die Lernerfolge finnischer Schüler aus der Perspektive des finnischen Zentralamts für das Unterrichtswesen. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 12(4), 617–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruschka, A. (2002). Didaktik. Das Kreuz mit der Vermittlung. Wetzlar: Büchse der Pandora.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havighurst, R. J. (1972). Developmental Tasks and Education [1948] (3rd ed.). New York: Longman Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. London: Routledge. [German translation in preparation]. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (2000). Starting a dialogue: A beginning conversation between the Didaktik and curriculum traditions. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition (pp. 3–11). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. (2002). Holding complexity and searching for meaningteaching as reflective practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. (2003). Approaching educational research from the tradition of critical-constructive Didaktik. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 11(2), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. (2007). Comparing different traditions of teaching and learning: What can we learn about teaching and learning? European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B., & Meyer, M. A. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond fragmentation. Didactics, learning and teaching in Europe. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms (1st ed. 1968; rev. ed. 1990). New York: Teachers College Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kansanen, P. (1995). The Deutsche Didaktik. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(4), 347–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1804/1964). Über Pädagogik. In v. W. Weischedel (Ed.), Werke in sechs Bänden (Bd. VI, pp. 693–761). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (1963). Das pädagogische Problem des Elementaren und die Theorie der kategorialen Bildung [1958]. Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (1991). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik [1985]. Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klette, K. (2007). Trends in research on teaching and learning in schools: Didactics meets classroom studies. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klingberg, L. (1987). Überlegungen zur Dialektik von Lehrer- und Schülertätigkeit im Unterricht der sozialistischen Schule (Potsdamer Forschungen, Reihe C, Heft 74). Potsdam: Pädagogische Hochschule “Karl Liebknecht”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingberg, L. (1995). Lehren und Lernen—Inhalt und Methode. Oldenburg: Carl von Ossietzky Universität, Zentrum für Pädagogische Berufspraxis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kron, F. W. (2008). Grundwissen Didaktik (5th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, H. (2004). Was ist guter Unterricht? Berlin: Cornelsen Scriptor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. A. (2007). Didactics, sense making, and educational experience. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. A. (2010). A view on didactics and instructional planning from the perspective of research on learner development and educational experience, Éducation & didactique, 4(2), 75–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. A. (2012). Chancen und Grenzen einer europäichen Vergleichenden Didaktik. In Pädagogische Rundschau, 6 (forthcoming).

  • Meyer, M. A. (2013). Einführung in Schulpädagogik und Didaktik. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers (in preparation).

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. A., & Meyer, H. (2009). Totgesagte leben länger! Oder: Hat es in der Allgemeinen Didaktik einen Erkenntnisfortschritt gegeben? In B. Wischer & K.-J. Tillmann (Eds.), Erziehungswissenschaft auf dem Prüfstand. Schulbezogene Forschung und Theoriebildung von 1970 bis heute (pp. 97–128). Weinheim: Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. A., Kunze, I., & Trautmann, M. (2007). Schülerpartizipation im Englischunterricht. Eine empirische Untersuchung in der gymnasialen Oberstufe. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system. How testing and choice are undermining education, as an example. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R. (1999). Philosophy and social hope. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richert, P. (2011). Professuren für Allgemeine Didaktik und Schulpädagogik an deutschen Universitäten. Jahrbuch für Allgemeine Didaktik, 1, 177–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish Lessons. What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sensevy, G. (2011a). Overcoming fragmentation: Towards a joint action theory in didactics. In B. Hudson & M. A. Meyer (Eds.), Beyond fragmentation: Didactics, learning, and teaching (pp. 60–76). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sensevy, G. (2011b). Le sens du savoir. Éléments pour une théorie de l’action conjointe en didactique. Brussels: De boeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spinner, H. F. (1974). Theorie. In H. M. Baumgartner & C. Willd (Eds.), Handbuch philosophischer Grundbegriffe (Bd. 5, pp. 1486–1514). München: Kösel.

  • Tenorth, H.-E. (1994). “Alle alles zu lehren”—Möglichkeiten und Perspektiven allgemeiner Bildung. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trautmann, M. (Ed.). (2004). Entwicklungsaufgaben im Bildungsgang. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weniger, E. (1975). Theorie der Bildungsinhalte und des Lehrplans [1930/1952]. In B. Schonig (Ed.), Ausgewählte Schriften zur geisteswissenschaftlichen Pädagogik (pp. 199–294). Weinheim: Beltz. (Ausgew. u. mit e. editior. Notiz vers. von B. Schonig)

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1960). Philosophische Untersuchungen. In G. E. M. Anscombe & R. Rhees (Eds.), Schriften (pp. 179–544). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On Certainty. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (Ed. bz G. E. M. Anscombe & G. H. Wright)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zierer, K. (2010). Alles prüfen! Das Beste bewahren! Zur Eklektik in Lehrbüchern der Didaktik und des Instructional Design. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank Jens Dolin (Ảrhus), Per-Olof Wickman (Stockholm), Kirsti Klette (Oslo), Hafdis Ingvarsdottir (Rejkiavik), Pertti Kansanen (Helsinki), Joris Vlieghe (Leuven), Gérard Sensevy (Rennes), Bernard Schneuwly (Geneva), Manuela Keller-Schneider (Zurich), Anke Wegner (Vienna), Bernd Hackl (Graz), Joana Duarte (Hamburg), Fernando Marhuenda (Valencia), Teresa Nigro (Hamburg), Remigijus Bubnis (Šiauliai), Marko Palekčić (Ljubljana), and Anatoli Rakhkochkine (Leipzig) for useful information which allowed me to estimate the level of institutionalised general and domain-specific didactics in the countries mentioned in the Appendix.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meinert A. Meyer.

Appendix: General didactics/school pedagogy etc. and domain-specific didactics in Europe (Chairs including other scientific staff where indicated)

Appendix: General didactics/school pedagogy etc. and domain-specific didactics in Europe (Chairs including other scientific staff where indicated)

Country

Commentary

General didactics/School Pedagogy etc.

Domain-specific Didactics

United Kingdom

Didactics as a university discipline does not exist, but the sub-disciplines, curriculum theory, instructional research etc. do

Denmark

The figures stand for all positions, i.e. chairs and other scientific staff

Around 200

Around 100

Sweden

 

3

27

Norway

 

12–18

25–27

Iceland

Three Icelandic universities offer teacher education including didactics, but it is difficult to count the didacticians because their denominations are mostly combined with other denominations

?

?

Finland

Each of the 8 universities offers teacher education which means there is at least one chair in general didactics and one in teaching and learning. In addition, there are chairs for educational psychology. There are no teacher colleges in Finland

Up to 30

?

Belgium

Onderwijskunde (general didactics) and fakspezifiche didaktiek (subject matter didactics) are established elements of the curriculum in teacher education. The situation in the Netherlands is similar

?

?

France

There are 31 Instituts Universitaires de Formation des Maitres (IUFM) in France, including the overseas departments. If one assumes 5 chairs in domain-specific didactics per institute, this gives 155 together. In addition, there are chairs at the universities. A rough estimate is one-fifth of the IUFM-numbers, i.e. 31. There are no chairs for general didactics in France

 

186

Switzerland

Three chairs at Zurich University and 1 for pedagogical psychology and didactics.

Pre-school, elementary school and secondary stage teachers are educated at teacher training colleges. The lecturers there do not acquire the title of professor. Many people teach didactics, but not with this denomination for their chairs. A combination of didactics with school pedagogy, as is the rule in Germany, does not exist in Switzerland

Very few chairs, but many staff who teach, among other topics, didactics

The same holds for domain-specific didactics

Austria

In Austria, teachers at the “Gymnasum” can obtain the title professor. This makes it difficult to count the ‘real’ professors in school pedagogy and/or didactics at the teacher training colleges (“Pädagogische Hochschulen”). There are only 3 university professors whose denomination identifies them as school pedagogues. But there are quite a few professors at the universities who de facto work in the field. The number of professors who work in domain-specific didactics is much higher, with varying denominations of the chairs

40?

?

Spain

General didactics in combination with school organisation; domain-specific didactics with an additional estimated 150 non-chairholders

40–45

55

Italy

Secondary stage I teacher students have 5 years of domain-specific didactics, students of secondary stage II have two years. The number of chairs for these requirements could not be identified

?

?

Lithuania

There are lecturers at universities and university colleges in general didactics, but unclear total numbers, perhaps a total of 18.

18?

 

Croatia

The Croatian universities and teacher training colleges have at least one chair for general didactics. The number of chairs for domain-specific didactics is much higher.

The same holds for the other states of former Yugoslavia

?

?

Russia

Statistical material concerning chairs in didactics at the faculties of education at universities including pedagogical universities was unavailable, even though it is obvious that didactics is ‘strong’ in Russia. It is therefore difficult to assess the number of positions held in general and domain-specific didactics. Denominations may be misleading. But a rough estimate is possible. We assume that the 75 universities in the Russian Federation have chairs in the field of didactics. In addition, there are an estimated 250 colleges, plus 50 institutions for further education of teachers and another 100 centres for further education of teachers with chairs. This makes a total of 475 institutions. If we estimate three chairs per institution, this means 1,425 chairs. The number of chairs in domain-specific didactics is much higher

1,425?

?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meyer, M. Keyword: Didactics in Europe. Z Erziehungswiss 15, 449–482 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-012-0322-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-012-0322-8

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation