Abstract
This paper builds on earlier work which has explored differences between traditions in relation to teaching and learning. It outlines the development of an approach to the use of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to support learning and teaching based on the notion of Didaktik analysis. The focus is on the design of teaching situations, pedagogical activities and learning environments which aims to address the what, why and how of ICT use. Discussion focuses on the nature of design, the conception of teaching as a design profession, subject didactics as design science and Didaktik design for technology supported learning as a generic field of didactics which is applicable across the range of specific subject didactics. The role of research is discussed at a range of levels from the macro to the micro involving consideration of its role at the course or curriculum level. These ideas form the basis of an Integrative Didaktik Design (IDD) framework, and an example of the application of this philosophy and approach to development of ICT for learning in the field of teacher education at a national level is presented.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Autio, T. (2007): Towards European Curriculum Studies: Reconsidering some basic tenets of Bildung and Didaktik. In: Journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 3, February 2007.
Boyer, E. L. (1990): Scholarship Revisited. — Princeton University NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Carlgren, I. (2005): The content of schooling — from knowledge and subject matter to knowledge formation and subject specific ways of knowing. Paper presented at Ecer 2005 — European Conference on Educational Research, University College Dublin, 5-10 September 2005.
Chelimsky, E. (1997): Thoughts for a new evaluation society. In: Evaluation, Vol. 3, 1, pp. 97–118.
Clark, Ch. M./ Yinger, R. J. (1987): Teacher Planning. In: Calderhead, J. (Ed.): Exploring Teachers’ Thinking. — London.
Dewey, J. (1901): The situation as regards the course of study. In: Journal of the Proceedings and Addresses of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the National Education Association (1901), pp. 337–338.
Garrison, R. D./ Kanuka, H. (2004): Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. In: The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 7, pp. 95–105.
Granberg, C. (2007): Pedagogical attributes and ICT affordances — Implementing Digital Individual Development Planning in Teacher Education. Paper to Ecer 2007 — European Conference of Educational Research, University of Ghent, September 2007.
Granberg, C. (2008): Social software for reflective dialogue — is there any trace of reflection and dialogue in the students’ blogs? Paper to Ecer 2008 — European Conference of Educational Research, University of Gothenburg, September 2008.
Greeno, J. G. (1994): Gibson’s affordances. In: Psychological Review, Vol. 101, 2, pp. 336–342.
Hamilton, D. (1989): Towards a Theory of Schooling. — London.
Hopmann, S. (2007): Restrained Teaching: the common core of Didaktik. In: Hudson, B./ Schneuwly, B. (Eds.): Special Issue of the European Educational Research Journal (EERJ) on Didactics — Learning and Teaching in Europe, No. 2, 2007 http://www.wwwords.co.uk/EERJ/content/pdfs/6/issue6_ 2.asp (Visited 03 February 2008).
Hopmann, S./ Künzli, R. (1992): Didaktik — Renaissance. In: Bildung und Erziehung, 45. Jg., H. 2, S. 117–135.
Hopmann, S./ Riquarts, K. (2000): Starting a dialogue: a beginning conversation between the Didaktik and curriculum traditions. In: Westbury, I./ Hopmann, S./ Riquarts, K. (Eds.): Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition. — Mahwah, NJ, pp. 3–11.
Huberman, M. (2001): Networks that Alter Teaching: Conceptualizations, Exchanges and Experiments. In: Soler, J./ Craft, A./ Burgess, H. (Eds.): Teacher development: exploring our own practice. — London.
Hudson, B. (2002): Holding complexity and searching for meaning — teaching as reflective practice. In: Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 34, 1, pp. 43–57.
Hudson, B. (2003): Approaching educational research from the tradition of critical-constructive Didaktik. In: Pedagogy, Culture and Society, Vol. 11, 2, pp. 173–187.
Hudson, B. (2005): Networking as/for knowledge transformation and innovation: from research-based practice to the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) 2005 Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, 14-16 October 2005.
Hudson, B. (2007): Comparing different traditions of teaching and learning: what can we learn about teaching and learning? In: Hudson, B./ Schneuwly, B. (Eds.): Special Issue of the European Educational Research Journal (EERJ) on Didactics — Learning and Teaching in Europe, No. 2, 2007 http://www. wwwords.co.uk/EERJ/content/pdfs/6/issue6_2.asp (Visited 03 February 2008).
Hudson, B./ Boden, A./ Enochsson, A./ Granberg, C./ Johansson, M./ Lilleqvist, H./ Persson, H. (2008): Evaluating Process Based Assessment through Blended Learning: amplifying the student voice(s)? NU2008 Conference: Lärande i en ny tid — samtal om undervisning i högre utbildning (Learning in a new time — deliberations about teaching in higher education), University of Kalmar, 7-9 May 2008. http://www.nu2008 (Visited 03 February 2008).
Kansanen, P. (Ed.) (1995a): Discussion on Some Educational Issues VI Research Report No. 145. — Helsinki, Finland: Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki.
Kansanen, P. (1995b): The Deutsche Didaktik. In: Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 27, 4, pp. 347–352.
Kansanen, P. (1999): The Deutsche Didaktik and the American research on teaching. In: Hudson, B./ Buchberger, F./ Kansanen, P./ Seel, H. (Eds.): Didaktik/Fachdidaktik as Science(-s) of the Teaching Profession? TNTEE Publications, 2(1), pp. 21–36. http://tntee.umu.se/publications/publications.html (Visited 03 February 2008).
Kansanen, P./ Meri, M. (1999): The didactic relation in the teaching-studying-learning process. In: Hudson, B./ Buchberger, F./ Kansanen, P./ Seel, H. (Eds.): Didaktik/Fachdidaktik as Science(-s) of the Teaching Profession? TNTEE Publications, 2(1), pp. 107–116. http://tntee.umu.se/publications/publications.html (Visited 03 February 2008).
Klafki, W. (1958): Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung. In: Heinrich, R./ Blumenthal, A. (Hrsg.) (1964): Auswahl. Grundlegende Aufsätze aus der Zeitschrift “ Die Deutsche Schule“ — Hannover, S. 5–34.
Klafki, W. (1995): Didactic analysis as the core of preparation for instruction (Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung). In: Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 27, 1, pp. 13–30.
Klafki, W. (1998): Characteristics of critical-constructive Didaktik. In Gundem, B./ Hopmann, S. (Eds.): Didaktik and/or Curriculum: An International Dialogue. — New York, pp. 307–330.
Klafki, W. (2000): Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation of instruction. In Westbury, I./ Hopmann, S./ Riquarts, K. (Eds.): Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition. — Mahwah, NJ, pp. 197–206.
Kliebard, H. (1999): Constructing the Concept of Curriculum on the Wisconsin Frontier: How School Restructuring Sustained a Pedagogical Revolution. In: Moon, B./ Murphy, P. (Eds.): Curriculum in Context. — London.
Künzli, R. (2000): German Didaktik: models of re-presentation, of intercourse, and of experience. In Westbury, I./ Hopmann, S./ Riquarts, K. (Eds.): Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition. — Mahwah, NJ, pp. 41–54.
Lave, J. (1996): Teaching, as Learning, in Practice. In: Mind, Culture, and Activity, Vol. 3, 3, pp. 149–164.
Loveless, A./ Turvey, K./ Burton, J. (2007): Didaktik and Creativity, Paper to the European Conference on Educational Research — ECER 2007, University of Ghent.
Lilleqvist, H. (2007): ICT in Teacher Education at LiU — campus Linköping 2006/2007, Advanced Study Thesis in Professional Education, Institutionen for undervisningsprocesser, kommunikation och lärande, Lärarhögskolan i Stockholm.
Picket, A. (1863): Gradation and course of instruction for common schools. In: Wisconsin Journal of Education, Vol. 8, December, p. 183.
Reid, W. A. (1998): Systems and structures or myths and fables? A cross-cultural perspective on curriculum content. In: Gundem, B. B./ Hopmann, S. (Eds.), Didaktik and/or Curriculum: An International Dialogue. — New York, pp. 11–27.
Seel, H. (1999): ’Allgemeine Didaktik’ (’General Didactics’) and’ Fachdidaktik’ (’Subject Didactics’). In: Hudson, B./ Buchberger, F./ Kansanen, P./ Seel, H. (Eds.): Didaktik/Fachdidaktik as Science(-s) of the Teaching Profession? TNTEE Publications, Umea, Sweden, 2, 1, pp. 85–93. http://tntee.umu.se/ publications/publications.html (Visited 03 February 2008).
Senge, P. M./ Kleiner, A./ Roberts, C./ Ross, R. B./ Smith, B. J. (1994): The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook.-New York.
Senge, P./ Otto Scharmer, C./ Jaworski, J./ Flowers, B. S. (2004): Presence: Human Purpose and the Field of the Future. — Cambridge, MA.
Shulman, L. S. (1986): Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. In: Educational Researcher, Vol. 15, 2, pp. 4–14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987): Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. In: Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 5, 1, pp. 1–22.
Simon, H. (1970): The Sciences of the Artificial. — Cambridge, Mass.
Sinclair, J. (1987): Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary. — Glasgow.
Speer, H. C. (1878): A course of study for common schools. Programme and Proceedings of the State Teachers’ Association of Kansas and the Papers Read at the Session of the Association (Topeka, 1878), pp. 22–23.
Tyler, R. (1949): Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. — Chicago.
Westbury, I. (2000a): Teaching as a reflective practice: what might Didaktik teach curriculum? In: Westbury, I./ Hopmann, S./ Riquarts, K. (Eds.): Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition. — Mahwah, NJ, pp. 15–40.
Westbury, I. (2000b): Introduction. In: Menck, P.: Looking into Classrooms: Papers on Didactics. — Norwood, NJ, pp. ix–xi.
Wittmann, E. (1995): Mathematics Education as a „Design Science“, In: Educational Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 29, pp. 355–374.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hudson, B. (2009). Didaktik Design for Technology Supported Learning. In: Meyer, M.A., Prenzel, M., Hellekamps, S. (eds) Perspektiven der Didaktik. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91775-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91775-7_10
Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
Print ISBN: 978-3-531-15494-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-531-91775-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)