Excerpt
Table of contents
1. Introduction to the term "didactic method"
2. Educational theory according to Klafki
2.1 Material and formal educational theories
2.2 Klafkis categorical education
2.3 The didactic analysis
2.4 Criticism of Klafkis models
2.5 From the philosophy of education in teaching methods to critical-constructive didactic methods
3. Conclusion
List of references
1. Introduction to the term "didactic method"
Before theories and models of didactics can be explained and contexts can be understood, a basic understanding is necessary of what didactics are, at all, and, what factors play a role in this. The question of the importance of teaching cannot be answered easily. The word has its origins in the Greek "didáskein" which means "teaching" or "learning" and "being taught". Here, it is already clear that two elementary processes are connected and complete each other, which has not changed to this day. Thus, didactics is "die Theorie und Praxis des Lernens und Lehrens" (Meyer 2002: 14). It focuses on the interaction between apprentices and learners. Didactic theory should therefore be a support for mutual interaction for the teachers and learners. It is an action that is intended to offer teachers a practice-oriented approach. During the 20th century, educationists such as Erich Weniger, Paul Heimann and, above all, Wolfgang Klafki (born in 1927), who is considered the "father" of didactics, tried to narrow down and define the term, in order to develop theoretical education principles and didactic theories and models.
In light of these theories, the aim of this paper is to explain educational theory - driven didactics, which forms of education exist, what significance categorical education has and, which function the didactic analysis fulfills.
2. Educational theory according to Klafki
The question of the importance of education has always been a far-reaching and controversial topic, both in the past and in the present. At the beginning of the 19th century, Wolfgang Klafki dealt with the terms "education" and "general education". He asked the question "mit welchen Inhalten und Gegenständen sich junge Menschen auseinander setzen müssen, um zu einem selbstbestimmten und vernunftgeleiteten Leben in Menschlichkeit, in gegenseitiger Anerkennung und Gerechtigkeit, in Freiheit, Glück und Selbsterfüllung zu kommen“(Klafki 1986: 461). He answers this question by saying that education and the upbringing have the task of helping an immature person become a responsible human being. In his educational theory, he defines the four characteristics of education. The first one states that education has the goal of promoting reasonable self-determination. People should learn to develop their abilities and to reach a level of critical maturity. Secondly, education always depends on historical, social and cultural circumstances. The ability to self-determination can only be acquired if humans deal with their world, the norms and values of their society and cultural and political circumstances. Thirdly, humans can only receive education independently and for themselves. The education process is an individual process, so everyone has to find the right path to reasonable self-determination. The last point states that, even if education can only be acquired independently, the educational process is carried out in a society. According to Klafki, interaction with other people is the only way to promote the individual educational process.
His educational concept is also based on "general education". By general education, Klafki understands public access to education, regardless of origin, religion or social class. In addition, general education is an all-encompassing form of education, which means that people should be supported in the most diverse areas of mental and physical abilities and not only in certain specialized areas. Finally, education takes place “im Medium des Allgemeinen”, which means that humans deal with “human cultural activities” (Meyer 2002: 210), they reach self-determination and personality development themselves. In summary, Klafki sees general education as the competence of a human being to think and act in a critical, professional, solidarity and self-determined manner.
In order to realize the goals of self-determination, co-determination and the capacity to show one’s solidarity, Klafki created a collection of "key problems". He describes the key problems as fundamental problems of the people within a society and period, which represent a binding framework for teaching. The decisions on specific topics, subjects and procedures, thus, depend on the teachers and students. Dealing with these primary social key problems and communicating a certain level of co-responsibility is the foundation of general education for him. Klafki mentions the following eight key problems that are of fundamental importance to him:
1) The question of peace with regard to the potential for destruction of modern weapons of war
2) The problem and the meaning of the principle of nationality
3) The question about the environment in regards to the destruction or preservation of the natural resources of mankind and the resulting responsibility towards future generations
4) The growing world population
5) Socially-related inequality between social classes, genders, disabled and non-disabled people, ethnic groups, etc.
6) The dangers and opportunities of new technologies in regards to the impact on the labor market and communications
7) The human sexuality, experiences of love and gender relationships
8) The relationship between industrialized and developing countries.
The number of these key problems cannot be extended as desired, since these are overall societal structural problems, specific to an epoch, which influence each individual. According to Klafki, these key problems cannot be solved immediately and have the potential to cause considerable damage in the future. It is,therefore, a central task of education to prepare people for these problems.
2.1 Material and formal educational theories
The term "education" has always been interpreted differently; today, two fundamentally different branches of education can be differentiated.
The "materiale Bildungstheorie" (engl. material philosoühy of education) focuses on the factual and content level. It is about the question, which topics from the endless reality are that relevant and important that students should and must learn about them. Specifically, this means that essential components of education are defined and that the unimportant issues are separated from important ones and ultimately considered as education. A list of educational content is created which claim to provide and promote education. The learner should collect knowledge like an encyclopedia and be able to retrieve it.
The "formale Bildungstheorie” (engl.: “formal educational theory") focuses on the students and their subjective and objective needs. The question is asked which forms of behavior are or could be important for the students at present or in the future. An educational canon of essential skills and competences is developed that should help people to become capable of acting through the use of different methods. The focus is not on knowledge, but rather on communicating relevant methods, such as how to best collect information.
2.2 Klafkis categorical education
In the 20th century Klafki already dealt with the classic contradiction between material and formal education. However, this differentiation did not cover Klafki's conception of education, since education for him includes both material and formal elements, so that both forms must be combined. According to Klafki, education is “„jenes Phänomen, an dem wir – im eigenen Erleben oder im Verstehen anderer Menschen – unmittelbar der Einheit eines subjektiven (formalen) und eines objektiven (materialen) Momentes innewerden. Diese doppelseitige Erschließung geschieht als Sichtbarwerden von ‚allgemeinen‘ Inhalten auf der objektiven Seite und als Aufgehen ‚allgemeiner‘ Einsichten, Erlebnisse, Erfahrungen auf der Seite des Subjekts“ (Klafki 1963: 43). Klafki says that an educated person has categorically exploited reality in the dialectic event and, in return, was exploited by his experiences and insights of reality. Thus, "categorical formation" is the attempt to connect the object-related and subject-related level of formation dialectically with one another. In this model, Klafki succeeds in resolving the discrepancy between material and formal formation and in interlocking and combining them with each other. Specifically, this means that a categorically educated person, first, has accumulated knowledge, facts and findings and, secondly, developed his personality and broadened his horizons.
As a result, the question now arises as to how the "categorical development" should be applied specifically in class. At that time, Klafki focused on the binding nature of the prevailing curriculums at that time, which, however, must always adapt to changed circumstances in order to stay updated. The task of the teacher is then to analyse the specifications of the curriculum based on the five questions of the didactic analysis (see point 2.3 of this housework) and to develop the educational value of the prescribed educational content. In addition, Klafki formulated three principles on how categorical education can best be aimed for.
[...]
- Quote paper
- Anonymous, 2015, The Concept of Education according to Wolfgang Klafki. From educational theory to critical-constructive didactics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1145351
Publish now - it's free
Comments