The Concept of General Subject Didactics

The article deals with a new scientific approach developed under the title of ‘General Subject Didactics’. This concept is based on the existence of several academic disciplines called ‘subject didactics’ or ‘subject(−matter) didactics’. These are linked to certain scientific domains like biology or mathematics and to respective school subjects. The goal was to observe and reflect on how the individual subject didactics explore subject-specific teaching and learning, both by top-down reflections and by bottom-up comparisons. In terms of design, 17 subject didactics within Germany were compared and analyzed on the basis of six impulses. This empirical study allowed us to gain basic insights into the commonalities of all related subject-didactic disciplines and to identify differences among them. In this way, General Subject Didactics was developed step by step in a comparative way. As a result it can be defined as a theory of subject didactics. This innovative approach feeds into an extended content- or knowledge-based philosophy of education.

The Subject Pedagogical Process: The Interdependence of Literary Theory and Subject Pedagogy in Comparative Literature.
 This article examines and discusses how the conception of literary pedagogical content knowledge, and pedagogy of literature have changed and shifted in Sweden over the last few decades. I also try to indicate some possible future directions for a continuous “subject pedagogical process” for the discipline of Comparative Literature. All over the (Western) world, the need to develop the educational field of what is, after Lee S. Shulman, labelled pedagogical content knowledge is becoming an increasingly urgent concern. In this developing process I, after Sigmund Ongstad, propose as a working definition: pedagogical content knowledge deals with the identity of the university subject in question, with its role in society and with the act of communicating it on different levels and in different situations – for example in educational contexts and in mass media. I argue that, as educators and trainers of teachers-to-be, and as scholars of the discipline of Comparative Literature, we need to develop the field of literary pedagogical content knowledge in an active and conscious way. The development of pedagogical content knowledge must be conducted by the discipline itself and not by the discipline of educational studies. To develop pedagogical content knowledge is to continuously remould the discipline in question to secure the utmost relevance for individuals as well as for society. To engage in the activity of pedagogical content knowledge is to be conscious of the fact that no subject is eternally-given and self-evident. When you engage in reflections on the meaning and relevance of a university and school discipline you are engaging in questions of pedagogical content knowledge. Pedagogical content knowledge is akin to and dependent on subject theory. It should comprise a continuous and conscious meta-reflection upon the subject in question and upon its material, in relationship to society and to human beings. To engage in the developing of pedagogical content knowledge is to take on responsibility for the subject’s content and for its communication in an ever changing society.

The book deals with a new scientific approach developed under the title of “General Subject Didactics”. This concept is based on the existence of several academic disciplines called subject(-matter) didactics or disciplinary didactics (as in many parts of Europe) or subject pedagogies (as in Japan, for example), which have content-based teaching and learning in school and beyond as their object of study. General Subject Didactics can be defined as the theory of subject didactics. It observes and reflects on how the individual subject didactics explore subject-specific teaching and learning, both by top-down reflections and by bottom-up comparisons. The empirical basis derives from a comprehensive study in Germany where 17 subject didactics were compared on the basis of six impulses, e. g. reference sciences of subject didactics, sources and selection of subject content or research formats applied. This allows to gain insights into the commonalities of all related disciplines and to identify differences among them. Both are commented upon by four international experts, three from Europe and one from Israel.

For contemporary teaching, teachers need a good knowledge of pedagogy, a content knowledge, subject methodology and assessment. Although subject didactics has become an independent research area with interdisciplinary dimensions, only very few studies focus on the teaching of subject didactics. With the aim of developing a theoretical model for systematic treatment of subject didactics, a scoping literature review was implemented for analysing scientific literature. Twenty-five articles were chosen from different databases in the field of study. Data analyses revealed three domains of subject didactics: content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and knowledge of subject-specific assessment. These domains included various components which were used for developing a theoretical model for teaching subject didactics within the framework of primary teacher education. The results indicate how to organise the courses of subject didactics for primary teachers at universities. Firstly, teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge should be treated in an integrated way. Secondly, integrating pedagogical knowledge with subject didactics enables the shaping of teacher education of students to understand the teaching profession at an early stage. Thirdly, studying subject didactics on the theoretical and empirical level is the driving force for developing syllabi in primary teacher education.

The following contribution is divided into two parts, for reasons of space. The current article will deal with issues of translation and translatability from German into English in the field of Didaktik (didactics, subject didactics and general subject didactics). The starting point will be to gather information about the spread and acceptance of the concept of didactics as a cover term for a comprehensive theory of teaching and learning within school as an institution, in Europe and beyond. The multi-facetted reality of this concept in so many countries or educational settings and the different approaches to go with it, will have an effect on the demands of an appropriate rendering of Didaktik in English as a lingua franca and thus transferring it into another, essentially foreign socio- cultural context. The same is even more true for the notion of Fachdidaktik (= subject-matter didactics). In particular, it will be shown that there are challenges and even limits in sharing didactic and subject-didactic knowledge, concepts and research findings internationally, when transmitting them from German into English and thus from a continental European into an Anglo-Saxon way of thinking and of organizing school education. The difficulty to establish a one-to-one equivalence is reflected on the linguistic level, where certain anglicized forms which do not originally exist in English, have been developed (e.g. subject-matter) didactics, general subject didactics), for lack of appropriate translations. Also in many other cases of translation more than one version is possible, depending on context, focus or intention. This insight will be applied to individual notions or whole semantic clusters in the field (e.g. around key words like Fach or Fachliche Bildung). In combination with the second part the overall goal is to bring Didaktik/didactics and curriculum theory into conversation again and widen the scope towards subject-matter didactics at the same time.2

The professionalization of teachers is one central topic in both educational sciences and subject didactics. Within this debate pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has turned out to be a core component of professional competence. Consequently, PCK must be a primary task for teacher education. In Physical Education teaching games has been a conflicting issue in sport didactics for more than fifty years, especially considered from the perspective of game vs. skill orientation. In this case, the concept of TGfU has proved as an adequate and effective conception; thus, it can be assumed that this approach should be integrated into the education of PE teachers. This article deals with the issue of teaching TGfU to preservice teachers in Germany and Switzerland. We first deal with a framework for teacher education and its main target dimensions. Second, we present TGfU as a didactical conception for teaching sport games and its possibilities of implementing quality dimensions. Third, we present a study in which a qualitative experiment was conducted. It aimed at teaching the concept of TGfU to a variety of teachers over nine months. Some ideas and recommendations for teacher education round off the article.

Didactics as a theoretical basis and as a research field in relation to teaching exists within many disciplines (e.g., natural sciences and preschool education) but not for leisure-time pedagogy. Despite this, teacher students in School Age Educare Centers (SAEC) must fulfil one of the nationally established goals which explicitly demands knowledge in didactics and subject didactics within the field of leisure-time pedagogy. In addition, the research is quite invisible. This study highlights how didactics has been explicitly dealt with in both scientific articles and research-based literature aimed at SAEC. The purpose of the literature review is as follows: a) identify and describe focus and orien­tation (both subject-wise and didactically) in the years 2000–2021, b) compare, discuss and problematize the results, and furthermore, c) point out future research orientations. The method is a systematic literature review (SLR) with a qualitative and quantitative content analysis. The results show that the interest in and awareness of the concept of didactics have developed over the past ten years, and that the vast majority of texts are based on a qualitative approach with discussing, argumentative and reflective analyses. A small number of studies are based on empirical data. In terms of content, the studies capture some of the traditional didactic concepts such as the teacher, leadership, and subject didactics, but also different theoretical points of departure. The use of the concept of didactics in the SAEC indicates that the area needs to be developed, that the concept of didactics is used in relation to activities in SAEC, and that it is used as an interpretive framework for empirical material. The study certainly demonstrates the awareness of various didactic aspects, but there is a lack of studies that incorporate the didactic complexity.

The topic of ‘teacher professionalism’ is one of the most crucial ones in quality education research. It has a potential to generate results that could inform and hence enhance the practice in classrooms. Thus, research in this field needs reliable instruments to measure the professional knowledge of our teachers to be able to generate reliable results for our research problems. Not many instruments have been developed with regard to this topic. At the same time, an adequate validation of the instrument developed is often missing (Schilling & Hill, 2007). Hence, in a bigger project ProwiN (German acronym for professional knowledge of science teachers), test instruments for measuring science teachers’ pedagogical, pedagogical content and content knowledge (PK, PCK, and CK) were developed for the subjects biology, chemistry and physics. The present study tested the validity of some of these items which were used to measure the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of biology teachers. These items focused on measuring teachers’ professional knowledge by analyzing 1) teachers’ knowledge about student understanding (or lack of understanding) of several topics in biology and 2) knowledge about instructional strategies like the use of models or experiments. The content validity of these instruments was examined by think-aloud interviews with American and German Biology teachers ( N =11). This study shows a high content validity for these items. Furthermore, this paper demonstrates the scope for adapting the conceptual framework of these items to measure biology teachers’ PCK in other countries.

Since the implementation of technology as relatively new school subject, challenges are constantly being posed to higher education institutions (HEIs), and in particular those engaged in teacher training and the professional development of technology teachers. Teacher training programmes had to be developed and implemented within a limited time frame in comparison to other school subjects, despite a lack of previous experience of an appropriate academic discipline, subject methodology and classroom pedagogy. Furthermore, implications on organisational and managerial level regarding its accommodation within existing structures of faculties, schools and departments at HEIs had to be accounted for. The purpose of the article was to investigate how a scientifically founded philosophical framework of technology might guide teacher training at HEIs. The following research questions served as point of departure: in which way can a scientifically founded philosophical framework of technology be indicative regarding a relevant: (1) Subject methodology of technology? (2) Underlying academic discipline for undergraduate technology education students? In answer to the first question, it was found that it is important for programme developers, coordinators and subject methodology lecturers at HEIs to acquaint themselves sufficiently with a philosophical framework for technology to direct the technology teacher’s training and professional development. It seems viable to keep subject methodology of technology autonomous, with only one lecturer responsible, and that technology education students should be conversant in the philosophical framework for technology. In answer to the second question HEIs should urgently determine the nature and composition of the relevant academic disciplines underpinning the undergraduate qualification of a specialised technology teacher. Mechanisms should also be created to forge a relationship between the academic discipline and the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of technology education students.

This paper introduces and provides an overview of the special issue of this journal on Transnational and Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Subject Didactics. It describes a perspective on Subject Didactics that draws on insights from both the long tradition of General Didactics and from more contemporary subject-specific practices. In doing so it presents the crucial bridging position of subject didactics between academic disciplines and educational sciences. An outline of the theoretical framework to curriculum research and teacher education is provided. Furthermore, the guiding research questions and overall approach are presented including a focus on the development of teachers’ powerful professional knowledge. It addresses the questions of why describe this approach as critical and what is meant by a knowledge-led approach. The approach to data collection, analysis and interpretation is outlined and the implications for curriculum planning and professional development are considered. A summary of discussions related to the focus of this special issue at the conference that gave rise to it follows. Finally, an overview of contributions to this special issue is provided. In conclusion these are reflected on in relation to the guiding research questions and the vital importance of Subject-Specific Educational Content Knowledge (SSECK) for teacher education is highlighted.

Objectives This study aims to explore the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) of teachers in the context of play-based early childhood education. The focus is on how teachers observe, document, and support play activities in educational settings that demand a high level of professional expertise. By analyzing teachers' play documentation from a professional vision perspective, the study seeks to identify what aspects teachers focus on during play situations and how their PCK is manifested. Methods This study analyzed 19 play documentation cases from the 2019 revised Nuri Curriculum to examine teachers' selective attention and knowledge-based reasoning. The analysis of selective attention focused on the specific elements of play that teachers observed, the aspects of children they concentrated on, the areas they emphasized to support and suggest during play, and the experiences and learnings they highlighted. For knowledge-based reasoning, the study assessed teachers' inferential actions based on observational evidence, their professional knowledge, and educational theories. Results First, the analysis revealed that teachers focused on the transformation of play through chance encounters and on all the relationships children form. Second, in the interplay of play and activities, the teachers' PCK was evident in their attuned listening to children's language and behavior while implementing their educational plans, as well as their pedagogical PCK in responding spontaneously to children's needs and supporting their learning. Conclusions The examination of teachers' PCK in play documentation indicated that it is an intertwining of educational knowledge, contextual (practical) knowledge, and knowledge about children. This results in the manifestation of PCK through planning, observation, support, and interpretation by teachers. The study highlighted the importance of teachers’ roles in implementing a play-based curriculum that aims to deepen, expand, and reorganize educational content and experiences to promote higher levels of learning and support.

The impact of MASTEP on the use of practical work in Nambian science classes

Didactics is defined as the theory of education. It deals with the specific forms, procedures and goals of teaching that a teacher implements with his/her students. As such, it is an integral part of pedagogy. Since the forms, procedures and objectives of teaching vary in their specificity for the different fields, disciplines and subjects of education, this specificity is reflected in the disciplinary or subject didactics. The latter thus deal with the processes of teaching and learning with regard to subject-specificity and specificity. The article is thematically devoted to the area of subject or subject didactics, specifically didactics of electrical engineering, which is of particular importance for vocational technical education, as it forms a key part of it both in practice and in the preparation of teachers of such disciplines. The article also presents some of the results of the author’s research from recent years, which focuses specifically on the areas of modern technologies and their impact on the teaching process, especially in electrical engineering-oriented teaching subjects; tools for developing technical but also digital literacy are presented.

The present survey study aims to present the results of the authors’ work and own research in the area of ​​defining and structuring didactic of technical courses with a focus on secondary technical education. The overall objective is to contribute to the issue of didactics of technical courses in the area. After defining the problem we will deal with the current state of the problem, the wider context of the issue and the concept of didactics of technical courses while implying of our own conclusions and opinions. The result can serve to specialized didacticians of technical and science subjects in this area as inspiration for their work. However, it can also serve to specialized didacticians of other subjects as well as to students of teacher training for vocational and practical subjects in secondary vocational schools. A critical analysis of resources and studies in this area has brought us to our own conclusions in the area of defining this specialized didactics, and we present them in the study.

In the beginning of the 19th century, Humboldt defined Bildung as both process and product of the developing person. In this contribution we discuss how this classical concept may be used for defining subject didactics. We use two complementary approaches to answer it: a historical analysis, and the construction of a theoretical model. 1) Presenting results of a historical research on the process of didactic transposition of grammar in the 19th century, we show that Bildung seems to function as one driving force among others. 2) In reflecting on the respective signification of “learning” on the one hand and “Bildung” on the other hand, it is possible to define three levels of outcomes which (school) subjects have on persons who learn, Bildung being a not necessarily intended, but potential one. Both approaches show that Bildung is indeed a concept that can be used for doing research in subject didactics and for conceiving them as a whole, with a common core and with many differences between individual subject didactics at the same time.