from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The teaching (of ancient Greek διδάσκειν didáskein , German , 'teach ) is the "art" and "science" of learning and teaching . It is a central discipline of education and, in addition to technical training, is part of the qualification in academic teacher training .

Definition, classification and delimitation

Didactics in the narrower sense deals with the theory of teaching , in the broader sense with the theory and practice of teaching and learning . According to Johann Amos Comenius (1592–1670), didactics is the "art of teaching", while the "art of learning" is math . Wolfgang Klafki distinguishes didactics as a theoretical science , strictly separated from the methodology , which deals with the practical procedures of teaching and learning (the how ). Another fundamental counter-term to didactics as “teaching through instruction” is maeutics , the didactic aspect of the Socratic method , as “teaching through conversation” or “teaching through self-knowledge”.

Didactics work with the content, goals and their justifications selected by the selected educational theory (the what , what for and why ). However, it is applicable to several educational theories independently. In contrast, it depends on the learning theory chosen , i. That is, depending on your view of the process of learning, you will select, reduce and rank the knowledge elements in such a way that the process is optimally supported.

In a narrower sense, didactics is understood to be the science of teaching, in contrast to maths, which sees itself as the science of learning.

"But both are inextricably linked because, according to today's understanding, you cannot teach anything successfully without asking yourself at the same time: How do students learn?"

- R. Winkel.

As “general didactics”, it deals primarily with the principles, teaching and learning models and justification questions of educational processes, regardless of specific learning content. The subject didactics deal with teaching and learning subject-related teaching content as well as acquiring subject-specific skills . Considerations on a “general subject didactics” (Bayrhuber et al. 2016) work out the common and subject-related differences in the teaching / learning concepts of the individual didactics.

Learning in certain school levels is thematized in level didactics. Learning with media-supported learning offers is processed in media didactics. Interdisciplinary subject areas are the subject of interdisciplinary didactics, such as project teaching or project-oriented teaching .

For a long time, didactics related solely to school lessons and was regarded as a reference discipline for the actions of teachers, especially at primary and secondary levels. Other learning contexts, such as adult and continuing education, learning in professional contexts or at university, were ignored or neglected. The fixation on the actions of teachers was relativized in the 1990s by the discussion about constructivism . Didactics is no longer (only) action science for teachers, but deals in general with all arrangements that are conducive to learning, as emphasized above all by constructivist didactics . In the 1990s, for example, media didactics provided very important impulses for the didactic discussion. With the increasing importance of different learning contexts outside of school, didactics is constituting itself as a cross-context discipline that deals with the design of learning opportunities.

According to Werner Jank and Hilbert Meyer Didaktische Modelle , didactics deal with the question: "Who should learn what, from whom, when, with whom, where, how, with what and for what purpose?" According to Siegbert Warwitz and Anita Rudolf, the question of "why", the "justification" of the learning materials, learning objectives and forms of teaching and learning is an indispensable component of promising didactics. Clarifying it serves to ensure the acceptance of educational processes that are not simply prescribed rather, they must be critically scrutinized and clearly justified.

Understanding didactics as “theory and practice of teaching and learning” avoids the widespread simplistic “vulgar definition”, according to which didactics deal with the what and methodology with the how of teaching. According to Klafki, it seems more appropriate to understand methodology as a sub-discipline of didactics.

Against this background, didactics can be understood overall as “teaching and science of learning and teaching in their interrelationships as well as with their prerequisites and conditions” (Tulodziecki / Herzig / Blömeke 2017, p. 270).

History of Didactics

Jan Amos Komenský (Comenius) developed the first modern didactics. Early didactic models are visual pedagogy of the 19th century and work pedagogy of the 20th century as part of reform education .

The overall development is characterized by different conceptions of didactics, which still play a role in the didactic discussion today: Didactics as the art of teaching, as the teaching of educational teaching, as educational teaching, as a program to change schools, as the theory of educational content and the curriculum and finally as the science of learning and teaching.

“General Didactics” deals with the justification of lessons, lesson goals and content, the didactic methods and the design of lessons - regardless of the institutional context, level or subject. In addition, subject didactics have been developed that deal with conveying the various subject-specific content. German didactics, for example, had its first beginnings in the 15th century. In the 1960s, Wolfgang Klafki formulated the first goals and content of German didactics. In 1982 Kreft created a “prototype understanding model” which examined the process of understanding in literature lessons. This was refined by Kaspar Spinner in the 80s. Since the early 1980s, Wolfgang Isers advocated reception aesthetic theories and suggested the staging of still images in literature classes. Since the 1990s there have been concepts for media-integrated teaching that include audiovisual media and new media.

After general didactics and subject didactics, media didactics have also established themselves, which deals with media-based learning and the arrangement of media-based learning offers, as well as didactics that deal with teaching and learning in certain institutional contexts and school levels, such as B. vocational didactics , which addresses learning and teaching in vocational school or vocational college, or primary school didactics or adult and further education .

Goals of didactics

As the “science of teaching and learning”, didactics describe general principles and rules that apply to all teaching and all specialist disciplines. It is not a matter of content, let alone ideological, but rather formal requirements for scientifically appropriate teaching and learning. A misunderstanding of didactics is the so-called "image didactics", according to which it is only a matter of conveying the results of the specialist sciences to the students' heads. The specialist sciences are only one point of reference in didactics, others are society, the needs of the students or the orientation of the teacher, as represented in the so-called didactic triangle .

General didactics | Didactic models

According to Blankertz (1969) , Jank / Meyer describe a general didactic model as a “theoretical structure aimed at completeness for the analysis and planning of didactic activities in school and other teaching and learning situations” (see also model ). Didactic "concepts" (less scope) that relate to empirical teaching-learning research and research on didactic design are becoming increasingly important .

The following "didactic models" have long been discussed in Germany:

  • educational theory didactics , renewed as critical-constructive didactics ,
  • learning theory didactics ,
  • information-theoretical-cybernetic didactics ,
  • Development logic didactics and the
  • communicative didactics.

These approaches, which arose between 1930 and 1990 in German-speaking countries, were each seen as competing directions that emerged on the background of teacher training and each tried to establish a separate “school”. With the focus on these “didactic models” and “schools”, the discussion in Germany remained largely cut off from international research until the 1990s. Only at the end of the 20th century did research catch up with the international discussion and research on communication design. Instead of the “school education” that has long shaped the German discussion, didactics is increasingly developing into an interdisciplinary science with a high empirically based share. Theoretical foundations are z. B. from teaching-learning research, social theories, epistemology (such as constructivism) or communication theories.

Various didactics were developed against this background. These include u. a.

  • the constructivist didactics (Kersten Reich),
  • evolutionary didactics (Annette Scheunpflug),
  • the subjective didactics (Edmund Kösel),
  • the action and development-oriented didactics (Gerhard Tulodziecki / Bardo Herzig / Sigrid Blömeke) and
  • educational didactics (Meinert A. Meyer).

Educational theory didactics

Representatives of educational theory didactics are: Wolfgang Klafki , Wolfgang Kramp , Eduard Spranger , Herman Nohl , Wilhelm Flitner , Erich Less , Theodor Litt , Claus Gnutzmann .

Educational theory didactics understand teaching as a “process of an 'encounter' between selected suitable educational goods and the next generation” (Ewald Terhart: Didaktik (2009)). For the teacher, the focus is on the selection, arrangement and explication of the content, method and media questions are subordinate. Since 1958 it has been further developed by Wolfgang Klafki. The thesis of the "primacy of didactics" goes back to him, to which methodology is subordinate. Due to the following discussions and theoretical reorientations, Wolfgang Klafki has further developed his system for critical-constructive didactics . So he made decisions about content less the traditional educational curriculum than a series of epoch-typical “key problems”. However, these have changed over the decades since they were first named in the 1980s by Klafki.

This didactic model focuses on the question of the content of the lesson: What do young people have to deal with in order to be educated and come of age? The answer is the " Didactic Analysis as Core of Lesson Preparation" (1963) with sub-questions about the material under consideration: What is the fundamental, present, future, exemplary significance of the material to be taught? Furthermore, the educational theory didactics asks about the accessibility from the perspective of the students and the subject structure of the content of the lessons. In essence, it is always about the well-founded selection and arrangement of the objects through which learning processes are to be initiated. Klafki demands that the necessary decisions should be made in the "didactic analysis".

Educational theory didactics aims to educate people as a whole, not just special and useful properties and skills. This should be achieved through the synthesis of material education (broad knowledge and skills) and formal education (exhaustion of potential, methodological competence and instrumental skills). Klafki summarizes the dialectical unity of material and formal education under the term “categorical education”. The idea is that the problem of choosing suitable teaching content can be solved by means of exemplary objects from which the universal viewpoints (categories) of the spiritual order of the world can be acquired.

Learning theory didactics

The learning theory didactics was developed by Heimann in the Berlin model . It is an instrument for analyzing and planning lessons. It is assumed that lessons are always formally structured, but variable in content and situation-dependent. There are four elementary structures of teaching and learning that must always be weighed against each other and brought into harmony with one another. These are the intention , i.e. the why , the content , the what , the method , the how and the medium , the with what . Each element is dependent on the other. This four-part structure is in turn dependent on the social-cultural and anthropological-psychological requirements that affect the system and have social-cultural and anthropological-psychological consequences that are the new requirements in the next teaching / learning phase. This creates a continuous cycle.

Lesson planning is based on the principles of interdependence, variability and controllability. The interdependence is the consistent interaction and combination of the structural elements. The variability should enable flexible planning and implementation. The controllability enables a professional evaluation of the lessons.

Another classic of learning theory didactics is the "Psychological Didactics" by Aebli (1983; 2003). It is regarded as a role model for integrating learning psychological knowledge into didactic thinking. Aebli ties in with the cognitive learning and development theory of Jean Piaget. In a second step, a general structure of the knowledge to be acquired in school is proposed. Aebli distinguishes between three very broad categories: Operations, courses of action and terms. This simple and rough distinction was enormously stimulating and versatile for general didactic thinking. In a third step, prototypical learning processes must be described in relation to the individual knowledge categories. For example, Aebli postulates four overarching learning steps for the acquisition of operations, courses of action or terms. In a fourth and final step, didactic conclusions are drawn. Which teacher and student actions or which aspects in the learning environment support the learning process?

In the meantime, there are also current didactic models that take up the theory of learning. Maier (2012), for example, developed five categories for the planning of lessons that relate to findings in learning psychology, neuroscience, teaching-learning research, and educational-psychological diagnostics. Current considerations on competence-oriented teaching are also included in this learning-theoretical planning model. The planning categories:

  1. From the curricular and subject-specific requirements to the learning goals or competence goals
  2. From the learning prerequisites to a course planning based on learning theory
  3. Methodological dimensions of the design of teaching-learning processes
  4. Organizational aspects of teaching
  5. Reflection and evaluation of the teaching-learning process

In planning category 2 in particular, learning theory considerations play a central role. Teachers must be able to describe the previous knowledge of students. Teachers must also understand how subject-specific knowledge is developed and how subject-specific competencies are built up (e.g. levels of written language acquisition). Steps in the teaching-learning process can only be planned against the background of this learning-psychological knowledge.

Curricular didactics

The curricular didactics, also known as learning-oriented teaching, was developed by Christine Möller in the 1970s. One of the most important exponents of the approach is Robert Mager.

Information theory and cybernetic didactics

The information theory , a 1948 paper by Claude Shannon founded, is a sub-field of communications engineering . Under the name of cybernetics , Norbert Wiener in particular has proposed applications that go far beyond technology. The basic model is the control loop . A typical information technology term that has made permanent use of the humanities is redundancy .

The application in didactics goes back to Helmar Frank , Felix von Cube , Miloš Lánský .

The approach is only of historical importance and has no "avowed" supporters in didactics.

Constructivist didactics

As a basic assumption of the true findings that in the process of perception not reality depicted, but rather a relative and subjective reality created (constructed) is. In this sense, constructivist-oriented didactics are based on the following assumptions: “Knowledge can never be transmitted as such from one person to another. [...] The only way in which an organism can acquire knowledge, (is) to build it up itself or to construct it for itself. […] The activity of teaching (should) be seen as an attempt […] to change a pupil's environment in such a way that the pupil builds up those cognitive structures that the teacher would like to convey ”( Ernst von Glasersfeld 1987, 133). In contrast to the usual theories of 'establishment', constructivist didactics will understand learning as a process of self-organization of knowledge that takes place on the basis of the construction of reality and meaning of each individual learner and is therefore relatively individual and unpredictable. As a teacher, you should create as rich, multimodal, interesting and communication-oriented environments as possible, which address the subjective areas of experience and at the same time contain new 'puzzles' that invite pragmatic, interactive and creative self-orientation. Cooperation, communication and interaction are used to define and solve problems, with the negotiation of meaning playing a major role. The approach of Kersten Reich , who has also written a widespread text and study book on the subject of constructivist didactics, is more oriented towards cultural theory in constructivist didactics . In Edmund Kösel (Volume III: The construction of knowledge. A didactic epistemology . SD Verlag, 2007) constructivism gains a fundamental meaning in the generation of knowledge in the process of communication between teachers and students.

Communicative didactics

Older communicative didactics

The representatives of this didactics react to the fixation on the subject of learning that predominates in cognitive didactics and regard lessons as a communicative event. They direct attention to the relationship between the teacher and the student. How we communicate with one another also influences learning. For this reason, communicative didactics particularly emphasize the design of the relationship level. Content references: Communication theory by Paul Watzlawick , theory of communicative action by Jürgen Habermas . The founders of communicative didactics are Karl-Hermann Schäfer and Klaus Schaller .

Subjective didactics

The theory of subjective didactics (according to Kösel ) draws its basic axioms from the assumption that every person is a self-contained, unique system with its own structure of consciousness and behavior. The transfer of knowledge and experience happens exclusively through the self-organization of the individual. The transfer of knowledge can only take place via mutual communication, and it will never achieve a 1: 1 mapping with the other. An interdisciplinary approach is used to develop a didactic orientation that includes social as well as anthropological and individual historical dimensions. Theoretical foundations are the theory of living systems (autopoiesis), systems theory (didactics in systems), constructivism (knowledge construction), results from brain research (consciousness systems of teachers and students) and a separate didactic theory of action . The field of communication is identified as a drift zone between teachers and students. The representation of knowledge constructions and the development of postmodern learning cultures are fundamental to any general didactic. The Bern model developed at the Academy for Adult Education (aeB Switzerland) offers a further development of the didactic drift zone .

Newer communicative didactics

In the course of the learner orientation, the focus is on student interactions. The teaching / learning process is no longer seen as imparting knowledge to the group through a knowledge source (teacher), but as a joint construction of knowledge. The learner group and their interactions play a central role here. Part of the collective construction of knowledge is that the learners acquire the ability to communicate intensively and in a factual manner with one another (cf. collective intelligence ). This takes place within the framework of open teaching methods. This development is just beginning, because the spread of the Internet is placing ever higher demands on people's communicative competence. The task of schools and universities will be to prepare schoolchildren and students appropriately for these new challenges.


A method is a coherent whole made up of a theoretical framework and practical implementation.

Learning by teaching

Use of LdL in language lessons: Pupil introduces new vocabulary

Since the early 1980s, the method of learning through teaching (LdL) has developed apart from the established didactics. The concept was tried out and disseminated in French classes at high school by Jean-Pol Martin . The transfer of teaching functions to pupils is currently being taken up and integrated in all current didactic concepts (for example open teaching, subjective didactics, constructivist didactics, communicative didactics, action orientation ). In the handbook on French didactics by Nieweler (2006), LdL is defined in the glossary as a “radical form of student and action orientation” . A practical and theoretical foundation is desired from the pedagogy (see, inter alia, Alexander Renkl 2006), although both have been available since 1994 (bibliography inter alia in: Martin / Oebel 2007). In Germany, Grzega's method is being further developed theoretically and practically, and in Japan LdL has been implemented and disseminated by Guido Öbel since the 1990s. In 2016, Weng / Pfeiffer described Martin as "a forerunner of the much-cited 'shift from teaching to learning'".

With regard to the dissemination of collective knowledge construction on the Internet, LdL is a suitable method that particularly contributes to the development of empathy and network sensitivity .

More terms

Didactic action

The Didactic action is not a theory, but primarily everyday actions with everyday mechanisms (habituation, typing, paradoxes, power relations, etc.) in a here-and-now situation (H 1) that can not be undone. In addition, didactic activity is mostly linked to habit formation (H2); on the other hand, reflection (H3) and recourse to empirical and theoretical findings (H4) are rather rare.

Didactic competence

The Didactic competence refers to the skills and abilities of teachers to optimally support the mediation process and the promotion of the individual student in a school system. This didactic competence can be broken down into different sub-competencies, whereby it is impossible to consider each of them at all times and equally for the teacher. They can only be seen as a means of differentiation, in no way as prescriptive guidelines for the teachers. Didactic competencies are the skills of a teacher, which - in relation to the teaching / learning situation - show that he has the balance between the demands and expectations of the individual learner, those of the learning group, the requirements of the knowledge architecture, the requirements of the curriculum , who can set up and maintain opportunities for the development of modern learning cultures and his own wishes and ideas, so that the learning climate is as positive as possible. Depending on the situation and needs of those involved, different behavior will be necessary. The appropriateness of this behavior is guaranteed by the fact that the teacher develops the largest possible repertoire of partial competencies and behavioral patterns on the basis of experience, perhaps professional knowledge and theoretical awareness, in order to be able to meet his or external requirements or to set himself apart in the event of excessive expectations.

Didactic triangle

The didactic triangle is a structural model that illustrates the relationships between the three teaching components, teacher, pupil and learning content, and how they relate to the socio-cultural environment of society. It is of fundamental importance in academic teacher training because it is suitable for depicting the most diverse forms of teaching and for discussing alternatives.

The following points of reference and relationships are addressed in detail:

  • The learning content comes from the abundance of possible learning objects in the world. It should be perceived by the learner.
  • The teacher acts as a mediator between the interests of society, students and learning material. He usually chooses the z. B. from the contents given in the curriculum and prepares them methodically.
  • With the support of the teacher, the pupil should grasp the learning content, internalize it and, if necessary, implement it in socially acceptable behavior and action.

Didactic place

The so-called didactic location describes the position of a lesson element (e.g. group work) in the timeline of a lesson and in the methodological process of a lesson, which has a clear role in the lesson.

Didactic relativism

In the emerging knowledge society in the 21st century, according to Edmund Kösel, the term knowledge can no longer be met with the conventional ontological claim to truth. In the future, knowledge will therefore be seen as a distinction in many respects and reference systems. Every topic or problem can be constructed under very different and different references, and each of these constructions has its own meaning. Knowledge is primarily based on terms, types of knowledge, contexts of knowledge, logics of knowledge and fields of knowledge.

Kösel advocates a solid didactic relativism, which assumes that teachers and learners should disclose their reference systems and the underlying architecture (reference areas, relations , dimensions, types of knowledge, knowledge concepts, knowledge logics, etc.) to each other . The long-standing discussion about the reduction of complexity in the transfer of knowledge (principle of the exemplary, the classic, the reduction, etc.) can thus be reworked in the medium of a didactic epistemology and implemented operationally in the classroom. The school should not only offer reproducible knowledge as an educational product within the framework of modern didactics, but must also be able to enable new educational products such as reconstruction, new construction, deconstruction of knowledge and pattern recognition for current and possibly future contexts and situations. To this end, an instrument for knowledge construction has recently been developed (Kösel, 2007).

According to Manfred Broy, didactic reduction refers to the simplifications and aids that are made by the teacher for the learners to facilitate understanding of a complex subject, taking into account their skills and previous knowledge. So many aspects can be omitted entirely. Typical didactic reductions are models in which the essentials are emphasized: e.g. B. a globe , an atomic model , a communication model .

The Didactic reconstruction goes beyond the didactic reduction. The teacher tries not only to pass on the cognitive and possibly the psychomotor dimension to learners in a suitable way, but also to convey new individual and social relationships (affective dimension) with regard to understanding and meaning that are not considered in the scientific community; it leads to added value in didactic efforts. Examples of this "added value" are ethical questions about the acquisition and use of certain measured values, theoretical assumptions, controversial views or interdisciplinary results.

The Didactic transformation is a typical tasks of the Methodology: A predetermined content is structurally analyzed and redesigned taking into account the cognitive structure of the learner as well as its learning objectives as for educational goals and content that it contains at least the elementary and is not available to previous learning processes in contradiction. The teacher does not remain neutral, but brings in extensive knowledge of the content, teaching methodology and learning process.


Under micro teaching (from the Greek. Mikros for small and didaskein for learning , teaching ) is in the adult education educational fine planning usually a training event ( seminar planning) understood. In the adult educational literature, the distinction between macro , meso and micro didactics can be found. In the process model, micro-didactic planning is always preceded by macro-didactic planning. It includes the preparation, implementation and follow-up of an educational event.

See also


  • Hans Aebli: Basics of teaching: a general didactics on a psychological basis. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1993/2003.
  • Olaf Albers, Arno Broux, Peter Thiesen (eds.): Future workshop and scenario technology. A method book for schools and universities. Beltz, Weinheim / Basel 1999.
  • Horst Bayrhuber, Ulf Abraham , Volker Frederking, Werner Jank, Martin Rothgangel, Helmut Johannes Vollmer: On the way to general subject didactics. (= General Didactics. Volume 1). Waxmann, Münster 2016, ISBN 978-3-8309-3532-2 .
  • Uwe Maier: Teaching-learning processes in schools: studies. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn 2012.
  • Herwig Blankertz : Theories and Models of Didactics . Juventa, Munich 1969.
  • Joachim Bröcher: Living Environment and Didactics . University Press Winter, Heidelberg 1997.
  • Joachim Bröcher: Teach differently, go to school differently . University Press Winter, Heidelberg 2007.
  • Karl-Heinz Flechsig: Small manual of didactic models . Neuland, Eichenzell 1996.
  • Hans Glöckel : About the class. Textbook of general didactics. 4th edition. Bad Heilbrunn / Obb. 2003, ISBN 3-7815-1254-1 .
  • Andreas Gruschka : Didactics - The cross with mediation. Eleven objections to the didactic operation . Pandora, Wetzlar 2002.
  • Herbert Gudjons , R. Winkel (ed.): Didactic theories. 10th edition. Bergmann & Helbig, Hamburg 1999.
  • Maria Hallitzky, Norbert Seibert: Didactic concepts and models. In: H.-J. Apel, W. Sacher (Ed.): Study book school pedagogy. 3. Edition. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn.
  • Gerd Heursen: Unusual didactics . Bergmann & Helbig, Hamburg 1997.
  • Wolfgang Hilligen: Didactic approaches in political education . Schwalbach 1991.
  • Werner Jank and Hilbert Meyer : Didactic models. 3. Edition. Cornelsen, Berlin 1994.
  • Alexandra Kertz-Welzel : Didaktik of Music: A German Concept and its Comparison to American Music Pedagogy. In: International Journal of Music Education (Practice). 22, No. 3, 2004, pp. 277-286.
  • Wolfgang Klafki : The educational problem of the elementary and the theory of categorical education . 3rd / 4th, revised and supplemented edition. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim 1964.
  • Wolfgang Klafki: New studies on educational theory and didactics: contemporary general education and critical-constructive didactics. 2nd, expanded edition. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim / Basel 1991.
  • Eckehardt Knöpfel (ed.): Didactica Nova. Work on didactics and methodology of pedagogy teaching, Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren 1997
  • Edmund Kösel : The modeling of learning worlds.
    • Volume I: The theory of subjective didactics. 4th edition. SD-Verlag, Bahlingen 2004, ISBN 3-8311-3224-0 .
    • Volume II: The Construction of Knowledge. A didactic epistemology . 2007, ISBN 978-3-00-020795-2 .
    • Volume III: The Development of Postmodern Learning Cultures. 2nd Edition. 2008, ISBN 978-3-00-020794-5 .
  • Horst Küppers, Hermann Schulz, Peter Thiesen: Errweg learning field conception in the teacher training. In: small & large. Volume 12/2014, Verlag Oldenbourg, Munich 2014.
  • Jean-Pol Martin : Proposal of an anthropologically based curriculum for foreign language teaching . Gunter Narr, Tübingen 1994.
  • Jean-Pol Martin, Guido Oebel: Learning through teaching: paradigm shift in didactics? In: German Lessons in Japan. 12, 2007, pp. 4-21. (Journal of the Japanese Teachers Association. ISSN  1342-6575 .)
  • Meinert A. Meyer : Course didactics . In search of the core of general didactics. In: HG Holtappels, M. Horstkemper (Hrsg.): New ways in didactics? Analyzes and concepts for the development of teaching and learning. 5. Supplement to the magazine "Die Deutsche Schule". Juventa, Weinheim 1999, pp. 123-140.
  • Klaus Prange : Types of teaching. A didactic for teachers . J. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn 1983.
  • Kersten Reich : Constructivist Didactics: a text and study book with a pool of methods on CD. 3. Edition. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim 2006.
  • H. Ruprecht, H.-K. Beckmann, F. von Cube, W. Schulz: Models of basic didactic theories . Schroedel Verlag, Hanover 1972.
  • Karl-Hermann Schäfer, Klaus Schaller: Critical educational science and communicative didactics. 3rd, revised edition. Quelle & Meyer, Heidelberg 1976.
  • Ewald Terhart : Didactics. An introduction , Reclam, Stuttgart 2009
  • Peter Thiesen: Teaching social pedagogy. Small compendium of teaching at training centers for social education / social work, Beltz, Weinheim / Basel 1991.
  • Gerhard Tulodziecki , Bardo Herzig , Sigrid Blömeke : Design of lessons. An introduction to didactics. 3. Edition. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn 2017.
  • Georg Hilger: The religion teacher in the expectation horizon of didactic drafts. In: Catechetical Sheets. 1978, pp. 125-140.
  • Gerd Katthage: Didactics of Metaphor. Perspectives for German Lessons . 2004.
  • Peter Menck: Lessons - What is it? An introduction to didactics . BoD, Norderstedt 2006, ISBN 3-8334-4871-7 .
  • Siegbert Warwitz , Anita Rudolf: Project teaching. Didactic principles and models . Verlag Hofmann, Schorndorf 1977, ISBN 3-7780-9161-1 .

Web links

Wiktionary: Didactics  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Johann Amos Comenius : Didactica magna in Opera didactica omnia (1657) .
  2. Hartmut Mitzlaff: Johann Amos Comenius (1592–1670) teaching pansophic things. In: Kaiser & Pech (Hrsg.): Basiswissen Sachunterricht. Volume 1: History and historical concepts of general science. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler 2004, pp. 41–46.
  3. ^ Siegbert Warwitz, Anita Rudolf: Project teaching. Didactic principles and models . Verlag Hofmann, Schorndorf 1977.
  4. ^ R. Winkel: Didactics versus maths? In: DLZ . No. 10, 1995.
  5. a b c Werner Jank and Hilbert Meyer: Didaktische Modelle. 3. Edition. Cornelsen, Berlin 1994. p. 16 u. 17th
  6. ^ Siegbert Warwitz, Anita Rudolf: Project teaching. Didactic principles and models . Verlag Hofmann, Schorndorf 1977.
  7. ^ Gerhard Tulodziecki, Bardo Herzig, Sigrid Blömeke: Design of lessons. An introduction to didactics. 3. Edition. Klinkhardt / utb, Bad Heilbrunn 2017, ISBN 978-3-8252-4794-2 , p. 265-271 .
  8. Anja Saupe (Ed.): Literature Didactics. Study book literary studies. 2nd updated edition. Akademie Verlag, 2012, p. 15 ff.
  9. Kerres, Michael .: Media didactics: Conception and development of media-based learning offers . 4th, revised. and actual Edition. Oldenbourg, Munich 2013, ISBN 978-3-486-73602-1 .
  10. Andreas Nieweler (Ed.): French Didactics - Tradition | Innovation | Practice . Klett, Stuttgart 2006, p. 318.
  11. Alexander Renkl: Learning through teaching. In: Detlef Rost (Hrsg.): Concise dictionary of pedagogical psychology. 3. Edition. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim 2006, pp. 416–420: "Future research should therefore primarily aim at the practically and theoretically extremely important question, which framework conditions must be given so that learning through teaching leads to good learning results" .
  12. Jean-Pol Martin, Guido Oebel: Learning through teaching: paradigm shift in didactics? In: German Lessons in Japan. 12, 2007, pp. 4–21 (Journal of the Japan Teachers Association, ISSN  1342-6575 .)
  13. Joachim Grzega: LdL in technical and other subjects of the technical colleges: Ingredients and recipe suggestions. In: Didaktiknachrichten (DiNa). (in print)
  14. Guido Oebel: Learning through teaching (LdL) in DaF lessons. A “real” alternative to traditional classroom teaching. In: Petra Balmus, Guido Oebel, Rudolf Reinelt (eds.): Challenge and Opportunity. Crisis Management in German as a Foreign Language in Japan . 2005, ISBN 3-89129-404-2 .
  15. Annegret Weng, Anke Pfeiffer: “Learning through teaching” in mathematics - video tutorials and apps in a practical test. 2016 - URN: urn: nbn: de: 0111-pedocs-122641
  16. ^ Siegbert Warwitz, Anita Rudolf: The didactic thought picture. In: Dies .: Project teaching. Didactic principles and models . Schorndorf 1977, pp. 20-22.
  17. Manfred Bönsch: The didactic triangle as a basic model. In: Ders .: General Didactics. Verlag W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2006, pp. 149-150.
  18. U. Kattmann: Didactics of Biology. Aulis Verlag, Cologne 1993, ISBN 3-7614-1574-5 .
  19. Analogous to: M. Broy: Informatik. Volume 1, Springer, Heidelberg 1992.
  20. Macro & Microdidactics in the ELearning Wiki
  21. Micro-didactics (seminar planning)