Homogeneity (pedagogy)
In pedagogy and teaching, homogeneity denotes a group of learners who are composed of the same type of learners under certain aspects for learning or educational purposes. Homogeneity is the opposite of heterogeneity . It does not mean "equality", but "similarity", "similarity", "relationship".
term
The term homogeneity is derived from ὁμός homós “equal”, “similar” and γένος “génos” = kind, relationship. Homogenḗs (ὁμογενής, Middle Latin homogeneus ) means "same sex", "related", "same origin or species". In the meaning of “similarity”, “of a related kind”, homogeneity characterizes group formations that are formed under certain working conditions and objectives. Translated to the exact word, the compound homo-gen does not mean “same”, not “identical”, but “similar”, “similar”, “related”. Overlooking the second part of the word often leads to misinterpretations, incorrect use of the term and absurd criticism.
to form
Depending on the objective, it can make sense to create homogeneous or heterogeneous groups when structuring lessons. This group formation can be based on body size, gender, age, performance level, religious affiliation, language, culture and other criteria. Well-known homogeneous formats are, for example, teaching in year classes , the breakdown of the grammar school into lower, middle and upper grades, the division of education into a multi-level school system with elementary school , special school , secondary school , secondary school , grammar school , training in various specialist areas or scientific disciplines, etc.
Age homogeneity
As the name suggests, age homogeneity is aimed for in the formation of year classes in schools. These start with an approximately equal level of development of the children and want to promote in class formation. Groups of homogeneous age encourage the formation of peer groups and interest groups that are conducive to joint learning. For the teachers, this structure has the advantage of being able to implement the didactic principle of age-appropriate and development-appropriate learning methodologically more easily.
Gender homogeneity
_b_004.jpg)
A few decades ago, the prevailing doctrine was that adolescents should be taught separately from puberty onwards , if possible in classes of the same sex. This was especially true for physical education . In addition to the different pace of development and the avoidance of sexual advances, the divergence of the focus areas and interests were also decisive. The pedagogy did not want to be brought into line and leveled up in upbringing, but rather the creation of a gender-typical personality development for boys and girls. For this purpose, the formation of segregated gender homogeneous classes seemed the appropriate measure. Accordingly, lyceums were created for girls ' higher education and grammar schools for boys, boarding schools for girls and boarding schools for boys . Some of them set different educational priorities. With a few exceptions, this separation has largely been eliminated in private institutions. Only physical education continues to be given by female teachers for the girls and by male physical education teachers for the boys for obvious reasons.
Performance homogeneity
A didactic rule requires that the individual student be picked up for their learning progress at their respective level of knowledge and ability. If this is to be done in a class, a roughly equal performance level or a differentiation into homogeneously structured subgroups is required . It doesn't make sense to want to teach beginners to the same course with advanced skiers . A teacher cannot adequately prepare third graders for high school if he has to look after illiterate people in the same group at the same time . The beginner in violin playing will be just as uncomfortable as the student in the master class and will not be able to improve his or her skills if they find themselves in the same study group. For their optimal support, both need a learning group that corresponds to their level of performance, often even teachers at a different level of competence. Both require different teaching instructions and learning methods.
Interest homogeneity
Homogeneity of interests makes it easier to form groups based on the division of labor, because it allows people to join with like-minded people. It is realized as in the free choice of a particular option, in entering into a theme of common interest working group in the assignment to a specific team or sport in physical education, when choosing a particular type of school or study or vocational orientation. Similar interests create a group dynamic that promotes learning . The so-called peer education strategies also made use of this fact .
Educational homogeneity
The schools of the education system differentiate themselves into general and advanced, more scientific-academic or more job-related, more music-artistic or sport-oriented training directions, which offer relatively homogeneous training courses apart from each other. Hauptschulen, Realschulen or Gymnasien work at different levels of aspiration, have a different, but each relatively similar, educational orientation given by the school type.
Weltanschauung homogeneity
Religious instruction usually takes place in homogeneous groups according to the religious orientation, e.g. as Christian-Protestant, Christian-Catholic, Islamic or Jewish classes. The teaching concept is based on the assumption that the children first of all become at home in a religious community specified by their parents , that Christian children should receive a Christian and Islamic children should receive an Islamic upbringing, and that a premature mixture of Protestant and Catholic beliefs only affects the children would confuse.
Culture homogeneity
The phenomenon of a so-called “ multicultural society ”, which has recently been discussed intensively, is characterized by a mixture of the most diverse cultures in the communal living space. This is not without consequences for the school system and the pedagogy of the originally culturally more uniform educational institutions. It poses new challenges to prevent undesirable parallel societies from developing . The growing together of people from different countries of origin with their own traditions is often fraught with conflict and much more difficult to manage in terms of teaching than teaching and learning in homogeneous groups, as the school situation in different hot spots, such as in Berlin-Kreuzberg , shows. The teachers are then asked, instead of their own competence as a mediator of a curricularly prescribed learning material and educational mandate, as far as possible in the non- occupational role of social worker , what requires a different training and actually concerns a different professional group with a special focus.
Pedagogical intention
Homogeneity in the formation of learning groups aims to achieve the same level of requirements for those to be educated as possible in order to be able to achieve the best possible support for the individual student and the entire group. In terms of the nature of things, it is forbidden to want to teach the beginner skier, who has never had a sliding board underfoot, with the already racing slalom driver in the same training group, for example during a ski course . The choice of the terrain and the teaching method as well as the level of demands of the course and the expectations of the course participants are prohibited. Even if the group were to be of average ability, the beginner would be overwhelmed. He would be at increased risk of injury and would likely give up prematurely in frustration. The expert, on the other hand, would not be challenged. He would be bored, would hardly be able to achieve the desired learning progress and would also leave the course prematurely disappointed. The same applies to a language course or an academic lecture if the requirements of the learners are too different. In every course, there is the risk that the teacher or lecturer will not challenge individual learners and overwhelm the others. This danger also exists in homogeneous groups. However, it is hoped that the group formation will increase the fit between the learning content and the learners.
Social reality
It is a truism that people, even adolescents of the same age, differ from one another in many ways, that every person is a so-called individual , that diversity as social diversity is a given. In no class group are there children with completely identical ages, educational requirements or learning abilities. Equally indisputable, however, is the realization that there are related, even matching features that characterize a group of learners together and that can be appropriately summarized as groups. The division into homogeneous groups is based on the latter feature.
The homogeneous group formation tries to strictly follow the didactic "principle of age and development fairness " and to optimally promote the performance of each individual in a group that is appropriate to his level of performance. It is not about "equality" of the group members, but about "similarity", i. H. "Similarity" of interests and learning requirements.
With the establishment of homogeneous groups, the educational concept pursues the intention of creating the best possible learning conditions for a similarly structured learning group in order to be able to achieve optimal learning progress for each group member and the group as a whole. The remaining differences should be methodically compensated according to the principle of differentiation . However, this presupposes manageable class sizes, appropriate rooms and material equipment and often cannot be guaranteed in view of the serious shortage of teachers and the more difficult student behavior.
Problem areas
The debate about the pedagogically meaningful and didactically appropriate group formation has long since migrated from the pedagogical-didactic specialist discussion to the political arena and today, by means of corresponding guidelines, essentially determines what happens in schools. The school-political debate, which is often ideologically based and thus sometimes derailed into polemics, tends to use a mistranslation of “homogeneity” as “equality”, whereby the second half of the compound word in particular does not come into consciousness. From this the erroneous conclusion is derived that there is no homogeneity among people and groups in reality, that this is a pure positing. However, the main point of criticism is seen by the opponents of homogeneous group formation as the cementing of social structures, which one would like to overcome by favoring heterogeneous school courses. From a scientific point of view, contrasting the respective opposing position with controversial terms with negative connotations such as “ monoeducation ” or “ exclusion ” also appears unsuitable for a factual discussion of the topic .
Same-sex versus gender-segregated parenting
The contrast between the terms monoeducation and coeducation denotes a contradicting idea of whether same-sex or separate-sex upbringing would better suit the different characteristics or the desired educational goals of boys and girls, whether pure girls 'and boys' schools or mixed schools would offer better development opportunities. If the representatives of a gender-specific upbringing bring up the different speeds of development, interests, performance areas, for example in school sport , and fear disadvantages for both sides, the other side expects more equal opportunities , especially for girls, and a dissolution of established gender roles.
Regular school versus special school
The pair of opposites “inclusion” and “ exclusion ” should be understood more as a battle slogan in the school political debate than as a factual juxtaposition of two positions, because the term inclusion is positively linked to solidarity, empathy, and minority protection, while the term exclusion negatively relates to exclusion, exclusivity and stigmatization is connected, but upward and downward terms such as “homodoxy” cannot be considered conducive to a factual debate. It is about the question of whether physically or mentally handicapped or behavioral children are more advantageously taught in a special school , i.e. in a school form specially set up for them in relatively homogeneous groups with teachers specially trained for their care, or whether they are integrated into the mainstream schools and shared with them the non-disabled children should be trained. Empirical school research in Germany and in other countries shows that for children with special educational needs learning, teaching together leads to better school performance.
Homogeneity and heterogeneity
Until the middle of the 20th century, striving for the most homogeneous educational units possible, such as the gender segregation, the preference for the three-tier school system or the division into year classes, was almost a pedagogical consensus, but the idea of heterogeneity was also given increasing migration flows , new weight as a social condition. It had to be mastered socio-politically and pedagogically and modified itself to the motto “unity in diversity”.
The formation of homogeneous or heterogeneous groups is not a dogma or educational principle in pedagogy and didactics . You can get a (one-sided) focus in various educational concepts, but are then mostly socio-political and ideologically motivated. In contemporary, factually and scientifically oriented didactics, both correspond to one another according to the respective educational goal and complement one another. It is up to the didactically experienced teacher and educator, after examining the learning objectives and the learning addressees, to decide on the most convenient and appropriate form of group formation in terms of factual and personal considerations. Prejudices, sensitivities and ideological fixations should not be decisive, but rather the benefit for the individual learners and the learning group.
So it makes perfect sense, under the aspect of social action and learning, to let people with different learning requirements and different ages cooperate in a heterogeneous group in order to learn with and from each other. This is useful e.g. B. in the form of so-called "family learning", in which people of different ages, disabled and non-disabled, asylum seekers and locals can interact and support each other in families, retirement homes, sports clubs or games . More demanding learning processes aimed at individual learning progress in knowledge and ability, however, suggest the formation of homogeneous groups. With the didactic principle of differentiation , methodical possibilities are offered to practice compromises between the two groups at times.
Particularly in the macro area of school policy decisions, it remains a challenge to find the appropriate way between the requirements of optimal learning support for the individual learner and the equally necessary social integration of people with different educational requirements, willingness to learn and learning speeds.
literature
- Hans Aebli: Basics of teaching: a general didactics on a psychological basis. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2003.
- Jörg Hagedorn, Verena Schurt, Corinna Steber, Wiebke Waburg (eds.): Ethnicity, gender, family and school. Heterogeneity as an educational challenge . VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2009.
- Adolf Kaegi (arrangement): Keyword Homogenḗs (ὁμογενής). In: Benseler's Greek-German School Dictionary . 12th edition. Teubner, Leipzig / Berlin 1904, p. 629.
- Gisela Steins: Identity development - the development from girls to women and boys to men . Pabst Verlag, Lengerich 2003, ISBN 3-89967-010-8 .
- Gerhard Wahrig, Walter Ludewig: German Dictionary . 1st edition. Mosaik Verlag, Gütersloh 1970, ISBN 3-570-06588-X , columns 1819/1820.
- Wolfgang Schulz: Lesson planning . Urban & Schwarzenberg Publishing House, Munich 1980, ISBN 978-3-541-40902-0 .
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ Gerhard Wahrig, Walter Ludewig: German Dictionary . 1st edition. Mosaik Verlag, Gütersloh 1970, Sp. 1819-1820.
- ↑ Adolf Kaegi (arrangement): Benseler's Greek-German School Dictionary , 12th edition, Teubner, Leipzig / Berlin 1904, p. 629.
- ↑ see for example Hans Wocken: On opponents of inclusion and their counter-speeches - essay. Section The Homodox Answer: Belief in Equality . In: Das Parlament , 23–2010, supplement: People with disabilities . das-parlament.de ( Memento from May 12, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Maria Harring et al. a. (Ed.): Friendships, cliques and youth cultures. Peers as educational and socialization bodies , Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag 2010
- ↑ Silke B. Gahleitner u. a .: The discipline and profession of social work. Barbara Budrich, Opladen 2010
- ^ Schulz Wolfgang: Lesson planning , Munich, Verlag Urban & Schwarzenberg, 1980
- ↑ Hans Wocken: On opponents of inclusion and their counter-speeches - essay. Section The Homodox Answer: Belief in Equality . In: Das Parlament , 23–2010, supplement: People with disabilities . das-parlament.de ( Memento from May 12, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Gisela Steins: Identity Development - the development from girls to women and boys to men . Pabst Verlag, Lengerich 2003
- ^ S. Gibb, D. Fergusson, L. Horwood: Effects of Single-Sex and Coeducational Schooling on the Gender Gap in Educational Achievement . In: Australian Journal of Education , Vol. 52, 2008, No. 3, pp. 301-317
- ↑ Norbert Kühne: Girls and Boys - Development, Upbringing, Identity . In: Praxisbuch Sozialpädagogik , Volume 8, Bildungsverlag EINS, Troisdorf 2010, pp. 9–41
- ↑ Hans Wocken: On opponents of inclusion and their counter-speeches - essay. Section The Homodox Answer: Belief in Equality . In: Das Parlament , 23–2010, supplement: People with disabilities . das-parlament.de ( Memento from May 12, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- ^ Geoff Lindsay: Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education / mainstreaming . In: British Journal of Educational Psychology . tape 77 , no. 1 , March 2007, ISSN 0007-0998 , p. 1-24 , doi : 10.1348 / 000709906x156881 ( wiley.com [accessed November 2, 2018]).
- ↑ Aleksander Kocaj, Poldi Kuhl, Anna J. Kroth, Hans Anand Pant, Petra Stanat: Where do children with special educational needs learn better? A comparison of school competencies between mainstream and special schools in primary level . In: KZfSS Cologne journal for sociology and social psychology . tape 66 , no. 2 , June 2014, ISSN 0023-2653 , p. 165–191 , doi : 10.1007 / s11577-014-0253-x ( springer.com [accessed November 2, 2018]).
- ↑ Hans Aebli: Basics of teaching: a general didactic on a psychological basis. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2003
- ↑ Jörg Hagedorn: Heterogeneity as an educational challenge. About the difficulty of thinking about unity in difference . In: Jörg Hagedorn, Verena Schurt, Corinna Steber and Wiebke Waburg (eds.): Ethnicity, gender, family and school. Heterogeneity as an educational challenge . VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften: Wiesbaden 2009, pp. 403–423