Traffic education

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The traffic education is a branch of general education . In terms of content / subject matter, it is part of the traffic sciences and structurally it is part of the applied sciences . In addition to basic research on human traffic, it deals with the implementation of the findings in appropriate, safe, cooperative behavior in traffic. Corresponding theories and communication strategies are developed for this purpose.

The task of traffic education is to develop modern didactics for the teaching area and corresponding methods. Their findings lead to practical traffic education , which is anchored in the German, Austrian and Swiss curricula and taught in kindergartens and schools . This task is shared by universities and regional and supraregional institutes for traffic education created by the ministries, as well as organizations such as the German Road Safety Council , the Austrian Board of Trustees for Road Safety , the German Traffic Guard , various national automobile clubs and local police stations.

history

Traffic education developed out of the emergency of having to deal with growing road traffic and the increasing number of accidents, especially among children. The first signs of it can already be seen at the beginning of the 20th century, for example in the decree of the Prussian Minister for Intellectual Affairs of 1906, which made schools responsible for the safety of children when crossing the street. The main focus was on imparting knowledge of the rules, clarifying the risk of accidents, and teaching traffic discipline. A purely practical hazard theory was created with the sole aim of reducing the number of accidents and preparing children and young people to behave safely in traffic in accordance with the rules. This so-called traffic instruction was already integrated as an integral part of the Prussian education system in 1930. Traffic lessons could also be ordered for adult traffic offenders who became suspicious.

In the middle of the century, accident prevention and the commitment to ensuring that children were as roadworthy as possible were the focus of efforts, which were primarily carried out by extracurricular institutions (police, traffic guards, automobile clubs, etc.). The children were shown some very drastic traffic scenarios in the style of Wilhelm Busch and Struwwelpeter in catchy verse form, which were intended to promote attention in traffic and conscientious control behavior via the fear of terrible accidents

It was not until the KMK recommendation of July 7, 1972 that traffic instruction came to schools and universities as a comprehensive, compulsory educational mandate. This was the beginning of a - initially quite controversial (cf. Hohenadel 1986) - 'pedagogy' of the previously pragmatically oriented traffic theory. There was a didactic and methodical processing of the new area of ​​responsibility according to the modern knowledge of educational science , a professional training and further education of traffic educators , an anchoring in the curriculum, an institutionalization of responsibilities and an increasing acceptance by the schools. In the ministries, specialist lectures were set up, at the universities professorships or Senate assignments, and in the schools traffic officers were appointed to represent and promote the new area of ​​responsibility in theory and practice. In this way, a pedagogically sound traffic education under the umbrella of traffic education developed from the pragmatic accident prevention subject.

The KMK recommendation of July 28, 1994 , which affects all German federal states , assigned teacher training and further training to a key function for qualified teaching: In the first (scientific) as well as the second (practical school) phase, students should be given the opportunity to participate in traffic education events deal with relevant topics and offer them as an examination subject. In the advanced training phase, so-called “ institutes for traffic education” were given the task of using multiplier courses to ensure that teachers who were already active were retained and to train interested teachers to become mediators . Since the establishment and promotion of traffic education, the yearbooks of the Federal Statistical Office have recorded a steady decline in the number of accidents in road traffic despite the increasing mobilization.

With the latest version of the KMK recommendation of May 10 , 2012 , the classic term of traffic education is expressly retained, but supplemented by that of mobility education . This should also bring socially relevant aspects such as climate protection, resource consumption, traffic area design, use of transport into the educational field of view. In the information on the practical implementation of the objectives, the need to start from the personal experiences and the experience horizon of those to be educated is expressly emphasized.

Structure and tasks

As a sub-discipline of general education, traffic education , similar to sports education or religious education , is one of the so-called area education . It is in an interdisciplinary exchange with neighboring areas such as traffic psychology , traffic medicine , traffic policy , traffic law or traffic management .

As an application-related specialist discipline, traffic education has a theoretical and a practical field of activity: In the theoretical sector, the prerequisites and the structure of conditions in the field of work have to be researched. These concern, on the one hand, the subject area of ​​traffic, on the other hand, the human area and, third, their implications. In the application sector, traffic education has the task of developing suitable implementation strategies for the various target groups and of putting these into concrete curricula . The catalog of tasks, which has already largely been included in the curriculum, has been steadily expanding. B. from the ecological point of view of environmentally conscious traffic or the health aspect. It now encompasses issues of personality education , the social education , the safety education , the mobility education , the environmental education and health education . The different types of traffic participation as pedestrians, cyclists, skaters, bikers, motorists, train or bus users increasingly came into focus. The aim was to lead the way towards a critically questioned, environmentally friendly, healthy, safe and humane traffic design for the individual in partnership with the others.

In cooperation with non-profit organizations such as the German Traffic Watch, with the police and with the automobile clubs, great commitment was given to educating the population through the publication of books and brochures and the organization of action days. With the child and traffic training programs of the German Road Safety Council, parents were also involved in the safety concepts in terms of traffic education.

Didactics and methodology

Traffic pedagogy endeavors to develop the important and threatening area of ​​traffic for children and young people according to the latest findings in educational science. Two basic didactic directions can be distinguished, which found a meaningful division of labor with the advancing pedagogy of traffic studies : traffic education based on the needs of traffic and accidents, and traffic education based on the needs and abilities of the child .

While the first starting point is primarily geared towards safety interests and reducing the number of accidents, the second is aimed more at traffic-related personal development. If the first concept is primarily geared towards rapid success in defusing traffic hazards, the second is intended more to influence the character in the long term in the sense of a responsible road user. If the task of one didactic direction is indispensable in terms of responsibility for the life and health of children and young people, the second has an important function in terms of the sustainability of traffic pedagogical efforts and personal development. Accordingly, they are no longer understood as competing but as complementary approaches.

Methodically, the didactics of the primary interest in security mainly uses deductive teaching methods of the learning school. These take the existing rules of traffic as a given and try to introduce the new generation in their behavior as quickly as possible and to persuade them to conscientiously accept the official traffic regulations. Above all, this requires the ability to accept and adapt. In contrast, didactics from the child's point of view work primarily with inductive methods. It demands the child's creativity and lets them find and try out their own rules for dealing with traffic in a playful way. The still protected traffic area becomes a place of experimentation, the challenge of ability, the experience of social togetherness, the self-creation of ordered flows of movement. For both approaches, the traffic education child-friendly forms developed a modern transport classes: For rapid initial backup on the main roads suitable were learning programs developed, such as the safe way to school the Schulanfängers The didactics of the Child made available in addition to the children, even complicated learning projects . 

Trends in traffic safety

In historical retrospect, but also in practice, according to Warwitz, three different ideas can be identified today as to how society would like to pedagogically ensure the safety of children in traffic. You don't have to contradict each other:

  • Adaptive traffic education - traffic education based on the needs of traffic. (Learning to adapt to given rules)
  • Curative traffic safety - traffic safety as a protection and protection measure. (Spatial separation of child and traffic)
  • Creative traffic education - traffic education from the thinking and experience horizon of the child. (Finding yourself, trying out and allowing regulations to mature)

See also

literature

Books

  • Traffic education at all levels of education . Working and Research Association for Road Traffic and Road Safety University of Cologne (Ed.) Vol. 24. Cologne 1974.
  • JM Breinbauer: Introduction to General Pedagogy . 2nd Edition. Vienna 1998.
  • W. Brinkmann (ed.): Differential pedagogy. An introduction . Donauwörth 2001.
  • DVR (Ed.) (2009): Handbuch der Verkehrssicherheit . Bonn (www.verkehrssicherheitsprogramme.de)
  • Bruno Heilig: Perspectives in traffic education . Congress report 11. – 13. May 1988. Schwäbisch Gmünd.
  • HG Hilse, W. Schneider: Traffic safety . Stuttgart 1995.
  • Dieter Hohenadel: Education and traffic reality . 2nd Edition. Braunschweig 1986.
  • H. Holstein: Small lexicon of traffic education . Ratingen 1972.
  • Maria Limbourg, A. Flade, J Schönharting: Mobility in childhood and adolescence . Opladen 2000.
  • Ministry of Culture and Sport BaWü (Ed.): KMK recommendation on traffic education in schools from July 28, 1994 . In: Kultus und Studium 15. Stuttgart 1994.
  • C. Schneider: The Karlsruhe 12-step program. Practical review of a method for safe pedestrians . Knowledge State examination work GHS. Karlsruhe 2002.
  • G. Schreiber: The Karlsruhe 12-step program. A training attempt with school beginners . Knowledge State examination work GHS. Karlsruhe 2002.
  • Ph. Spitta: practical book on mobility education . Baltmannsweiler 2005.
  • Siegbert A. Warwitz: Traffic education from the child. Perceiving - playing - thinking - acting. 6th edition. Schneider, Baltmannsweiler 2009.

Essays

  • G. Deetjen: Traffic education as a motivator for intelligent mobility . In: Z. f. VE 47, 1997, pp. 27-30
  • R. Gorges: On the importance of psychomotor skills in traffic education or wrong ways in traffic education at primary level . In: Z. f. Traffic Education 1, 1997, pp. 4–10
  • J. Raithel: The concept of traffic / mobility pedagogy. A historical and systematic view. In: Journal for traffic education, 56, 2006, pp. 30–34.
  • J. Raithel: Approaches to the prevention of children's accidents. In: Deutsches Polizeiblatt, 20, 2002, pp. 13-14.
  • S. Warwitz: Children in the problem area of ​​school rush hour . In: Ding-Wort-Zahl 86, 2007, pp. 52–60
  • S. Warwitz: Are traffic accidents 'tragic' coincidences? In: Ding-Wort-Zahl 102, 2009, pp. 42–50 and 64

Web links

Wiktionary: Traffic education  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Single receipts

  1. ^ W. Brinkmann (Ed.): Differential Pedagogy. An introduction. Donauwörth 2001.
  2. ↑ Working and research group for road traffic and traffic safety at the University of Cologne: traffic education at all levels of education. Vol. 24, Cologne 1974.
  3. ↑ http://luzernmobil.ch/verkehrteilnahmende/schulen/verkehrserichtung
  4. ↑ http://www.puppenhausmuseum.de/teddypolizei-1.html
  5. ↑ a b Ministry for Culture and Sport BaWü (Ed.): KMK recommendation on traffic education in schools from July 28, 1994. In Kultus und Lehr 15/1994. Stuttgart 1994.
  6. ↑ D. Hohenadel: Education and traffic reality. 2nd edition, Braunschweig 1986
  7. ↑ a b S. Warwitz: Traffic education from the child. Perceive-play-think-act. 6th edition, Schneider, Baltmannsweiler 2009.
  8. ↑ Decision of the KMK from 07/07/1972 as amended from 10/05/2012: Recommendation on mobility and traffic education in schools
  9. ↑ KMK recommendation p. 4.
  10. ↑ C. Schneider: The Karlsruhe 12-Step Program . Practical review of a method for safe pedestrians. Knowledge State examination work GHS. Karlsruhe 2002.
  11. ^ G. Schreiber: The Karlsruhe 12-Step Program. A training attempt with school beginners . Knowledge State examination work GHS. Karlsruhe 2002.
  12. ^ S. Warwitz: Traffic education from the child. Perceive-play-think-act. 6th edition, Schneider, Baltmannsweiler 2009, pp. 190-279.
  13. ↑ S. Warwitz: Are traffic accidents 'tragic' coincidences? In: Ding-Wort-Zahl 102, 2009, pp. 42–50 and 64.
  14. ↑ Future- oriented traffic education ring lecture University of Vechta May 14, 2012.