All Issue

2024 Vol.13, Issue 4 Preview Page

Research Article

Klafki’s Didactical Analysis, Theory of Knowledge and It’s Application to Geography Education

독일 Klafki의 Didactical Analysis와 지식론의 지리교육에의 적용 방안

서태열1†

Tae-Yeol Seo1†

1고려대학교 지리교육과 교수
1Professor, Department of Geography Education, Korea University
31 December 2024. pp. 393~415
PDF Citation
Abstract
German Didaktik has similarities as well as differences with the ‘curriculum’ in English speaking countries. The former focuses on ‘why’ and ‘what’, on the contrary the latter focuses on ‘how’. The former integrates curriculum and instruction, on the contrary the latter separates curriculum and instruction. Particularly German Didaktik starts with the concept of Bildung which has central purpose to nuture human abilities in the interaction with content, and has a special tool of Didaktik triangle to feature specific educational situation which is composed of three components of teacher, student and content. German Didaktik can be divided into two types of allgemeine Didaktik which aims to cultivate personality and Fachdidaktik which focus on specific subject content. Klafki integrates materiale Bildung and formale Bildung into categoriale Bildung to combine the content and method in education, and using categoriale Bildung he suggested Didactical analysis model which has five stages of identifying general meaning and suggesting example, identifying meaning of the content, the importance of content in the future, structuring contents, and identifying the condition of contents. Referring to this model, identifying meaning and importance of geography content, structuring and representing geography contents are needed; Considering progression and learning path, knowledge forming process, integrating curriculum- teaching- learning are requested in geography education.
Keywords
Didaktik
Fachdidaktik
Klafki
Kategoriale Bildung
Didactical analysis
독일의 교수학은 영미권의 교육과정과의 공통점과 차이점을 동시에 가지고 있는데, 독일의 교수학은 ‘왜’ 그리고 ‘무엇’에 초점을 두는 반면, 영미권의 교육과정은 ‘어떻게’에 초점을 둔다. 독일 교수학은 영미권의 교육과정과 교수를 통합적으로 접근하는 반면, 영미권은 교육과정과 교수를 분리하여 다룬다. 독일 교수학의 출발점은 교수의 중심적 목적을 내용과의 상호작용을 통한 인간능력의 육성이라는 Bildung의 개념으로 설명하고, 교양있는 인격의 함양에 초점을 두는 일반교수학과 특정한 내용에 초점을 두는 교과교수학으로 구분된다. 그리고 교수학의 여러 가지 양상들은 교사, 학생, 교과라는 세 가지 구성요소에 의해 표현되는 교수학 삼각형Didaktik triangle에 의해 설명된다. Klafki는 독일 교수학의 기저개념인 Bildung이 내용으로서 지식에 중점을 두는 materiale Bildung과 학습자와 적용능력에 중점을 두는 formale Bildung으로 나누어진 것을, 내용과 방법을 함께 고려하는 categoriale Bildung으로 통합하여 제시하였다. 이를 바탕으로 Klafki는 내용의 일반적 의미와 실재의 예시 → 내용의 의미 → 미래에서의 중요성 → 내용의 구조화 → 내용의 조건화라는 5단계의 교수학분석(Didactical Analysis)을 제시하였다. Klafki의 교수학분석론을 적용하여, 지리교육은 지리 내용의 의미와 중요성, 지리내용의 구조화, 지리 내용의 표상과 접근성에 중점을 두면서, 지리교육과정과 지리교수에서 지식형성과정을 통합적으로 다루고, 내용적 지식과 방법적 지식을 결합하여 개인의 학습 발달의 계열성과 경로를 고려하는 것이 요구된다.
키워드
교수학
교과교수학
Klafki
Kategoriale Bildung
교수학분석
References
  1. 김민성, 2021, “힘있는 지식의 의미와 지리학습전략,” 한국지리학회지, 10(1), 1-17.10.25202/JAKG.10.1.1
  2. 김승호, 2014. “Didaktik의 교육과정적 함의,” 교육과정연구, 32(2), 1-19.
  3. 문장원, 2020, “‘도야(Bildung)’ 개념의 역사적 전변과 미적도야,” 문학교육학, 69, 85-116.10.37192/KLER.69.3
  4. 백승수, 2019, “교양교육의 명칭 재정립을 통한 교양교육의 재개념화,” 교양교육연구, 13(1), 141-161.
  5. 서정혁, 2020, “대학의 교양 교육에 대한 철학적 성찰,” 교양교육연구, 14(5), 149-160.
  6. 서태열, 2023, “영국 국가교육과정의 ‘지식전회’, 지식논쟁 그리고 지리 교과,” 한국지리학회지, 12(4), 547-575.10.25202/JAKG.12.4.3
  7. 손승남, 2004, “남명 조식의 ‘敬義’ 교육사상과 클라프키(Klafki)의 ‘陶冶’사상 비교연구,” 교육사상연구, 15, 1-17.
  8. 손승남, 2005, “‘학습자 발달’의 관점에서 본 도야과정 교수법,” 교육사상연구, 17, 139-157.
  9. 손승남, 2008, “독일 일반교수학 모형과 최근 동향,” 비교교육연구, 18(1), 93-114.
  10. 손승남, 2023, “클라프키(Klafki)의 비판-구성적 교육학과 시대적 핵심 문제의 재음미,” 교육사상연구, 37(4), 73-94.
  11. 임창호, 1995. “교육학에 있어서 Bildung 개념의 재음미,” 고신대학교 논문집, 22. 107-127.
  12. 정영근, 1998a, “도야이념과 인간교육,” 한국청소년연구, 24, 16-29.
  13. 정영근, 1998b, “훔볼트의 도야이론의 개념과 방법론에 관한 연구,” 교육연구(상명대 교육문제연구소), 16집, 1-20.
  14. 정창호･손승남, 2020, “비판-구성적 교수법과 열린 화학수업,” 현장수업연구, 1(1), 29-59.10.22768/JFLS.2020.1.1.29
  15. 조철기, 2012, “영국 국가교육과정의 개정과 새로운 지리 학습프로그램의 특징,” 한국지역지리학회지, 18(2), 232-251.
  16. 주현정･이병준, 2018, “교사교육을 위한 독일 교수학 이론 모형에 대한 탐구,” 교육혁신연구, 28(4), 557-575.10.21024/pnuedi.28.4.201812.557
  17. 최종인, 2016, “도야(Bildung)의 교육적 의미,” 교육의 이론과 실천, 21(1), 119-143.
  18. Bauer, W., 2003, On the relevance of Bildung for democracy, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 35, 212-225.10.1111/1469-5812.00020
  19. Bladh, G., 2020, GeoCapabilities, Didaktical analsysis and curriculum thinking-furthering the dialogue between Didaktik and curriculum. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 29(3), 1-15.10.1080/10382046.2020.1749766
  20. Deng, Z., 2018, Bringing knowledge back in: Perspectives from liberal education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(3), 335-351. 10.1080/0305764X.2017.1330874
  21. Duit, R., 2015, Didaktik, in Gunstone, R., ed., Encyclopedia of Science Education, Dordrecht: Springer, 325-327.10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_156
  22. Friesen, N. and Osguthorpe, R., 2018, Tact and the pedagogical triangle: The authenticity of teachers in relation. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 70(1), 255-264.10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.023
  23. Gudmundsdottir, S., Reinertsen, A., and Nordtømme, N.P., 2000, Klafki’s Didaktil Analysis as a conceptual framework for research on teaching, in Westbury, I., Hopman, S., and Riquarts, K., eds., Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition, New York and London: Routledge, 319-334.
  24. Hopmann, S., 2010, Klafki’s model of Didaktik analysis and lesson planning in teacher education, in Westbury, I., Hopman, S., and Riquarts, K., eds., Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition, New York and London: Routledge, 197-206.
  25. Hudson, B., 2003, Approaching educational research from the tradition of Critical-constructive Didaktik, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 11(2), 173-187.10.1080/14681360300200171
  26. Hudson, B., Buchberger, F., Kansanen, P., and Seel, H., 1999, Preface, in Hudson, B., Buchberger, F., Kansanen, P., and Seel, H., eds., Didaktik/Fachdidktik as the Science(-s) of the Teaching Professon, Umea(Sweden): TNTEE Publications, 1-7.
  27. Kansanen, P., 1995, The Deutsche Didaktik, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(4), 347-352.10.1080/0022027950270401
  28. Klafki, W., 1995, Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction(Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung), Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 13-30.10.1080/0022027950270103
  29. Klafki, W., 1998, Characteristics of Critical-Constructive Didaktik, in Gundem, B.B. and Hopman, S., eds., Didaktik and/or Curriculum, New York: Peter Lang, 307-330.
  30. Künzli, R., 2010, German Didaktik: Models of Re-Presentation, of Intercourse, and of Experience, in Westbury, I., Hopman, S., and Riquarts, K., eds., Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition, New York and London: Routledge, 41-54.
  31. Muller, J., 2023, Powerful knowledge, disciplinary knowledge, curriculum knowledge: Educational knowledge in question, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 32(1), 20-34.10.1080/10382046.2022.2058349
  32. Rothgangel, M. and Vollmer, H.J., 2020, Towards a theory of subject-matter didactics, RISTAL, 3, 126-145.
  33. Schneider, K., 2012, The subject-objected transformation and ‘Bildung’, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44, 302-311.10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00696.x
  34. Seel, H., 1999, “Allgemeine Didaktik”(“General Didaktics”) and “Fachdidaktik”(“Subject Didaktics”), in Hudson, B., Buchberger, F., Kansanen, P., and Seel, H., eds., Didaktik/Fachdidktik as the Science(-s) of the Teaching Professon, Umea(Sweden): TNTEE Publications, 13-20.
  35. Sjöström, J. and Eilks, I., 2021, The Bildung theory - From von Humboldt to Klafki and beyond, in Akpan, B. and Kennedy, T.J., eds., Science Education in Theory and Practice, Springer Nature: Switzerland, 55-67.10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_5
  36. Vollmer, H.J., 2014, Fachdidaktik and the Development of Generalised Subject Didactics in Germany, Éducation & Didactique, 8(1), 23-34.10.4000/educationdidactique.1861
  37. Vollmer, H.J., 2021, Powerful educational knowledge through subject didactics and general subject didactics. recent developments in german-speaking countries, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(2), 229-246.10.1080/00220272.2021.1887363
  38. Westbury, I., 2010, Teaching as a reflective practice: What might didaktik teach curriculum, in Westbury, I., Hopman, S., and Riquarts, K., eds., Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition, New York and London: Routledge, 15-39.
  39. Westbury, I., Hopman, S., and Riquarts., K., 2000, Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik Tradition, New York and London: Routledge.
  40. Willbergh, I., 2016, Bringing teaching back in: The Norwegian NOU The school of the future in light of the Allgemeine Didaktik thery of Wolfgang Klafki, Nordic Journal of Pedagogy & Critique, 2, 111-124.10.17585/ntpk.v2.268
  41. Zierer, K. and Seel, N.M., 2012, General didactics and instructional design: Eyes like twins A transatlantic dialogue about similarities and differences, about the past and the future of two sciences of learning and teaching, SpringerPlus, 1, 1-22.10.1186/2193-1801-1-1523961346PMC3725874
Information
  • Publisher :The Association of Korean Geographers
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국지리학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of the Association of Korean Geographers
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국지리학회지
  • Volume : 13
  • No :4
  • Pages :393~415
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.25202/JAKG.13.4.5
Journal Informaiton Journal of the Association of Korean Geographers Journal of the Association of Korean Geographers
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close