Zusammenfassung:

Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es, die didaktischen Implikationen der dramaturgischen Interpretation von Lehren im „Mehrperspektivischen Unterricht“ (MPU) aufzuzeigen. Dazu wird hier die Kritik der „Lehrerzentriertheit“ am MPU zu überprüfen versucht. Um obengenanntes Ziel zu erreichen, wird in diesem Beitrag drei Schritte als Untersuchungsaufgaben gestellt: Es wird erstens die Absicht und Konzeptionen des MPUs als Forschungsprojekt der Curriculumentwicklung für Sachunterricht in den 1970er Jahren zu ermitteln, die später dessen „Lehrerzentriertheit“ kritisiert wurden. Danach wird zweitens solche kritischen Einschätzungen gegen dem MPUs von auf sog. „didaktischen Dreiecke“ berufenden Perspektiven dreifach (Lehrer – Schüler – Stoff) eingeordnet. Und um Einseitigkeit und ungenügenden Argumentation solcher Kritik hinzuweisen, werde ich drittens auf die dramaturgischen Metaphern des Lehrens im MPU konzentrieren, welche den schulischen Unterricht als auf der „Bühne“ inszenierenden künstlichen „Spiel“ zu interpretieren ermöglichen. Daraus wird schließlich didaktische Implikation der „Lehrerzentriertheit“ im MPU erneut ausgezogen, die mit der Tendenz zur „learnification“ kritisch umgegangen werden kann. Als Ergebnisse dieser Überprüfung weise ich insgesamt folgende drei Punkte hin:

(1) Die MPU wurde in den 1970er Jahren in Westdeutschland als Teil des CIEL (Curriculum der institutionellen Elementarerziehung)-Forschungsprogramm zur Curriculumentwicklung des Sachunterrichts eingerichtet. Es basierte auf der Idee der „Emanzipation“, der die Rekonstruktion der Alltagswirklichkeiten aus vier Perspektiven und Aufklärung der Schüler durch mehrperspektivischen Unterricht zugrunde lag.

(2) Damals war die MPU allerdings gerade von der Seite der „Emanzipation“ orientierte Pädagogik an seiner „Lehrerzentriertheit“ kritisiert. In diesem Beitrag wurde die Einheit und Vielfalt solcher kritischen Bewertungen geordnet, indem ich sie in drei Kategorien unterteilte: Kritik am „lehrerzentrierten Unterricht“, an der „Entsubjektivierung“ des Wirklichkeitsbegriffs und auch an der „Kindferne“ des mehrperspektivischen Curriculums sowie Lehrstoffs.

(3) Um die Reichweite solcher Einschätzungen zu überprüfen, griff ich das dramaturgische Verständnis von Lehren des MPUs, das mit Metapher der „Partitur“ Unterrichtsplanung als künstliche Konstruktion von Lehrer und Lehrerinnen erfasst, und hob daraus didaktische Konzeption „Unterricht über Unterricht“ hervor, unter dem Unterricht als „Stück innerhalb des Stücks“ reflexiv verstanden, um den Schülern emanzipatorischen Distanz zur Selbstverständlichkeit der Alltagswirklichkeit geschaffen zu werden.

Durch diese Überprüfungen stellte ich fest, dass kritische Aussagen an der „Lehrerzentriertheit“ eigene Dramaturgie des „Lehrens“ von MPU vernachlässigt, die nicht bloß Unterricht sich auf „Verkopfung“ oder „Indoktrination“ des Lernens beschränkt, vielmehr emanzipatorischen Moment des mehrperspektivischen Zeigens betont. Wenn es sich darum gehandelt werden kann, die derzeitige Trivialisierung des „Lehrens“ zum „Lernen“ im Namen des „learnification“ in Frage zu stellen, darf ein solcher dramaturgische Ansatz zur inszenierenden (Re-)Konstruktion von Unterricht eine wichtige Rolle spielen kann, weil er sich sowohl von der tyrannischen Indoktrination des Lehrers unterscheidet als auch das zugriffsweise Lehren mit selbständigem Lernen zu vermengen vermeiden lässt.

This paper examines a new common framework for citizenship education in Europe, where social integration is pursued in the time of social fragmentation caused by globalization. Our study mainly focuses on “The Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture”, proposed by the Council of Europe in 2018.Through an analysis of three reports on the framework, we identified the following characteristics regarding the content construction and development process. We used the concept of intercultural dialogue as an analytical perspective.

In the background of the study, there are two dilemmas in the curriculum development of citizenship education in Europe that previous studies have not focused on. The first is how to include shared values in education while respecting diversity. Education in Europe has emphasized shared values, as they can mediate the chaotic situation over the two world wars and the Cold War. However, it is pointed out that the interpretation of these shared values can be different in different contexts and even contradict the values of each country. The second is how to design a common framework for transnational citizenship education that can guide flexible curriculum making rather than constraining the national curriculum. These dilemmas relate to the larger question of how to mediate respect for diversity and social integration.

Interculturalism has focused on educational policy in Europe since around 2010, when multiculturalism was criticized for causing polarization and social fragmentation. Interculturalism emphasizes constructive ideas of culture and identity, individual rights, shared values, and intercultural dialogue. Intercultural competencies, including intercultural dialogue, were proposed by Council of Europe’s educational experts. Critical cultural awareness, which is the ability to critically evaluate perspectives and practices of one’s own and other cultures and countries, is the central concept of intercultural competencies.

In the framework, intercultural dialogue was used as a criterion for content selection and as a principle for the development process in order to make it possible to combine respect for diversity with social integration. While shared values are emphasized in competency models and descriptors in the framework as a basis for intercultural dialogue, they are not treated as universal. Instead, they are introduced as something constructed in specific cultural contexts and that can be critically examined and reconstructed in dialogue. In the competency model, values include contradictory concepts, namely “valuing human dignity and human rights” and “valuing cultural diversity,” which is the premise of intercultural dialogue. These concepts can mediate the importance of cultural diversity while respecting the human rights of each individual. Furthermore, the inclusion of “knowledge and critical understanding” as components fosters a critical reflection on one’s own culture.

In addition, the framework has been developed through intercultural dialogue between different education stakeholders in member countries. This development process ensures that the framework is comprehensive, transparent and coherent for all concerned, and opens up the possibility of reconsideration. In this way, it can be appreciated that the content and process of preparation, based on intercultural dialogue, attempted to combine respect for diversity with social integration.

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

Economic inequality is growing, and the problem of child poverty is becoming more serious. The various challenges faced by children in difficult socioeconomic conditions tend to manifest in schools as problems of “disruption” and “low academic performance.” This study examines the case of Ikuno Minami Elementary School with the aim of clarifying a process by which schools facing such difficulties may engage in curriculum improvement. Over the past 10 years, this school has managed to overcome various “disruptions” and raise academic performance.

The improvement process of Ikuno Minami Elementary School included the following three phases: First, from 2011 to 2013, a policy was widely understood and practiced whereby a consistent response was applied to various problematic behaviors in children. In addition, a sense of normality was fostered by enhancing human rights education. As a result, “disruption” subsided, and a “safe and secure” school environment was realized.

Then, from 2014 onward, research and development were carried out to pursue Japanese language education that fosters “the power of words.” An instructional strategy was developed for stories and explanatory texts to foster reading and communication abilities through a series of “small steps,” such as annotating in the text or visualizing its contents. At the same time, the school endeavored to “create a place where every individual can shine” by developing relationships among children in various subjects and events and by ensuring that each child has the opportunity to play an active role.

Finally, since the 2017 school year, a unique educational program called “Education for Living” has been developed, based on the findings of child trauma research. “Education for Living” consists of “Abuse Prevention Education,” “Life Story Work (Therapeutic Education),” and “Education for Understanding People with Disabilities.” By dealing with topics that tend to be directly related to children’s “psychological trauma,” the program aims to ensure that children have the knowledge to solve “life’s difficulties” and foster values that lead to resilience.

The process followed by Ikuno Minami Elementary School provides an example of one school’s process of curriculum improvement. The improvement efforts were gradually phased in, indicating that it is important that improvement measures are introduced according to the readiness of the school. In each phase, the school was able to become more inclusive and empowering by adopting a spiral approach to subject education and life guidance that meets the needs of children. Based on the actual conditions of the children and careful research of teaching materials, teachers reevaluated the kind of “academic abilities” students should develop, and implemented classes that foster “awareness” that is necessary for children to overcome any difficulties they may face. At the same time, they endeavored to ensure a fun and fulfilling school life. This helped overcome the severe “disruption” and improved academic performance.