Using pragmatism to develop didactics in Sweden

Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 483-501

  Wickman, P O ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Didactics; Pragmatism; Sweden

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870946759     PISSN: 1434663X     EISSN: 18625215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11618-012-0287-7     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Arvola-Orlander, A., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011). Bodily experiences in secondary school biology. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 6, 569-594.
2. Caillot, M. (2007). The building of a new academic field: the case of French didactiques. European Educational Research Journal, 6, 125-130.
3. Cuban, L. (1992). Curriculum stability and change. In P. Jackson (ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 216-247). New York: Macmillan.
4. Dewey, J. (1916/1966). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press.
5. Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Simon and Schuster.
6. Dewey, J. (1929/1958). Experience and nature (2nd ed.). New York: Dover.
7. Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and education. New York: Simon and Schuster.
8. Englund, T. (1997). Undervisning som meningserbjudande. In M. Uljens (ed.), Didaktik (pp. 120-145). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
9. Fensham, P. (1988). Familiar but different: Some dilemmas and new directions in science education. In P. Fensham (ed.), Development and dilemmas in science education (pp. 1-26). London: Falmer press.
10. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
11. Gyllenpalm, J., Wickman, P.-O., & Holmgren, S.-O. (2010). Secondary science teachers' selective traditions and examples of inquiry-oriented approaches. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, 44-60.
12. Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2008). Describing and analyzing learning in action: An empirical study of the importance of misconceptions in learning science. Science Education, 92, 141-164.
13. Hubber, P., Tytler, R., & Haslam, F. (2010). Teaching and learning about force with a representational focus: pedagogy and teacher change. Research in Science Education, 40, 5-28.
14. Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2008). The roles of aesthetic experience in elementary school science. Research in Science Education, 38, 45-65.
15. Jank, W., & Meyer, H. (2003). Didaktische Modelle (revised ed.). Berlin: cornelsen Scriptor.
16. Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3, 163-178.
17. Johansson, A.-M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011). A pragmatist approach to learning progressions. In B. hudson, & M. A. Meyer (eds.) Beyond fragmentation: Didactics, learning, and teaching in Europe (pp. 47-59). Opladen: Barbara Budrich.
18. Kansanen, P., Hansén, S.-E., Sjöberg, J., & Kroksmark, T. (2011). Vad är allmändidaktik? In S.-E. Hansén, & L. Forsman (eds.), Allmändidaktik - Vetenskap för lärare (pp. 29-50). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
19. Kelly, G. J., Mcdonald, S., & Wickman, P.-O. (2012). Science learning and epistemology. In K. Tobin, B. Fraser, & C. Mcrobbie (eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 281-291). Dordrecht: Springer.
20. Klafki, W. (1958). Didaktische Analyse als kern der unterrichtsvorbereitung. Die deutsche Schule, 10, 450-471.
21. Lave, J. (1996). The practice of learning. In S. chaiklin, & J. Lave (eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Liberg, C., af Geijerstam, Å., & Folkeryd, J. W. (2011). Scientific literacy and students' movability in science texts. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. erickson, & A. Mackinnon (eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 74-89). New York: Routledge.
23. Lidar, M., Lundqvist, L., & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: the interplay between teachers' epistemological moves and students' practical epistemology. Science Education, 90, 148-163.
24. Ligozat, F. (2011). The determinants of the joint action in didactics: the text-action relationship in teaching practice. In M. A. Meyer, & B. Hudson (eds.), Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics, learning and teaching in Europe (pp. 157-176). Opladen: Barbara Budrich.
25. Ligozat, F., Wickman, P.-O., & Hamza, K. (2011). Using practical epistemology analysis to study the teacher's and students' joint action in the mathematical classroom. In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland, & E. Swoboda (eds.), Proceedings of the seventh congress of the European society for research in mathematics education (pp. 2472-2481). Rzeszów: University of Rzeszów.
26. Lundegåd, I. (2008). Self, values and the world - young people in dialogue on sustainable development. In J. Öhman (ed.), Values and democracy in education for sustainable development - contributions from Swedish research (pp. 123-144). Stockholm: Liber.
27. Lundegåd, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Conflicts of interest: an indispensable element of education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 13, 1-15.
28. Lundegåd, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2009). Identity transformation in education for sustainable development: A question of location. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53, 461-479.
29. Lundqvist, E., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2009). Epistemological norms and companion meanings in science classroom communication. Science Education, 93, 859-874.
30. Lundqvist, E., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2012). Institutional traditions in teachers' manners of teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 111-127.
31. Maivorsdotter, N., & Quennerstedt, M. (in press). The act of running: A practical epistemology analysis of aesthetic experience in sport. Qualitative Research in Sport, Excercise and Health.
32. Meyer, M. A. (2007). Allgemeine Didaktik aus der Perspektive der Bildungsgangforschung. Abschiedsvorlesung. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg.
33. Meyer, M. A. (2011). Professional teacher development and educational experience. In B. Hudson, & M. A. Meyer (eds.), Beyond fragmentation: Didactics, learning and teaching in Europe (pp. 404-422). Opladen: Barbara Budrich.
34. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington: National Academy Press.
35. ÖHman, M. (2010). Analysing the direction of socialisation from a power perspective. Sport, Education & Society, 15, 393-409.
36. ÖHman, J., & ÖStman, L. (2007). Continuity and change in moral meaning-making: A transactional approach. Journal of Moral Education, 36, 151-168.
37. ÖStman, L. (1994). Rethinking science teaching as a moral act. Journal of Nordic Educational Research, 14, 141-150.
38. ÖStman, L. (1995). Socialisation och mening: No-utbildning som politiskt och miljömoraliskt problem. Stockholm: Almqvist & wiksell.
39. Persson, L., Lundegåd, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011). Worry becomes hope in education for sustainable development - an action research study at a secondary school. Education & Democracy, 20, 123-144.
40. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. chicago: university of chicago press.
41. Piqueras, J., Wickman, P.-O., & Hamza, K. M. (2011). Student teachers' moment-to-moment reasoning and the development of discursive themes - an analysis of practical epistemologies in a natural history museum exhibit. In E. Davidsson, & A. Jakobsson (eds.) Understanding interactions at science centers and museums - approaching sociocultural perspectives (pp. 79-96). Rotterdam: Sensepublishers.
42. Roberts, D. A. (1982). Developing the concept of "curriculum emphases," in science education. Science Education, 66, 243-260.
43. Roberts, D. A., & ÖStman, L. (1998). Preface. In D. A. roberts & L. Östman (eds.), Problems of meaning in science curriculum (pp. ix-xii). New York: Teachers College Press.
44. Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, relativism, and truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Sandell, K., ÖHman, J., & Östman, L. (2005). Education for sustainable development. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
46. Säljö, R. (2000). Lärande i praktiken. Ett sociokulturellt perspektiv. Stockholm: prisma.
47. Schnack, K. (1998). Why focus on conflicting interests in environmental education. In M. Åhlberg & W. L. Filho (eds.), Environmental education for sustainability: Good environment, good life: Vo l 4. Environmental education, communication and sustainability pp. 83-96). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
48. Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. Aldershot: Ashgate publishing.
49. Seel, H. (1999). Didaktik as the professional science of teachers. TNTEE Publications, 2(1), 85-93.
50. Selander, S. (2010). Didaktik - undervisning och lärande. In U. P. Lundgren, R. Säljö, & C. Liberg (eds.), Lärande skola bildning: grundbok för lärare (pp. 197-214). Stockholm: Natur & Kultur.
51. Sensevy, G. (2011). Patterns of didactic intentions, thought collective and documentation work. In G. Gueudet, B. pepin & L. trouche (eds.), From text to 'lived' resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 43-57). New York: Springer.
52. Sjøberg, S. (2000). Naturvetenskap som allmänbildning - en kritisk ämnesdidaktik. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
53. Sund, P. (2008). Discerning the extras in eSD teaching: A democratic issue. In J. Öhman (ed.), Values and democracy in education for sustainable development - contributions from Swedish research (pp. 57-74). Stockholm: Liber.
54. Sund, P., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011a). Socialisation content in schools and education for sustainable development: I. A study of teachers' selective traditions. Environmental Education Research, 17, 599-624.
55. Sund, P., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011b). Socialisation content in schools and education for sustainable development: II. A study of students' apprehension of teachers' companion meanings in ESD. Environmental Education Research, 17, 625-649.
56. Tytler, R., Hubber, P., Johansson, A.-M., wickman, P.-O., Prain, V., Carolan, J., Waldrip, B., & Duschl, R. (submitted 2011). Learning science through engaging with its epistemic representational practices. ESERA Proceedings.
57. Uljens, M. (1997). Grunddrag till en reflektiv skoldidaktisk teori. In M. Uljens (ed.), Didaktik (pp. 166-197). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
58. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
59. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60. Wickman, P.-O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88, 325-344.
61. Wickman, P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
62. Wickman, P.-O. (2012). How can conceptual schemes change teaching? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 129-136.
63. Wickman, P.-O. (In press). A comparison between practical epistemology analysis and some schools in French didactics. Education & Didactique.
64. Wickman, P.-O., & Ligozat, F. (2011). Scientific literacy as action: consequences for content progression. In C. Linder, L. Östman, P.-O. wickman, D. A. roberts, G. erickson, & A. Mackinnon (eds.), Exploring the landscapes of scientific literacy (pp. 145-159). New York: Routledge.
65. Wickman, P.-O., & ÖStman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601-623.
66. Wickman, P.-O, Liberg, C., & Östman, L. (2012). Transcending science: Scientific literacy and bildung for the 21st century. In D. Jorde & J. Dillon (eds.), Science education research and practice in Europe (pp. 39-61). Rotterdam: Sense publishers.
67. Williams, R. (1973). Base and superstructure in Marxist cultural theory. New Left Review, 82, 3-16.
68. Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On certainty. Oxford: Blackwell.