1. MODULEI: Didactics
WEIAT IS DTDACTICS?
Didactics is one of the Sciences of E,ducation. In patticular, it deals rvith the
processes of teachrng and learning. It is different from other Education
Sciences in that it concentfates specifically on horv teachets, learnets and
know-ledge intcract and support one another. Because of th-is reasoo, it is a key
subiecr in rlrr teachcr educetjon cL¡rrictrluln. (iivcn lts emphasis it aets as a
hinge betrveen tire general educ'¿tion subjccts and the subject-specific
cliscipl,ines, r,,,hich make up the core of a teacher's knor'rledge.
Horvel,er, this definition is quite broad and it can be interpreted from many
clifferent perspectives. For example, is Didactics about classroom techniques?
Is it about planning? Is it about er,aluation?
,Uso, the -erv term "Didacdcs" has positive and ncgatire ctrnnc-,tadons
clependrng on where it is used. For example, when you talk about Didactics in a
North American context, it is taken to mean "traditional education" (".g.
^
didactic approach means a teacher-centered approach). On tire other side of
the Atlantic, though, the meaning is similar to the one adopted by Spanish or
T)_- --.- ---- ... ^ ^.^ ^^l-^--^l (,r Lugutr5c sPUdt,LL),
[-lence,gii'rn rhar the fie]J and rhc rrr¡,r tre ¡o¡¡,1¡v ones, w( u'ill first crnlnrr-
the history of Didactics and, in so doing, u,e v'i1l trv to come to understand it as
it is conceir.ed norvada,vs.
Hou.ever, at al1 times, keep in mincl that, as r.vith any othet professional term,
the meanings associated rvith it var1, gir.en the socio-histodcal conditions in
u,hich it is used. After all, anr. field of human activiq, is but the re sponse that
commurrities of ptactice can give to the problems of their dar:
A BRIEF HISTORY OF DIDACTICS
There has ahvavs trecn a concern u.ith teaching and learning, since these two
processes u'ere first established as a forn'r of ascertaining the continuit)'of
civilization. The first accounts of teaching are those of Socrates ancl Plato.
Socrates taught through questioning, a teaching methocl knorvn as "Socratic
questioning" cven to this day This method r.r.as made expLicit b), Socrates's
pupil Plato rn ''f l¡e Republic. " Socrates is genera111, seen as the flrst great teacher
and this may be because of his tumultuous life and death but also because of
his effort to engage students in finding answers on their own (and aiso because
through Piato, rve had the opportunity to reacl about his teaching). Hrs ideas
have pe rmeate d the educational fleld and r¡..ere taken up bv other educators.
C)ne such follorver u,as Saint Augusune (35+-430) rvho, in hLrs D¿ lfagstro
adapts the qr-restions to require afl e,pected, dogmatic anss'er. This x'as in
(
J
f

2. keeping u,ith a catechistic approach to teachrng and learning. X/e must
remember that in ti-ie Niicicile Ages, education r¡.as the task of monks in
monasteries, rvho also held the ke1, ¡s knor.lledge since the1, urete the ones uüo
copied old manuscripts b1. hand, silce there u'ere no prinung presse s.
Education in those clavs rvas a privilege of the rich and pou,erful and it u,as
done mairdy as apprenticeship: a young man would be put in the service of a
wiser, older man rvho would teach him whater-et the voung person needed to
knour. The same vas true for the drfferent tracles that made up commerce in
medicval socictr'.
Hole,er, it is no t until i 613 when the term D i da cti cs is used for the Fust time by
Ratke (157L-1635), one of JanAmos Komenskl:'s ('Comenir-rs' 1592 - rc7A)
teachers, in his Aphoistzi Didactici Praecipui. In tkus particular rvork, Ratke
conceprualizes Didactics as an intuitive kind of iearning about reaLifi'-, stre ssing
the role that incluction, psychology and the absence of pressure have on
expericnce.
But it v,ill be his pupil, Comenius, who ¡¡,i11 define the freld for the first time in
historv and who r,vill establish the basis for Didactics as a science. Comenius'
Diclactica Magna (164q sets a series of classical principles for the discipLine,
amongst which r.ve ma), count:
' Diclactics is both an art and a science.
' Teachirg shc'uld har.e ¿Ls its main air., the learning of
everything by e¡eryofl e.
' Teaching and learrung should be characterlzed by speed and
effectiveness, prioritizing the key 1e1. that language and
images playin each of the tu.o prcce sses.
Comerrius' greatest achievement was the systemaLization of the consrruction
of Didactics as a r.alid science and att. He sets Didactics as seperate from
Pedagogy and introduces de concept of "method." Horvever, his approach to
the matter is a very specific one. He proposes that each discipline should
develbp its own didactic methods congruent r.rrith the purpose s ancl content of
the discipline. Ttris stands in stark contrast with pr-evious proposals, rvhich salv
the existence of one soie method that could be appJied to any atea of
knov,lcdge. If one looks at Comenius' proposal one can cleatly perceive a
change from standatdization to individuabzatton. To him, each person has the
potential to learn anything in so far as the right methods and resources are
orgarrized in such a way that allorv for the person's intuition to cone into
contact with a specific atea of knorvledge. Thrs stands in stark contrast r.r,ith
previous elaborations of the field which saw it as more standard.
Comenius' r.vork s.i1l be folior¡,ed by further efforts tor,vards the
individualization of education as those proposed bv Rousseau (1712-1778),
Pestalozzi (1746-1827) and Froebel (1782-1852). A-lso, from thrs moment on,
rve rvili be able to perceive a consrant swing of a penrluium betw-ecn two
etre me positions: those r.vho sarv education as dea[ng u.ith the transmissicn
rE
n
§
;
t
i
:!
aa
l
l

3. F'
of knowledge via a sole ¡r¡1ro¿ and those who saw it as happeningvia specific
indir-idualized means. Incredibly enough, even today', there is no agreement
and neither should there be, because one *L1ng is certain: there is no best
method. Teaching should be at the service of learning and, as Comenius said,
teachers should look for aJI possible alternatiyes to help er-eryone leatn'
DIDACTICS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE, EDUCATION
SCIENCES
Because Didactics relates to the pfocesses of teaching and learnjnE, the
inflr-rence of other education sciences has been fathef overwhelming. For
exampie, Psychology helps teachers undefstand how students learn so they
claim that Didactics is part of Psychologlt By the same token, Pedagogf is
concerned with how people are educated and they also claim that f)idactics is
part of Pedagog;,.
k was not until the trventieth century that Didactics could ascertain its rightful
toie amongst the sciences of education, independent from Pedagogy, Biologl;
Socioiog,v, Anthropology or Psychology (Frabboni, 1998). Duting that
century, the process of vaüdation of Didactics as a self-standing and essential
discipline in education, oscillated amongst three main perspectives: a
traditional perspective emphasizing a technical and ptescriptive vieu, of the
process of teaching (this is the era of the methoci and perpefuate s the tradition
set by St Augustine), a cognitive perspectiv.e rvhich positit'rned the discipiine as
a p,roblern soir,-ing approach to the task of turning krro-wlc,igc ilt¡ ¿n ob¡eci of
teachinq (this second vierv was more in keeping with the vie.¡-s of Contenius
and hLrs Íollorvers), and a "new dimension" (Fiore and Leymonié,2007) which
focuses on the analysis of the processes of teaching and learning through
specific curricuium contents in order to develop new sttategies for the
appropriation of knowtedge by students in highly sj.tuated contexts.
The constant state of flux to which the üscipline has been submitted has
rendered it difficult to conceptualtze, and has acted in detriment of its
epistemological identity, at best.
The advent of the twenty-ffst cenrury has seen different authors (Vadilio &
Klinger, 2004; Cad)koni, et. al., 2007; Imen, 2007; Tenrt Fantini, 2009)
advocating for a reconceptualization of the field which positions it as a theorl.
"necessarily committed to social practices which are oriented towards the
design, implementation and evaluation of teaching and learning programs, the
design of teaching and learning situations and the orientation and support of
students' learning, while identifying and analyzing problems stemming from
the teaching and learning pfocesses with a vj.ew to providing the best possible
learning opportunities for all students and in an)¡ educadonal ilstitution"
(Camilloni, 2007 22).
In this seflse, Didactics has evoived from a position of subservience to other
<J.isciplines into a subject-specifrc field of inquity into teachng and learning
serving the purpose of developing situated theories and practices as
potential-though tentative-solutions to the problems stemming from the
::
,11
I
;j:'

4. encountef of individuals rvith tr.vo complemefltaty drives: the drive to share
r.vhat the1, knorv and tl"ie drive to gain nerv knowiedge.
It can be tightly claimed that Didacucs has transitioned from being a di5gipli¡.
r,vhose sole putpose was the description and prescription of the "art of
reaching" to beconring a discipJine, which is deeply concerned with the
elaboration of context and subject-specific knor,','1edge. This elaboration-be
it consffuction or transmission-¡65s]¡5 from the interpiay of situated
cognitions (Feldman, 1999). To this author, cognition does not reside in the
minds of indrviduals, but emelges in the possibilitie s for theirinteraction.
This r-Lerr. scenatio, might serve as the backdrop to positioning the cliscipline,
within the teacher education curriculllm) as the space where theorizing
ptactice and practicin¡J theoq. @uLlough, 1997) wi1-t happen' In othet rvords, in
thi.s context, Subject Didactics becomes the realm of ptaxis, (Freire, 1972)
action and reflection v,hich transform the rl.orld, and by doing so, claims 2
crucial tole in the der.elopment of socially just practices.
If, as Horace Mann claimed, Education "is the great equali zer of the condition
of man," then Subject Diclactics, the preeminent curriculum afea dealing with
teaching and learning, should be understood as a space uüere teacher capacitl''
for social iustice can be constfucted, negotiated and developed. Giroux (2005:
99) explains that "A social ]ustice stance is, in part, a disposition through which
teachers reflect upon theif oiv'n actions and those pfesented by others. Rather
than passively accepting information or embracing a fals: consciousness,
rcachers rake a nruch rriorc acúve rr-,lc irr leatling, learning and rcflcctillg upon
their relationship with their practice and the social context in which the
pracrice is siruated."
DIDACTICS: GENERAL OR SPECIFIC?
So, r.vhat constitutes the field of Didactics? How do teaching and learning
interact with knowledge? §íhat is, in short, the sttucture of l)irlactics? Is
Didactics the same as Nfethodology? These and other related questions have
guided developments in the field of Didactics. For many )'ears, it was
considered that Didactics possessed a generaLiry of Pufpose. If, as many
authors claimed, it had to do with teaching and learning, then it could be
defined in terms of things that teachers do and things that students do in the
classroom. In fact, teaching and learning wefe seen as one and the same
pfocess, a two-way stteet rvhere knowledge was tfansmitted from the teacher
to the student who, in turn, returned his or her understanding of the teacher's
transmission as proof of learning. In tlus paradigm then, we talk of the
teaching and learning process (singular).
Ho§,ever, if rve go back to the conceptions of Comenius, we can readily see
that each discipline is, in fact, made up on inherently particular knowledge
(concepts, facts, ski11s and dispositions), rvb,rch is unique and makes the
discipline unique as x.eli. For example, the n'a¡. jrr u.hich histodans approach
the stud1, of historv is not the same way in u,hich a physisis¡ approaches the
study of
^
nafirfalphenomenon. If we take tlus example , §/e can ciearly see that

5. a hístorian u,ill look for artifacts and documents, which provide accounts of a
certain e-ent. They may interr-ieu, u,'itnesses, look at photos, tead documents,
and once thel: i121's collected all this information, thev ri,il1 provicle their or','n
interpretation of the event. This interpretation can be the same that orher
historian may pror-ide or not.
In the case of the physicist, he ot she rvi-ll first of all observe a certain natural
phenomenon in orcler to develop a hlpothesis. This hlpothesis rvill guide the
sra. in which the phr.sicist s,i1i coliect infotmation and come to conclusions. If
the conclusions are in line rvith the hlpothe sis, then w-hatwill be cieveloped is a
thesis, a general statement, u,hich will hold true for aLl occurrcnce s of this kind
of natur al phenornena. It the hypothe sis ptove s falsc, then the physicists,ill go
on ro reformulate the hypothesis and collect further data until a plausible,
generaltzalcle explanation of the phenomenon can be given.
As 1.ou can see, the r.,er,rr nature of the discipline (Histor1, or Physics), as weLl as
its modes of thinking about and perceiving teahqi is inherendy different and
r-rnique for each area of human knolrrledge.. Hence, in teaching, we should be
able to account frrr this difference so that iearners can have access to the mocles
of thinl«ng uüich are specific to each discipline rn the curriculum. In this
sense, it can be cleatl,v seen that different approaches are needed for- each
discipline. As a resuit of this realtzatton, the concept of General Dida.ctics, a
..-:c^l L. 1.. ^r l.^^...1^-1. ^ ^1...,,- "-^^L;-^ ^-l l^^--;---. 1 ;^L .^.- l--.^n'li^-{L¡rultLu uL)u) (rL Mlu!r!u5u ¿uuuL tLaLtlrtiS ¿ri¡ rLJLlutró L,¡Lr¡ !drr u!
in al-l the diff-erent üscipünes, ceases to make sense. §7hat is neecled., then is a
Specific I)idactir:s, r,vhici-r aliol",,s teacirers of a certain Cisciplinc or sublect t<t
help their learners Ie arn it s.ith rigor and efficacl,.
DIDAC:TIC INTERACTIONS
Didactics is the science of education concerne d u,'ith the proce sses of teaching
and learning. These are two different processes even though, to some authors,
thev are two sides of the same process.
For our intents anci purpc-rses) ve will concepLua)lze them as t§'o separate
although jnterrelatcd processes: one dealing rvith the transformation of
knorvleclge into teachable objects (teaching), and the other dealing rvith the
construction of knou.ledge vta interaction urith knorvledge but also r.vith
teachers and peers (earners). Teachrng is concelned with how the teacher
adapts his or her knowleclge of the subject matter in order to transfotm it into
an obiect of iearning. Teachers generally knorv much more than theit srudents
and their 1inou.1e dge is b,oth complex and diverse.
For example, back in 1990, Grossman pror.ided a charactetizaúon of teacher's
knov,iedge, based on the r,vork of Rlbaz and ShuLman, which cleadv clepicts
this complexity and üversiry To this authof, teacher's knorviedge evoives out
of the intetacLion of fout intetrelated and mutuallr.. inclusive areas:
a. Subjecr matter knorvledge: ..vhich includes the various
paradigms uritl-rin a field xüjch :rffect both hou'thc field is

6. otgarllzed and the questions that guide furthet inquiry
together u,rth an.understancling of the canons of evidence
and proof within a ihsciphne rvhich heip members of the
discipline evaluate the knou.ledge claims tnade. If a teacher
orr1r, possesses tlris kind of knowledge, we caff]ot claim that
person is a teacher, but a subject expert.
Pedagogical knowleclge : to include knowledge about
leatners and learning, classroom management, curriculum
and instruction. Agarn, this kind of knowiedge is not
suffjcient to make a teacher. Those who posscss strong
pedagogical knowledge but lack the necessary content
knor.vledge cannot be calLed teachets but a pedagogues or
activiry desi¡lners.
I{nowledge of context: e ncompassing students'
backgrounds and identiry configurations, knowledge of the
educational institution and the communiry within which it
develops its social role and last, but not least, knowledge of
the requirements of the school system and the purposes of
education in sociery If teachers only possess this kind of
knorr,'ledge then they cannot be called teachers either, but
socialworkers.
Y/hrt sorr cf k-no..r-ledgr makes a rercher, rhen? To Grossrnrn (op. ci.), besides
a strong grounding on all the previously mentioned kinds of knowledge,
teachers need to possess -r fourth kind of knowledgc uniquc to the profession
d. Pedagogical Content l(norvleclge: the kind of knowledge
that distinguishes between the subject matter expert, the
actir'-it!' designer, the social §¡orlier and the experienced
teacher. It includes a multitude of facets and is, in itself, an
integtal part of a teacher's professionai landscape.
Pedago gical C ontent I(norvledge encomp as s e s : knowle dge
and beiiefs about the purposes for teaching a subject at
different grade levels; knorvledge of students'
understanding, conceptions and misconceptions of
particular topics in the sr-ibject matter; knou4edge of
curriculum materials available fot reaching the subject
matter; knowledge of both horizontal and vertical
curriculum alignments for the sub,ject and, know-ledge of
istructional strategies and representations for teaching
parúculat topics, etc.
b.
c.
ii
.»,¡
r!:
r*!:?F
i&
;lii
*i
a
-r)'v'
T
*t
rT
Ir
r
§
ñ
E
It
E
¡
E
E
É
#
F
É
F
É
ú
rü
s
#:.
r
E
t
ñ
fis
E

7. The follou.ing diagtam summarizes these points
Teachers ate also influenced by other fu.toir. One such factor is what we can
call Teaching Sry1.. A teacher's teaching style is their preferred way of teaching,
or, in other rr,'ords, the teacher's own "method." One basic and classic
depiction of teaching styles is the one distinguishing between traditionai
teachers and progressi":e tea.chers. One u,ord of caution a-bout this kind of
ciassifications: Reaüry is seldom dichotomous, so we cannot claim that only
rhese nvo sryles eúst.
Perhaps it wouid be more usefui to conceive of C . se terms as tu/o ends of a
continuum alongwhich teachers move throughout their careers, depending on
theit needs, the context in which they teach and the challenges posed by their
students. Further on in these materials, we will see that, in the same rvay that
teachers have teaching style preferences, students have learning st),les
pteferences and there can be potential conflicts betrveen the teacher's
preferred style and that of the students'.
This brings us to the issue of students and the learrung process. If we
conceptualize the learning process as one in which learners interact with
knowledge, their peers, teachers and other school personnel in order to
construct neu, understandings, then we have to pay special attention to what is
brought to beat in learning. For a start,learning originates in ¡¡üat the learnet
alreadyknows.
Human beings are not tabala rasa, they are members of social groups and
participants in social activities which are meaningful to them. In paruciparing
in these activities, learners accrue abaggage of knowledge, rvhich constitutes
w'hat we can call background knowledge. This comprises everything that a
human being learns ínside and outside the classroom, formally or informalll',
because of observation or as a consequence of interaction with other human
beings. This knowledge is neither s-stematic nor organized. Hence,
background knowledge is prone to contain both mistakes and correct
information. These are brought to bear when srudents begin to learn

8. something new. If their background knorvledge has a positive correlarion to
r,hat $,e ¡ant to teach them, then u,e caLl this knor¡,ledge a pre-requisite.
Othenvise, if it does not correlate to w-hat ¡e want to teach, we call it a
prcconceptjon.
E,xample:
The teacher is explaining something to sfudents and she uses the wotd
"international" f fntar'nr{enel/ . One student corrects her by saying: "It's
7'rntor'nerfonolf ." To which, the teacher replies u,ith "No, it's
f lnter'otr.lanalf " Then, the student says "But I heard it on TV and on üe
tadiol" uüich is truc, jn all likelihood, as this rvord tends to be mispronounced
b]. anchors rvho do not knou, Engüsh.
Because preconceptions are generally developed outside thb classroom, and
because students have not had them questioned before, they constitute a very
por,verful coflstruct, rvhich is dif{icu1t to break. However, the skillful teacher
urill help the students see why their preconceptions are nor correct, and also
hclp them build srrong pre-rcquisires.
Another important issue ar play in the learning process is that of learning
strategies. Learning Strategies are thoughts or actions that we use in order to
help ourselves learn. ExampJes of strategies are planning for a task at hand,
.l^.i¡^.i.-^.'-^^-r^.-^..^t..^-:,^^:,rV/^^I,|-^-,l-.^.,,5 "*. Hr I I ur rrr4rrLL uL q dluaul tg tL. vc at1 pu55c55 aIILt uSc SLIaLcglc5
al1 the time when we are learning. Some of us may sing to ourselves so as to
remetnLer some jaformation, others mal¡ rirarv ot order infotmation in a- r.isua-1
rvay while others prefcr to plan and think before commitring to action. These
are all ways w'e have del,eloped to help us remember information, í.rlpe i/ith
nerv situations or develop an idea. Hov-ever, not everyone has the correct
strategy for the right situation or ls able to applv strategies in rhose contexts
rvhete they are most needed. Hence it is importantthatteachers help students
see what strategies are neecled in order to accompJish certain tasks.
x/e can depict the interactivc processes of teaching and learning as a triangle
where teachers, learners and knowledge constitute the angles, and the
relationships which are estabLished between rwo of the angles are the place
rvhere interactions surface. The following diagram makes this expücit:
tI
t.i
.ri
.i
.§
':¿
.{
ü
¡
E
._É
i
Iit
!
I
r
E
I
r
*
It
:§
,1
'¡
.P
:F
i
Í
:i
r*
.', §
':.*€
§
.E
6

9. Looking at the rliagram, we can see that LEARNING is the process in rvhich
stlrdents interact rvith knorviedge and r.vith learners constructing neu'
meanings from experience. That is to say, each new experience learners have,
puts into plav the learnets' previous knowledge (both pre conceptions and
pre-requisites) as weil as theirlearning strategies. This knowleclge is contrasted
wiür the ne'w experience and accommodated into what students knov,.
Learning then, is about constructirig new meanings from experience and
incorporating those new meanings into our background knowiedge.
'IEACHING on the other hand is a process teachers go through in their
ilteractiorr v-ith knorvledge bv which teachers ttansform "scientific" or
"acadenic" knowledge into objects of learning. However, in order to do
this, teachers need to understand hov, students iearn, and, more importanti¡,
hor.v these particuiar students learn, what learning strategies the1, use, ¡¡,kLich
are the most suitable strategies to teach these students this specific conterrt,
etc. As lve have said before, teachers need to possess high ievels of
peclagogicai content knowledge in order to be able to transpose disciplinary
knowiedge in such a wav that it results in positir,-e student learning.
Finallv. out of the intetaction betrveen teachers and students, a third form of
relating to one another is born. We will call this the "Didactic contract." This
refers to the unsaid but ever-presentv/ays in rvhich teachers reiate to students.
lhen we talk of discipiine in the ciassroom and also reachet--student
rapport, ñ'e are talking about th.is contract. In er,,eryclay terms, we say that
str:dents "test" hor.r, far they can go v'ith one teacher during the f;rst.¡eeks cf
class, üese "testing" results in implicit rules which govern classroom culnrre.
One should be vigilant of the didactic corrtract implicit in one's teachi^::
because, many times, ít may be counter productive in terms of srudents'
learning.
CONCLUSION
In this module we have defined Didactics as the Science of Education, which
most directly addresses the processes of teaching and learning. X/e
conceptual,ized teaching as a process of intetaction berween teachets and
knowledge by which teachers make successive adaptations to scientific or
academic knowledge so that it becomes an object of leaming. Learning, on
the other hand, is a process of interaction between students and knowledge in
rvhich learners construct new meanings from expedence. In order to do this,
they resort to their background or prior knowledge to make sense of üe nerv
experiences.
Read Appendices I & II in this Self-Access Booklet
¡
Í
t
¡
.i
!
¡
I
a
L
!
i
:'
!:
{
i
r