1.
Developing a WERA International
Research Network on Didactics – Learning
and Teaching
Brian Hudson
Workshop @ SERA 2014
University of Edinburgh
20th November 2014

2.
Workshop contributions
Developing a WERA International Research Network on Didactics – Learning and
Teaching: Introduction and overview
Brian Hudson, Centre for Teaching and Learning Research (CTLR) – University of
Sussex, UK
Comparative didactics: a reconstructive move from subject didactics
Florence Ligozat, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Dialogic Teaching and Moral Learning
Andrea English, University of Edinburgh, UK
A three-tier teaching model for teaching mathematics in context
Ernest Davis and Joseph Ampiah, College of Education Studies, University of Cape
Coast, Ghana
The planning-reflection of classes and the analysis of learning tasks in textbooks: a cross
point of German didactics and Japanese pedagogy
Nariakira Yoshida, University of Hiroshima, Japan
2

3.
What has the study of Didactics offered me?
 What has the study of Didactics offered me in relation to teaching
and learning?
 What has the study of Didactics offered me in terms of the
development my own practice?
 What key issues have emerged from my search to derive meaning
from this tradition in a way that makes sense to my own experience
and practice?
Hudson, B. (2000) Seeking connections and searching for meaning:
teaching as reflective practice. Symposium on Didaktik: an
International Perspective, European Conference on Educational
Research, University of Edinburgh, 20-23 Sept 2000.

4.
Some key issues to emerge
 Recognising and holding complexity
 Where attention is focused
 Tools for holding complexity
 Meaning and intentionality
 The role of the teacher
Hudson, B. (2002) Holding complexity and searching for meaning -
teaching as reflective practice, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 1,
43-57.

5.
Tools for holding complexity - pedagogical
relation
The Didactic triangle
CONTENT
TEACHER pedagogical relation STUDENT

6.
Tools for holding complexity - didactic
relation
TEACHER
CONTENT Didactic relation STUDENT

7.
Important to stress that this analysis takes
place within a school and societal context
7
Hudson, B. and Meyer, M. (eds) (2011) Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics,
Learning and Teaching in Europe. Opladen and Farmington Hills: Verlag
Barbara Budrich, p8.

8.
Didactical analysis and the didactical design
process

9.
Didactical design for technology enhanced
learning
9
Hudson, B. and Meyer, M. (eds) (2011) Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics,
Learning and Teaching in Europe. Opladen and Farmington Hills: Verlag
Barbara Budrich, Chapter 13.

10.
Developing Mathematical Thinking in
the Primary Classroom – some key concepts
 ‘Didactic transposition’ (Schneuwly, 2011) - related to the school
context, in which the knowledge in question is not knowledge for
acting and solving problems in the social contexts in which it was
created and where it is used, but it is instead transposed into
knowledge to be taught and to be learned – such that there is a
‘rupture’ between daily life and school, which changes the
knowledge profoundly.
10

11.
Developing Mathematical Thinking in
the Primary Classroom – Epistemic quality
 High epistemic quality - maths as fallible, refutable and uncertain
involving critical thinking, creative reasoning, the generation of
multiple solutions and learning from errors and mistakes.
 Low epistemic quality – maths as infallible, authoritarian, dogmatic,
absolutist, irrefutable and certain and which involves rule following
of strict procedures and right or wrong answers.
 The rupture can lead to the epistemic quality of the subject
becoming degraded as it is transposed into school mathematics (
Hudson et al., 2014)
11

12.
Initial composition of the WERA IRN
 20 participants from Sweden, Ghana, Brazil, Canada, France,
Mexico, South Korea, Switzerland, Germany, Niger, Benin, Thailand,
Japan, and the United States
 Regions represented – Europe (9), North America (3), Latin America
(2), South East Asia (3), Sub Saharan Africa (3)
12

13.
Work plan and expected outcomes
 The WERA IRN will work over a period of 3 years with the aim of
producing 3 major outcomes, as follows:
 A synthesis report based on a landscape review that aims to map
the major territories in the field of research on Didactics – Learning
and Teaching worldwide for publication in 2015/16 (Hudson&Meyer)
 A special issue of the (planned) World Education Research Journal
on Didactics – Learning and Teaching (2016/17)
 A roadmap aimed at stimulating future research on Didactics –
Learning and Teaching to be published as part of the special issue
of WERJ (2016/17)
13

14.
Year 1 (2014)
 6-7 February 2014, University of Rennes - Initial planning meeting of
core group (Hudson, Meyer, Trautmann, Loquet, Gruson and
Sensevy) was held.
 25-26 June 2014, Münster Seminar - A follow-up planning meeting
was held (Hudson and Meyer) in Münster.
 1– 5 September 2014, University of Porto - Research Workshop,
Developing a WERA International Research Network on Didactics -
Learning and Teaching, European Conference of Educational
Research, University of Porto, 1st – 5th September 2014.
14

15.
Year 1 (2014)
 19-21 November 2014, University of Edinburgh - Research
Workshop, Developing a WERA International Research Network on
Didactics - Learning and Teaching, Annual Conference of the
Scottish Educational Research Association/WERA Focal Meeting,
University of Edinburgh, 19-21 November 2014
 An open and flexible online working environment within the
redesigned WERA website has been established
http://www.weraonline.org/?DidacticsIRN
15

16.
Year 2 and 3 (2015/16)
 A proposal for a Symposium is planned for the WERA Focal Meeting
2015 at ECER 2015, University of Budapest, 7-11 September 2014.
 Communication and interaction will be maintained via the open and
flexible online working environment provided by WERA website and
through meetings at AERA, EERA and the WERA Focal Meetings in
2015 and 2016.
16

17.
Today’s workshop
Structure of the workshop:
 Contributions x5 @ 10 minutes each (50-60 mins)
 Workshop discussion (15-20 mins)
 Feedback, contributions and questions (15-20 mins)
17

18.
Some questions for workshop discussion
 How do we decide which studies to include within the field of
'Didactics – Learning and Teaching'?
 How do we decide what are ‘the major territories’ of research
in this field? What criteria can we use to evaluate and decide?
 Where are the obvious gaps in relation to work that we need
to take into account?
 How do we develop this international research network in a
way that is really world wide?
18

19.
References
 Hudson, B. (2000) Seeking connections and searching for meaning: teaching as
reflective practice. Symposium on Didaktik: an International Perspective, European
Conference on Educational Research, University of Edinburgh, 20-23 Sept 2000.
 Hudson, B. (2002) Holding complexity and searching for meaning - teaching as
reflective practice, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 1, 43-57.
 Hudson, B. and Meyer, M. (eds) (2011) Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics, Learning
and Teaching in Europe. Opladen and Farmington Hills: Verlag Barbara Budrich.
 Hudson, B., Henderson, S. and Hudson, A., (2014) Developing Mathematical
Thinking in the Primary Classroom: Liberating Teachers and Students as Learners of
Mathematics, Journal of Curriculum Studies
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.979233
 Schneuwly, B. (2011) Didactic Transposition: a Key Concept in the French Tradition of
‘Didactiques des disciplines/Fachdidaktik’, Symposium on Fachdidaktik – European
Perspectives, European Conference of Educational Research, Freie Universität
Berlin, 13-16 September 2011.
19