Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Instructional Quality in Natural Sciences. A Comparison of Subject-Specific Approaches

Authors: Heinitz, Benjamin; Szogs, Michael; Förtsch, Christian; Korneck, Friederike; Neuhaus, Birgit J.; Nehring, Andreas;

Instructional Quality in Natural Sciences. A Comparison of Subject-Specific Approaches

Abstract

Die Frage danach, was einen guten naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht ausmacht und die Frage, inwiefern Unterrichtsqualitätsmerkmale fachspezifisch oder generisch betrachtet werden müssen, sind grundlegende Fragestellungen mit denen sich die Unterrichtsqualitätsforschung beschäftigt. Inzwischen zeichnet sich in den Naturwissenschaftsdidaktiken ein breiter Konsens ab, dass die drei Basisdimensionen der Unterrichtsqualität, Klassenführung, konstruktive Unterstützung und kognitive Aktivierung, fachspezifisch ausdifferenziert und ergänzt werden müssen. Zur konkreten fachspezifischen Ausdifferenzierung und Ergänzung existieren in den Naturwissenschaftsdidaktiken jedoch unterschiedliche Ansätze. Im Rahmen dieses Beitrages wurden exemplarisch drei Ansätze zur fachspezifischen Ausdifferenzierung von Unterrichtsqualitätsmerkmalen herausgegriffen und vergleichend betrachtet, um so zu einem umfassenden Bild aus der Perspektive der Naturwissenschaften zu gelangen. Dazu wurden die drei Ansätze aus dem naturwissenschaftlichen Fachbereich hinsichtlich des Verwendungszwecks, der theoretischen Fundierung und der Operationalisierung einzelner Qualitätsmerkmale verglichen. Anschließend wurden die in einem Ansatz genutzten Qualitätsmerkmale jeweils in den beiden anderen Ansätzen verortet. Hierbei konnten fünf Kategorien herausgearbeitet werden, die für einen zukünftigen systematischen Vergleich mit weiteren Ansätzen genutzt werden können. Der Beitrag stellt somit eine Möglichkeit vor, unterschiedliche Forschungsansätze zur Unterrichtsqualität systematisch aufeinander zu beziehen, um so ein umfassendes Bild der Unterrichtsqualität zu erhalten.

What constitutes to good science teaching and to which extent should criteria of instructional quality be considered subject-specific or generic are fundamental questions within educational research. Currently, a consensus about the necessity to differentiate and add domain-specific criteria to the broadly used basic dimensions of teaching quality, classroom management, constructive support and cognitive activation has emerged in science education. However, there are many approaches to differentiate and add to the three basic dimensions. In the context of this contribution, three approaches of instructional quality were selected and compared in order to arrive at a comprehensive picture from the perspective of the natural sciences. For this purpose, the three science specific approaches were compared with regard to the purpose of use, the theoretical foundation and the operationalization of individual criteria of instructional quality. Subsequently, the criteria used in one approach were transferred into the other two approaches to compare their compatibility. Five categories were identified, which can be used for a future systematic comparison with other approaches. The article thus presents a possibility to systematically relate different research approaches of instructional quality to each other in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of instructional quality.

Keywords

Unterrichtsqualität, Instructional quality, Subject specific, Messinstrumente, Dewey Decimal Classification::300 | Sozialwissenschaften, Soziologie, Anthropologie::370 | Erziehung, Schul- und Bildungswesen, Comparative analysis, Generic, Systematisierung, Systematisation, Measurement tools, Generik, Vergleichsanalyse, Fachspezifik, Dewey Decimal Classification::500 | Naturwissenschaften

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Beta
sdg_colorsSDGs:
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!