Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:18:04.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Deeper Learning Episodes: First Steps towards Transforming Classrooms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2023

Edited by
Do Coyle ,
Oliver Meyer  and
Susanne Staschen-Dielmann
Do Coyle
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Oliver Meyer
Affiliation:
Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Germany
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
A Deeper Learning Companion for CLIL
Putting Pluriliteracies into Practice
 , pp. 19 - 20
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Baumert, J., Klieme, E., Neubrand, M., et al. (Eds.). (2001). PISA 2000: Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich. Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
Brown, N. J. S., Furtak, E. M., Timms, M., Nagashima, S. O., & Wilson, M. (2010). The Evidence-Based Reasoning Framework: Assessing Scientific Reasoning. Educational Assessment, 15(3–4), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2010.530551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, H. (2013). Positioning Writing as Meaning-Making in Writing Research: An Introduction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(2), 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, T. (2019 ). Die Förderung vertiefter Lernprozesse durch Sachfachliteralität: Eine vergleichende Studie zum expliziten Scaffolding kognitiver Diskursfunktionen im bilingualen Chemieunterricht am Beispiel des Erklärens [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz]. http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-4833Google Scholar
Gillis, V. (2014). Disciplinary Literacy: Adapt not Adopt. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(8), 614–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.301Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. (1993). Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values (2nd ed.). Ablex.Google Scholar
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting Students’ Construction of Scientific Explanations by Fading Scaffolds in Instructional Materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1Google Scholar
Nashan, M., & Parchmann, I. (2008). Fachtext versus Geschichte. Kommunikation in den Naturwissenschaften als Zugang zu einem Verständnis für die Natur der Naturwissenschaften. Unterricht Chemie, 19(3), 57–61.Google Scholar
Parchmann, I., & Venke, S. (2008). Eindeutig – Zweideutig?! Chemische Fachsprache im Unterricht. Unterricht Chemie, 19, 10–15.Google Scholar
Polias, J. (2016). Apprenticing Students into Science: Doing, Talking & Writing Scientifically. Lexis Education.Google Scholar
Putra, G. B. S., & Tang, K.-S. (2016). Disciplinary Literacy Instructions on Writing Scientific Explanations: A Case Study from a Chemistry Classroom in an All-Girls School. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 569–579. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00022CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to Write, Reading to Learn: Genre, Knowledge and Pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox.Google Scholar
Thummathong, R., & Thathong, K. (2018). Chemical Literacy Levels of Engineering Students in Northeastern Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(3), 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.06.009Google Scholar
Vollmer, G. (1980). Sprache und Begriffsbildung im Chemieunterricht. Diesterweg.Google Scholar

References

Fischer, H. E. (1998). Scientific Literacy und Physiklernen. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 4(2), 41–52.Google Scholar
Gebhard, U., Höttecke, D., & Rehm, M. (2017). Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teachers. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203181522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmke, A., Helmke, T., Lenske, G., Pham, G. Praetorius, A.-K., Schrader, F.-W., & Ade-Thurow, M. (2011). Unterrichtsdiagnostik – Voraussetzung für die Verbesserung der Unterrichtsqualität. In Huber, S. G (Ed.), Jahrbuch Schulleitung 2012: Befunde und Impulse zu den Handlungsfeldern des Schulmanagements. Carl Link Verlag, pp. 133–144.Google Scholar
Leisen, J. (2014). Wie soll ich meinen Unterricht planen? – Lehr-Lern-Prozesse planen am Beispiel Elektrizitätslehre in Physik. In Maier, U (Ed.), Lehr-Lernprozesse in der Schule: Referendariat: Praxiswissen für den Vorbereitungsdienst. Klinkhardt, pp. 102–117.Google Scholar
Merzyn, G. (1998). Fachbestimmte Lernwege zur Förderung der Sprachkompetenz. Praxis der Naturwissenschaften – Physik in der Schule, 36, 284–287.Google Scholar
Meyer, O., & Imhof, M. (2017). Pluriliterales Lernen. Vertiefte Lernprozesse anbahnen und gestalten. Lernende Schule, 20(80), 20–24.Google Scholar
Prenzel, M., Sälzer, C., Klieme, E., & Köller, O. (2013). PISA 2012. Fortschritte und Herausforderungen in Deutschland. Waxmann. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-188384Google Scholar
Taçon, P. S. C., Wilson, M., & Chippindale, C. (1996). Birth of the Rainbow Serpent in Arnhem Land Rock Art and Oral History. Archaeology in Oceania, 31(3), 103–124. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1834-4453.1996.tb00355.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vollmer, H. J. (2011). Schulsprachliche Kompetenzen: Zentrale Diskursfunktionen. https://www.home.uni-osnabrueck.de/hvollmer/VollmerDF-Kurzdefinitionen.pdfGoogle Scholar
Vollmer, H. J., & Thürmann, E. (2010). Zur Sprachlichkeit des Fachlernens: Modellierung eines Referenzrahmens für deutsch als Zweitsprache. In Ahrenholz, B. (Ed.), Fachunterricht und Deutsch als Zweitsprache, 2nd ed. Narr, pp. 107–132.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, T., Horz, M., & Schlichting, H. J. (2014). Ein Regenbogen mit Glaskügelchen. Praxis der Naturwissenschaften – Physik in der Schule, 63(6), 5–10.Google Scholar

References

Berg, N. (2020). Listening for Literacies – Effekt von fachspezifischem Hör-Verstehenstraining auf die Entwicklung der mündlichen Sachfachliteralität im bilingualen Geographieunterricht Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz. http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-3591Google Scholar
Charles, D. (2014, December 15). Congress to Nutritionists: Don’t Talk about the Environment. NPR: The Salt. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/12/15/370427441/congress-to-nutritionists-dont-talk-about-the-environmentGoogle Scholar
Chatterjee, R. (2017, February 27). What’s the Environmental Footprint of a Loaf of Bread? Now We Know. NPR: The Salt. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/02/27/517531611/whats-the-environmental-footprint-of-a-loaf-of-bread-now-we-know?t=1614339378381&t=1642421329281Google Scholar
Edelson, D. C. (2009). Geographic Literacy in U.S. by 2025. ESRI: Geo Learning. https://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/spring09articles/geographic-literacy.htmlGoogle Scholar
Edelson, D. C. (2011a). The Challenge of Defining Geo-Literacy. ESRI: Geo Learning. https://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/summer11articles/the-challenge-of-defining-geo-literacy.htmlGoogle Scholar
Edelson, D. C. (2011b, March 25). Geo-Literacy: Learn about Geo-Literacy – What It Is, Why It’s Important, and What We Can Do to Advance Geo-Literacy in the U.S. National Geographic Society. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/geo-literacy-preparation-far-reaching-decisions/Google Scholar
Egli, H.-R., Hasler, M., & Probst, M. (Eds.). (2016). Geografie: Wissen und verstehen: Ein Handbuch für die Sekundarstufe II, 4th ed. hep der Bildungsverlag.Google Scholar
Harte, W., & Reitano, P. (2016). ‘Doing Geography’: Evaluating an Independent Geographic Inquiry Assessment Task in an Initial Teacher Education Program. Journal of Geography, 115(6), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2016.1175496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Charter on Geographical Education (Ed.). (2016). 2016 International Charter on Geographical Education. http://www.cnfg.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Charter_2016-IGU-CGE_May_9.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kang, H., Thompson, J., & Windschitl, M. (2014). Creating Opportunities for Students to Show What They Know: The Role of Scaffolding in Assessment Tasks. Science Education, 98(4), 674–704. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21123Google Scholar
Lewis, M. (2012). The Lexical Approach: The State of ELT and a Way Forward. Cengage Learning EMEA.Google Scholar
What is Geo-Literacy? (2012, May 24). National Geographic Society. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/what-is-geo-literacy/Google Scholar
Utami, W. S., Zain, I. M., & Sumarmi, . (2018). Geography Literacy Can Develop Geography Skills for High School Students: Is It True? IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 296, 012032. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/296/1/012032Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating Strategy Use: Toward a Model of the Skilled Second Language Listener. Language Learning, 53(3), 463–496. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00232Google Scholar

References

Downey, M. T., & Long, K. A. (2016). Teaching for Historical Literacy: Building Knowledge in the History Classroom. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Fischer, D. H. (1970). Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Kayser, J., & Hagemann, U. (2010). Urteilsbildung im Geschichts- und Politikunterricht (eine Publikation von Cultus e. V. - Bildung - Urteil - Kompetenz, Berlin). Schneider.Google Scholar
Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport Baden-Württemberg (Ed.). (2004). Bildungsplan 2004 – Allgemein bildendes Gymnasium.Google Scholar
Rodrigo, M. (1994). Promoting Narrative Literacy and Historical Literacy. In Carrettero, M. & Voss, J. F. (Eds.), Cognitive and Instructional Processes in History and Social Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Walsh, W. H. (1960). Philosophy of History: An Introduction. Hutchinson.Google Scholar

References

Denver, D., & Hands, G. (1990). Does Studying Politics Make a Difference? The Political Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceptions of School Students. British Journal of Political Science, 20(2), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400005809Google Scholar
The Documentary Channel (2019). Blame Game – E-Waste in Africa and Solutions. Online video clip. www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrCcTiSL_HgGoogle Scholar
Grinth, H. (2010). Sprachverwendung in der Politik. Bpb: Bundeszentrale Für Politische Bildung. www.bpb.de/politik/grundfragen/sprache-und-politik/42687/sprachverwendungGoogle Scholar
Sander, W. (2009). Wissen: Basiskonzepte der Politischen Bildung. In Forum Politische Bildung (Ed.), Informationen zur Politischen BildungI, vol. 30 (pp. 57–60). www.nibis.de/uploads/2medfach/files/30_sander.pdfGoogle Scholar
The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (n.d.). The Nature of Political Inquiry. Retrieved 25 June 2021 from www.csun.edu/~cahn/inquiry.htmGoogle Scholar
Westholm, A., Lindquist, A., & Niemi, R. G. (1990). Education and the Making of the Informed Citizen: Political Literacy and the Outside World. In Ichilov, O. (Ed.), Political Socialization, Citizenship Education, and Democracy. Teachers’ College.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum (Ed.). (2019). A New Circular Vision for Electronics: Time for a Global Reboot – In Support of the United Nations E-Waste Coalition. www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_A_New_Circular_Vision_for_Electronics.pdfGoogle Scholar

References

Carter, R. (2007). Literature and Language Teaching 1986–2006: A Review. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2007.00130.xGoogle Scholar
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.Google Scholar
Goldman, S. R., Britt, M. A., Brown, W. et al. (2016). Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework for Disciplinary Literacy. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1168741Google Scholar
Hallet, W. (2016). Genres im fremdsprachlichen und bilingualen Unterricht: Formen und Muster der sprachlichen Interaktion. Klett/Kallmeyer.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2011). Disciplines and Discourses: Social Interactions in the Construction of Knowledge. In Starke-Meyerring, D., Paré, A., Artemeva, N., Horne, M., & Yousoubova, L. (Eds.), Writing in Knowledge Societies. Parlor Press/WAC Clearinghouse, pp. 193–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2014). Teaching Foreign Languages in an Era of Globalization: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 296–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12057.xGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M. (2011). Writing to Learn the Language: Issues in Theory and Research. In Manchón, R. M. (Ed.), Learning-to-Write and Writing-to-Learn in an Additional Language, vol. 31. John Benjamins, pp. 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.31.07manGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M. (Ed.) (2021). The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Writing. 1st Ed. Routledge.Google Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Cerezo, L. (2018). Writing as Language Learning: Framing the Issue. In Liontas, J. I., T. International Association, & DelliCarpini, M. (Eds.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0530Google Scholar
Pountain, C. J. (2019). Modern Languages as an Academic Discipline: The Linguistic Component. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 32(3), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2019.1661153Google Scholar
Sedita, J. (2020). We Need a Writing Rope [Blog Entry]. Keys to Literacy. https://keystoliteracy.com/blog/we-need-a-writing-rope/Google Scholar

References

Altmeyer, S. (2010). Competences in Inter-Religious Learning. In Engebretson, K., de Souza, M., Durka, G., & Gearon, L. (Eds.), International Handbook of Inter-Religious Education, vol. 4. Springer, pp. 627–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altmeyer, S. (2015). The Aesthetic Dimension of Believing and Learning. In Buchanan, M. T. & Gellel, A.-M. (Eds.), Global Perspectives on Catholic Religious Education in Schools. Springer, pp. 61–72.Google Scholar
Altmeyer, S. (2019). Sprachhürden erkennen und abbauen: Wege zu einem sprachsensiblen Religionsunterricht. In Altmeyer, S., Grümme, B., Kohler-Spiegel, H., Naurath, E., Schröder, B., & Schweitzer, F. (Eds.), Reli: Keine Lust und keine Ahnung? vol. 35. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 184–196.Google Scholar
Altmeyer, S. (2021a). Religious Education for Ecological Sustainability: An Initial Reality Check Using the Example of Everyday Decision-Making. Journal of Religious Education, 69(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40839-020-00131-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altmeyer, S. (2021b). Sprachsensibler Religionsunterricht: Grundlagen und konzeptionelle Klärungen. In Sprachsensibler Religionsunterricht, vol. 37. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 14–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altmeyer, S., & Dreesmann, D. (2020). The Importance of Religion for the Evaluation of Everyday Ecological Decisions by German Adolescents: A Case Study with Students in Biology and Religious Education Classes. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology, 24(3), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685357-20203001Google Scholar
Altmeyer, S., & Dreesmann, D. (2021). ‘The Tree Was There First’ – Using an Everyday Ecological Dilemma to Explore the Personal Orientations of Secondary School Students in Environmental Decision-Making. Environmental Education Research, 27(1), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1853062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning, 1st ed. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914505Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, Power, and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Englert, R., Hennecke, E., & Kämmerling, M. (2014). Innenansichten des Religionsunterrichts: Fallbeispiele, Analysen, Konsequenzen. Kösel.Google Scholar
Gardner, G. T. (2006). Inspiring Progress: Religions’ Contributions to Sustainable Development. Norton.Google Scholar
Grelle, B. (2018). Worldviews, Ethics, and Ecology: ‘Sustainability’ as a Context for Religious Education. In Astley, J., Francis, L. J., & Lankshear, D. W. (Eds.), Values, Human Rights and Religious Education: Contested Grounds, vol. 14. Peter Lang, pp. 189–206.Google Scholar
Hannam, P., Biesta, G., Whittle, S., & Aldridge, D. (2020). Religious Literacy: A Way Forward for Religious Education? Journal of Beliefs & Values, 41(2), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2020.1736969Google Scholar
Heimbrock, H.-G. (Ed.). (2017). Taking Position: Empirical Studies and Theoretical Reflections on Religious Education and Worldview. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Jenkins, W., Berry, E., & Kreider, L. B. (2018). Religion and Climate Change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 43(1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Imhof, M., & Connolly, T. (2018). Beyond CLIL: Fostering Student and Teacher Engagement for Personal Growth and Deeper Learning. In Martínez Agudo, J. (Ed.), Emotions in Second Language Teaching: Theory, Research and Teacher Education. Springer, pp. 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75438-3_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, K. (2021). Religion, Interreligious Learning and Education (edited and revised by Philip Barnes, L.). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Miedema, S. (2017). Position, Commitment and Worldview from a Pedagogical Perspective. In Heimbrock, H.-G. (Ed.), Taking Position: Empirical Studies and Theoretical Reflections on Religious Education and Worldview, vol. 33. Waxmann, pp. 127–138.Google Scholar
Roebben, B. (2021). Religious Educational Leadership in Times of Upheaval: How to Build Sustainably on Insights from the Past? ET-Studies, 12(2), 357–367.Google Scholar
Rothgangel, M., Danilovich, Y., & Jäggle, M. (Eds.). (2014–2020). Wiener Forum für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft: Religious Education at Schools in Europe, vol. 10. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Ständige Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, & Engagement Global (Eds.). (2016). Orientierungsrahmen für den Lernbereich globale Entwicklung im Rahmen einer Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung, 2nd ed. Cornelsen.Google Scholar
Tomalin, E., Haustein, J., & Kidy, S. (2019). Religion and the Sustainable Development Goals. The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 17(2), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2019.1608664Google Scholar
Tomlinson, J. (2019). Ecological Religious Education: New Possibilities for Educational Practice. Journal of Religious Education, 67(3), 185–202.Google Scholar

References

Barth, D. (2012). Musik-Kulturen im Klassenzimmer – Musik und Menschen in interkulturellen Situationen. In Wallbaum, C. (Ed.), Perspektiven der Musikdidaktik: Drei Schulstunden im Licht der Theorien. Olms, pp. 201–220. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-87604Google Scholar
Beacco, J.-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H. J., & Sheils, J. (2016). The Language Dimension in All Subjects: A Handbook for Curriculum Development and Teacher Training. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/a-handbook-for-curriculumdevelopment-and-teacher-trainingthe-languag/16806af387Google Scholar
Biesta, G. J. J. (2012). Giving Teaching Back to Education. Phenomenology & Practice, 6(2), 35–49.Google Scholar
Bossen, A. (2019). Sprachbewusster Musikunterricht Problematisierung sprachdidaktischer Ansätze und Perspektiven einer Sprachbildung im Fach. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dreßler, S. (2016). Was genau ist (d)ein Problem? In Dreßler, S. (Ed.), Zwischen Irritation und Erkenntnis: Zum Problemlösen im Fachunterricht. Waxmann, pp. 13–29.Google Scholar
Ehinger, J., Knigge, J., & Rolle, C. (2021). Musikbezogene Argumentationskompetenz: Ein Werkstattbericht über die Entwicklung von Testaufgaben. In Budke, A. & Schäbitz, F. (Eds.), Argumentieren und Vergleichen Beiträge aus der Perspektive verschiedener Fachdidaktiken. LIT Verlag, pp. 93–112.Google Scholar
Ehrenforth, K. H. (1993). Musik als Leben: Zu einer lebensweltlich orientierten ästhetischen Hermeneutik. Musik und Bildung, 25(6), 14–19.Google Scholar
Gebauer, H. (2013). ‘Beschreibt doch mal die Form, die wir gerade gemacht haben.’ Kognitive Aktivierung im Musikunterricht. In Lehmann-Wermser, A. & Krause-Benz, M. (Eds.), Musiklehrer (-bildung ) im Fokus musikpädagogischer Forschung. Waxmann, pp. 61–79.Google Scholar
Geuen, H., & Stöger, C. (2016). Lesarten entwickeln: Eine kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektive auf Lernen und Lehren im Musikunterricht. In Dreßler, S. (Ed.), Zwischen Irritation und Erkenntnis: Zum Problemlösen im Fachunterricht, vol. 1. Waxmann, pp. 63–82.Google Scholar
Geuen, H., & Stöger, C. (2017). ‘Spielarten’ – Musizieren im allgemeinbildenden Musikunterricht aus Perspektive der Cultural Studies: Ein Gedankenexperiment. In Cvetko, A. & Rolle, C. (Eds.), Musikpädagogik und Kulturwissenschaft, vol. 38. Waxmann, pp. 57–71.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, T., & Lehmann-Wermser, A. (2013). Iteratives Forschen am Beispiel der Förderung musikalisch-ästhetischer Diskursfähigkeit. In Komorek, M. & Prediger, S. (Eds.), Der lange Weg zum Unterrichtsdesign: Zur Begründung und Umsetzung fachdidaktischer Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprogramme, vol. 5. Waxmann, pp. 63–78.Google Scholar
Green, L. (2012). Musical ‘Learning Styles’ and ‘Learning Strategies’ in the Instrumental Lesson: Some Emergent Findings from a Pilot Study. Psychology of Music, 40(1), 42–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735610385510Google Scholar
Hardy, I., Hettmannsperger, R., & Gabler, K. (2019). Sprachliche Bildung im Fachunterricht: Theoretische Grundlagen und Förderansätze. In Ziehm, J., Voet Cornelli, B., Menzel, B., & Goßmann, M. (Eds.), Schule migrationssensibel gestaltet: Impulse für die Praxis. Beltz, pp. 31–61.Google Scholar
Hasselhorn, J. (2015). Messbarkeit musikpraktischer Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern: Entwicklung und empirische Validierung eines Kompetenzmodells, vol. 2. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Höfer, F. (2021). Nathan Evans: Wellerman. Mip-Journal, 61, 12–18.Google Scholar
Jank, W. (Ed.). (2021). Musik-Didaktik: Praxishandbuch für die Sekundarstufe I und II, 9th ed. Cornelsen.Google Scholar
Jordan, A.-K. (2014). Empirische Validierung eines Kompetenzmodells für das Fach Musik: Teilkompetenz ‘Musik wahrnehmen und kontextualisieren’, vol. 43. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Jordan, A.-K., Knigge, J., Lehmann, A. C., Niessen, A., & Lehmann-Wermser, A. (2012). Entwicklung und Validierung eines Kompetenzmodells im Fach Musik. Wahrnehmen und Kontextualisieren von Musik. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 58(4), 500–521. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:10392Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. J. (2010). Verständige Musikpraxis: Eine Antwort auf Legitimationsdefizite des Klassenmusizierens. Zeitschrift Für Kritische Musikpädagogik www.zfkm.org/10-kaiser.pdfGoogle Scholar
Karlsen, S. (2011). Using Musical Agency as a Lens: Researching Music Education from the Angle of Experience. Research Studies in Music Education, 33(2), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X11422005Google Scholar
Knigge, J. (2010). Modellbasierte Entwicklung und Analyse von Testaufgaben zur Erfassung der Kompetenz ‘Musik wahrnehmen und kontextualisieren’. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Bremen. http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/diss/docs/00012006.pdfGoogle Scholar
Knigge, J. (2012). Interkulturelle Musikpädagogik: Hintergründe – Konzepte – Befunde. In Niessen, A. & Lehmann-Wermser, A. (Eds.), Aspekte interkultureller Musikpädagogik: Ein Studienbuch. Wißner, pp. 25–26.Google Scholar
Knörzer, L., Rolle, C., Stark, R., & Park, B. (2015). ‘… er übertreibt und das macht mir seine Version zu nervös’ – Einzelfallanalysen musikbezogener Argumentationen. In Niessen, A. & Knigge, J. (Eds.), Theoretische Rahmung und Theoriebildung in der musikpädagogischen Forschung. Waxmann, pp. 147–162. www.pedocs.de/frontdoor.php?source_opus=12619Google Scholar
Kranefeld, U. (2021). Der Diskurs um Unterrichtsqualität in der Musikdidaktik zwischen generischen und fachspezifischen Dimensionen. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 49(2), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-021-00113-yGoogle Scholar
Krause, M. (2008). Bedeutung und Bedeutsamkeit: Interpretation von Musik in musikpädagogischer Dimensionierung, vol. 7. Olms.Google Scholar
Krause-Benz, M. (2014). ‘Musik hat für mich Bedeutung’ – Bedeutungskonstruktion im Musikunterricht als Dimension musikbezogener Bildung. Art Education Research, 5(9), 1–8.Google Scholar
Krupp-Schleußner, V. (2016). Jedem Kind ein Instrument? Teilhabe an Musikkultur vor dem Hintergrund des Capability Approach. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Krupp, V. (Ed.). (2021). Wirksamer Musikunterricht. Schneider Verlag.Google Scholar
Levinson, J. (1990). Musical Literacy. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 24(1), 17–30.Google Scholar
Major, A. E. (2007). Talking about Composing in Secondary School Music Lessons. British Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051707007437Google Scholar
Major, A. E., & Cottle, M. (2010). Learning and Teaching through Talk: Music Composing in the Classroom with Children Aged Six to Seven Years. British Journal of Music Education, 27(3), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051710000240Google Scholar
Meyer, O., & Coyle, D. (2017). Pluriliteracies Teaching for Learning: Conceptualizing Progression for Deeper Learning in Literacies Development. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2017-0006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport Baden-Württemberg (2016). Musik. Gemeinsamer Bildungsplan der Sekundarstufe I. Kultus und Unterricht.Google Scholar
Prediger, S., & Buró, S. (2021). Selbstberichtete Praktiken von Lehrkräften im inklusiven Mathematikunterricht: Eine Interviewstudie. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 42(1), 187–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-020-00172-1Google Scholar
Regelski, T. A. (1998). The Aristotelian Bases of Praxis for Music and Music Education as Praxis. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 6(1), 22–59.Google Scholar
Richter, C. (1993). Lebensweltliche Orientierung des Musikunterrichts: Eine Komposition Mozarts als Verkleidungs- und Rollenspiel. Musik Und Bildung, 5, 24–29.Google Scholar
Rolle, C. (2011). Wann ist Musik bildungsrelevant? In Schäfer-Lembeck, H.-U. (Ed.), Musikalische Bildung – Ansprüche und Wirklichkeiten. Reflexionen aus Musikwissenschaft und Musikpädagogik. Allitera, pp. 45–55.Google Scholar
Rolle, C. (2013). Argumentation Skills in the Music Classroom: A Quest for Theory. In de Vugt, A. & Malmberg, I. (Eds.), Artistry, vol. 2. Helbling, pp. 137–150.Google Scholar
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content-Area Literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.Google Scholar
Tajmel, T., & Hägi-Mead, S. (2017). Prinzipien des sprachbewussten Unterrichts. In Tajmel, T. & Hägi-Mead, S. (Eds.), Sprachbewusste Unterrichtsplanung. Prinzipien, Methoden und Beispiele für die Umsetzung. Waxmann, pp. 72–103.Google Scholar
van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648–010-9127-6Google Scholar
van Geert, P., & Steenbeek, H. (2005). The Dynamics of Scaffolding. New Ideas in Psychology, 23(3), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2006.05.003Google Scholar
Vogt, J. (2014). Schwierige Gleichheit: Vom Nutzen gerechtigkeitsphilosophischer Überlegungen für die Musikpädagogik. In Gies, S. & Heß, F. (Eds.), Kulturelle Identität und Soziale Distinktion. Helbling, pp. 45–58.Google Scholar
Weininger, E. B., & Lareau, A. (2018). Pierre Bourdieu’s Sociology of Education: Institutional Form and Social Inequality. In Medvetz, T & Sallaz, J. J. (Eds.), The Oxford Book of Pierre Bourdieu. Oxford Academic, pp. 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199357192.013.11Google Scholar

References

Amit, M., & Fried, M. N. (2005). Multiple Representations in 8th Grade Algebra Lessons: Are Learners Really Getting It? Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 57–64.Google Scholar
Bednarz, N., Kieran, C., & Lee, L. (Eds.). (1996). Approaches to Algebra: Perspectives for Research and Teaching. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Blum, W., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2009). Mathematical Modelling: Can It Be Taught and Learnt? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45–58.Google Scholar
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design Experiments in Educational Research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001009Google Scholar
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erath, K., Ingram, J., Moschkovich, J., & Prediger, S. (2021). Designing and Enacting Instruction that Enhances Language for Mathematics Learning: A Review of the State of Development and Research. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(2), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01213-2Google Scholar
Fong Ng, S., & Lee, K. (2009). The Model Method: Singapore Children’s Tool for Representing and Solving Algebraic Word Problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(3), 282–313. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.40.3.0282Google Scholar
Friedlander, A., & Talbach, M. (2001). Promoting Multiple Representations in Algebra. In Cuoco, A. A. (Ed.), The Roles of Representation in School Mathematics: 2001 Yearbook of the National Council of the Teachers of Mathematics. NCTM, pp. 173–185.Google Scholar
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom. Heinemann.Google Scholar
Götze, D., & Baiker, A. (2021). Language-Responsive Support for Multiplicative Thinking as Unitizing: Results of an Intervention Study in the Second Grade. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(2), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01206-1Google Scholar
Gravemeijer, K. (1998). Developmental Research as a Research Method. In Kilpatrick, J. & Sierpinska, A. (Eds.), What is Research in Mathematics Education and What Are Its Results? Kluwer.Google Scholar
Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design Research from a Learning Design Perspective. In van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.), Educational Design Research. Routledge, pp. 17–51.Google Scholar
Grünkorn, J., Klieme, E., Praetorius, A.-K., & Schreyer, P., eds. (2020). Mathematikunterricht im internationalen Vergleich: Ergebnisse aus der TALIS-Videostudie Deutschland. DIPF | Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation.Google Scholar
Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and Teaching with Understanding. In Grouws, D. A. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Macmillan, pp. 65–97.Google Scholar
Jablonka, E. (2003). Mathematical Literacy. In Bishop, A., Clements, M. A., Keitel, C., Kilpatrick, J., & Leung, F. K. S. (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Mathematics Education. Kluwer, pp. 77–104.Google Scholar
Kaput, J. J. (1998). Representations, Inscriptions, Descriptions and Learning: A Kaleidoscope of Windows. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 265–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(99)80062-7Google Scholar
Kieran, C. (2004). The Core of Algebra: Reflections on Its Main Activities. In Stacey, K., Chick, H., & Kendal, M. (Eds.), The Future of the Teaching and Learning of Algebra: The 12th ICMI Study, vol. 8. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-8131-6_2Google Scholar
Kuhnke, K. (2013). Vorgehensweisen von Grundschulkindern beim Darstellungswechsel: Eine Untersuchung am Beispiel der Multiplikation im 2. Schuljahr. Springer.Google Scholar
Malle, G. (1993). Didaktische Probleme der elementaren Algebra. Vieweg.Google Scholar
McConachie, S. M., Petrosky, A. R., & Resnick, L. B. (Eds.). (2016). Content Matters: A Disciplinary Literacy Approach to Improving Student Learning. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Moschkovich, J. (Ed.). (2010). Language and Mathematics Education. Information Age.Google Scholar
Moschkovich, J. (2013). Principles and Guidelines for Equitable Mathematics Teaching Practices and Materials for English Language Learners. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 6(1), 45–57.Google Scholar
Moschkovich, J. (2015). Academic Literacy in Mathematics for English Learners. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 40(A), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.01.005Google Scholar
OECD. (2007). PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World: Volume 1: Analysis. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264040014-enGoogle Scholar
Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking Mathematically: Communication in Mathematics Classrooms. Routledge.Google Scholar
Pöhler, B., & Prediger, S. (2015). Intertwining Lexical and Conceptual Learning Trajectories – A Design Research Study on Dual Macro-Scaffolding towards Percentages. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1697–1722. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1497aGoogle Scholar
Polias, J. (2016). Apprenticing Students into Science: Doing, Talking & Writing Scientifically. Lexis Education.Google Scholar
Prediger, S. (2019a). Mathematische und sprachliche Lernschwierigkeiten: Empirische Befunde und Förderansätze am Beispiel des Multiplikationskonzepts. Lernen und Lernstörungen, 8(4), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1024/2235-0977/a000268Google Scholar
Prediger, S. (2019b). Welche Forschung kann Sprachbildung im Fachunterricht empirisch fundieren? Ein Überblick zu mathematikspezifischen Studien und ihre forschungsstrategische Einordnung. In Ahrenholz, B., Jeuk, S., Lütke, B., Paetsch, J., & Roll, H. (Eds.), Fachunterricht, Sprachbildung und Sprachkompetenzen. De Gruyter, pp. 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110570380-002Google Scholar
Prediger, S. (2020). Sprachbildender Mathematikunterricht in der Sekundarstufe – Ein forschungsbasiertes Praxisbuch. Cornelsen.Google Scholar
Prediger, S., & Hein, K. (2017). Learning to Meet Language Demands in Multi-Step Mathematical Argumentations: Design Research on a Subject-Specific Genre. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 309–335. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2017-0010Google Scholar
Prediger, S., & Krägeloh, N. (2016). ‘X-Arbitrary Means Any Number, but You Do Not Know Which One’: The Epistemic Role of Languages while Constructing Meaning for the Variable as Generalizers. In Halai, A. & Clarkson, P. (Eds.), Teaching and Learning Mathematics in Multilingual Classrooms. SensePublishers, pp. 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-229-5_7Google Scholar
Prediger, S., & Wessel, L. (2013). Fostering German Language Learners’ Constructions of Meanings for Fractions – Design and Effects of a Language- and Mathematics-Integrated Intervention. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(3), 435–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0079-2Google Scholar
Prediger, S., & Zindel, C. (2017). School Academic Language Demands for Understanding Functional Relationships: A Design Research Project on the Role of Language in Reading and Learning. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7b), 4157–4188. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00804aGoogle Scholar
Prediger, S., Erath, K., & Opitz, E. M. (2019). The Language Dimension of Mathematical Difficulties. In Fritz, A., Haase, V. G., & Räsänen, P. (Eds.), International Handbook of Mathematical Learning Difficulties: From the Laboratory to the Classroom. Springer, pp. 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97148-3_27Google Scholar
Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of School Algebra and Uses of Variables. In Coxford, A. F. & Shulte, A. P. (Eds.), The Ideas of Algebra, K-12. NCTM, pp. 8–19.Google Scholar
Warren, E. (2003). The Role of Arithmetic Structure in the Transition from Arithmetic to Algebra. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(2), 122–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217374Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×