Sprachsensibel unterrichten – in allen Fächern  und für alle Lernenden

Becker-Mrotzek, Michael; Höfler, Martha; Wörfel, Till

doi:10.24452/sjer.43.2.5

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…the basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) that children initially acquire in the home environment, is characterized by orality and used to cope with everyday communication situations (Cummins, 2008). In contrast, academic language and the corresponding cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) is formal, "needs high cognitive and linguistic demands" (Massing, 2020, p. 6) and is conceptually oriented towards writing (Becker-Mrotzek et al, 2021). Academic language contains both "subject-specific and cross-curricular elements" (Pineker-Fischer, 2017, p. 68, own translation).…”

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subjectspecific language, in turn, is purely subject-specific (Pineker-Fischer (2017). Subjectspecific features of subject-specific language include subject vocabulary (Becker-Mrotzek et al, 2021) and the language necessary to cope with subject-specific communicative challenges (Neuhof & Girnus, 2020). While mastery of academic language is relevant for learners' academic success (Neugebauer & Nodari, 2016), subject-specific language impacts on their discourse.…”

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In language-aware subject teaching, language learning is intertwined with subject learning. The aim is thus to provide linguistic support for subject-specific learning so that, starting from everyday language competencies (BICS), learners are introduced to general academic language competencies (CALP) and then proceed to the corresponding subject-specific language (Becker-Mrotzek et al, 2021).…”

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Oral argumentation and language-aware civic education – a theoretical proposal

Sobernheim

2023

Research in Subject-Matter Teaching and Learning (RISTAL)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral argumentative competence is highly relevant for responsible [mündige] participation in social negotiation processes. Thus, promoting argumentative competence is central to civic education. However, there is a lack of theoretical concepts and empirical findings which can guide action in the civic education classroom. Since argumentative competence is a linguistic skill, the concept of language-aware civic education offers itself as a plausible framework. In this article, the two terms oral argumentative competence and language-aware subject teaching are clarified within the context of civic education. It is shown how subject-specific oral argumentative competence can be fostered through language-aware civic education.

show abstract

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Language-aware Civic Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oral argumentation and language-aware civic education – a theoretical proposal

Sobernheim

2023

Research in Subject-Matter Teaching and Learning (RISTAL)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dabei wird in aktuellen Diskursen um die Weiterentwicklung von sprachlicher Bildung in inklusiven Bildungskontexten besonders das Konstrukt der Bildungssprache, verstanden als elaborierter Code der deutschen Sprache (Bernstein, 1973), in den Fokus gerückt (Bock, 2020 ;Jostes, 2017 ;Lange, 2020). Grund dafür sind Einwände, die hinsichtlich der Anerkennungsund Teilhabegerechtigkeit eines inklusiven Unterrichts kritisieren (Emmerich & Hormel, 2013), dass das Konstrukt in vorherrschendem Verständnis sprachliche Hürden und Barrieren für besonders marginalisierte und vulnerable Schüler:innen bereitstelle, welches mittel-und langfristig Stigmatisierungsprozesse und unterrichtliche Exklusion begünstigen und zu Bildungsbenachteiligung beitragen könne (Becker-Mrotzek, Höfler & Wörfel, 2021 ;Chilla, 2019 ;Gogolin & Lange, 2011 ;Lütke, 2019 ;Wojnesitz, 2016). Eine erweiterte Diskussion und Reflexion impliziter Normativität scheint im Hinblick auf Transdisziplinarität von Sprachbildung im Allgemeinen und Bildungssprache im Speziellen von Nöten zu sein.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

„Bildungssprache ist immer noch wichtig, aber wenn man sich […] so nicht ausdrücken kann, gelten natürlich andere Standards für diese Kinder.“ Zwischen Standardorientierung und Individualbezug: Antinomien in Kontexten mehrsprachiger und inklusiver Sprachbildung. Eine Erhebung von Einstellungen angehender und praktizierender Grundschullehrkräfte

Venanzio

Niehaus²

2023

QfI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Anknüpfung an aktuelle Diskurse um die Weiterentwicklung von Sprachbildung in Bildungskontexten manifestiert sich das Konstrukt der Bildungssprache weiterhin als elaborierter Code der deutschen Sprache. Daraus resultieren angenommene sprachliche Hürden für bestimmte Lerngruppen, ebenso Stigmatisierung und Bildungsbenachteiligung. Marginalisierte Lerner:innen sind hier insbesondere betroffen, weshalb sie von angestrebten bildungspolitischen Reformen in den Bereichen (schulischer) Mehrsprachigkeit und Inklusion gezielt berücksichtigt werden müssen. Dafür ist eine stärkere individuumsbezogene Perspektive auf Sprachbildung und Bildungssprache von Nöten, die Sprache als eine von vielen Heterogenitätsdimensionen versteht und im Hinblick auf gesellschaftliche Teilhabe reflektiert und in den Vordergrund stellt. Darauf aufbauend stellt der Beitrag eine Pilotstudie vor, die das vorherrschende Verständnis von Bildungssprache bei angehenden und bereits ausgebildeten Grundschullehrkräften und die ihr beigemessene Bedeutung erhebt. Fokussiert wird das Verständnis des Konstrukts Bildungssprache allgemein, seine angenommene Notwendigkeit für den schulischen Unterricht und seine Implikationen für mehrsprachige und inklusiv beschulte Schüler:innen. Die Befragung kombiniert den Einsatz von offenen qualitativen Items in Form von schulisch-unterrichtlichen Vignetten des inklusiven Schulalltags und geschlossenen quantitativen Items. Die Ergebnisse zeigen neben ersten Tendenzen zur möglichen konzeptionellen Erweiterung sprachbildender Arbeit vor allem eine unzureichende kritische Reflexion des Konstrukts Bildungssprache, insbesondere auch im Hinblick auf soziale und gesellschaftliche Teilhabeprozesse. Des Weiteren bestätigt die Untersuchung ein normatives Spannungsfeld zwischen formalen, bildungspolitischen Erwartungen einerseits und immanenten, defizitären Wahrnehmungen andererseits, dessen Aufbruch für jegliche Professionalisierungsbemühungen angehender Lehrkräfte von großer Bedeutung zu sein scheint Abstract Along current discourses on the development of language support in educational contexts, academic language (Bildungssprache) still occurs as an elaborate code of the German language. This results in language barriers for certain learners, as well as in stigmatization and educational disadvantages. Marginalized learners are particularly affected here, therefore, they must be considered specifically in educational policy reforms regarding multilingual learners and learners with special educational needs. To do so, a stronger individual-related perspective on language education and academic language is needed. This perspective frames language as one of many dimensions of heterogeneity and reflects it concerning social participation. Basing on this, the article presents a pilot study with pre- and in-service primary school teachers, investigating the understanding of (academic) language in educational contexts, its importance and necessity for teaching practice, and its implications for multilingual learners and special needs learners. The survey uses open qualitative items and closed quantitative ones. The results show tendencies towards a conceptual expansion of certain language understandings, above all, however, they point out a minor critical reflection of the concept of academic language in its dominant definition, as well as a minor critical reflection of its implications for social participation processes. Furthermore, the study confirms a normative area of tension between formal, educational-policy expectations on the one hand, and immanent, deficient perceptions of multilingual learners and learners with special educational needs on the other hand. Decreasing this tension seems to be of great importance for any teacher professionalization efforts in the form of supervised reflection.

show abstract

Effectiveness of language‐sensitive subject teaching: Heterogeneity and quality of the evidence and implications for future research

Vasylyeva,

Woerfel,

Twente

et al. 2024

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report and appraise the heterogeneity and quality of 53 primary studies included in a systematic review project on the effectiveness of language‐sensitive subject teaching in primary and secondary education to provide a comprehensive overview of the research field and to give detailed recommendations for future research. We followed a systematic review process adhering to existing guidelines and procedures to define inclusion and quality criteria for experimental, quasi‐experimental and observational studies published since 1990 in English and German. We performed an extensive search, screened on titles, abstracts and full texts, and found 55 studies to meet the inclusion criteria. Out of these studies, 53 studies fulfilled the quality criteria (assessment of internal validity) and were included in the review. Most of the studies show that students taught with language‐sensitive approaches achieve the same or better results than students taught using non‐language‐sensitive approaches for at least one content or language learning outcome (for the results of the narrative synthesis, see Höfler et al., Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 2023, 27, 449). Here, we examine in detail the characteristics of the included studies in terms of the heterogeneity of populations, interventions, outcomes, and study designs and provide arguments for a careful interpretation of the review results. We argue that limited methodological and reporting quality introduce risk of bias to varying degrees. We address methodological issues and gaps in research and present our detailed recommendations for future work informed by our findings. Context and implicationsRationale for this study: This paper systematises the heterogeneity, quality and scope of the studies on the effectiveness of language‐sensitive teaching and gives detailed recommendations for future research.Why the new findings matter: Our findings help shape the trajectory of research on language‐sensitive subject teaching.Implications for researchers and policy makers: This article describes the state of knowledge concerning the effectiveness of language‐sensitive subject teaching. Our results provide educators and educational researchers with a systematised overview of the tested approaches and their effect on different learning outcomes. Based on our assessment of the study quality and the transferability of the results, we point out research gaps and offer detailed recommendations to help researchers design new research projects. Our results will also aid policy makers in deciding what evidence to consider in the context of evidence‐based practice as well as in the formulation of future funding directives.

show abstract

Sprachsensibel unterrichten – in allen Fächern und für alle Lernenden

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Oral argumentation and language-aware civic education – a theoretical proposal

Oral argumentation and language-aware civic education – a theoretical proposal

Effectiveness of language‐sensitive subject teaching: Heterogeneity and quality of the evidence and implications for future research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About