The Representation of Reality in Teaching: A “Mimetic Didactic” Perspective on Examples in Plenary Talk

References

• Aasebø, Turid Skarre, Midtsundstad, Jorunn H., & Willbergh, Ilmi. (2015). Teaching in the age of accountability: Restrained by school culture? Journal of Curriculum Studies. doi:10.1080/00220272.2015.1072249.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. J. (2000). Culture and pedagogy. International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. J. (2001). Towards dialogic teaching (3rd ed). New York: Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Aristoteles. (1999). Etikk. Et hovedverk i Aristoteles’ filosofi, også kalt “den nikomakiske etikk” (A. Stigen, Trans. 3rd ed.). (Nicomachean ethics). Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Aristotle & Halliwell, S. (1995). Poetics (S. Halliwell, D. A. Russell, & D. Innes, Trans.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Auerbach, E., & Said, E. W. (2003). Mimesis: The representation of reality in Western literature by Erich Auerbach. ( German by Willard R. Trask, Trans.; with a new introduction by Edward W. Said). Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bollnow, O. F. (1992). Tilbake til anskuelsen (Back to Anschauung). Ergo, 23, 140–148.
   Google Scholar
• Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 230–284. doi: 10.1080/10508400903530036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comenius, J. A., & Keatinge, M. W. (2005). Didactica magna (Great didactic, first published in 1657). Kessinger Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Deng, Z. (2015). Content, Joseph Schwab and German Didaktik. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(6), 773–786. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2015.1090628
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (2008). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education (first published in 1916). Champaign, Ill.: Book Jungle.
   Google Scholar
• van Dyk, C. J. (2006). Exemplary teaching: Some possibilities for renovating and stimulating didactic practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 127–134. doi: 10.1080/00220270500122653
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fangen, K. (2010). Deltagende observasjon (Participant observation) (2nd ed.). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Sandhed og metode. Grundtræk af en filosofisk hermeneutik (Truth and method. Outlines of an hermenetic philosophy, first published in 1960) (A. Jørgensen, Trans.). Århus: Systime Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Gebauer, G., & Wulf, C. (1995). Mimesis: Culture, art, society (D. Reneau, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Green, J. L., & Smith, D. (1983). Teaching and learning: A linguistic perspective. The Elementary School Journal, 83, 353–391. doi: 10.1086/461322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grondin, J. (1994). Introduction to philosophical hermeneutics; foreword by Hans-Georg Gadamer; translated by Joel Weinsheimer. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology: A Journal of Theory, Research and Development, 29, 75–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–116). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1987). Feltmetodikk: Grunnlaget for feltarbeid og feltforskning (Field methodology: The basis of fieldwork and field research). Oslo: Gyldendal.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, C., Philips, R. S., & Penuel, W. R. (2012). Examining teachers’ instructional moves aimed at developing students’ ideas and questions in learner-centered science classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 769–788. doi: 10.1007/s10972-011-9237-0
   Google Scholar
• Hassan, J. E. (2009). Parents’ socioeconomic status and children’s academic performance. Oslo: NOVA – Norwegian Social Research.
   Google Scholar
• Heffernan, P. (1986). Questioning communicatively in the second language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 43, 108–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbart, J. F., & Stern, J. (2002). Allgemeine pädagogik. With an introduction by Jeffrey Stern (General pedagogy, first published in 1806). Bristol: Thoemmes.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, L., Krapp, A., Renninger, K. A., & Baumert, J. (1998). Interest and learning. Proceedings of the seeon conference on interest and gender. Kiel: Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften an der Universität Kiel.
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. T. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6, 109–124. doi: 10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.109
   Google Scholar
• Humboldt, W. (2000). Theory of Bildung (probably written in 1793 or 1794, translated from a publication from 1969). In I. Westbury, K. Riquarts, & S. T. Hopmann (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 57–61). Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp, P. (2006). Mimesis in educational hermeneutics. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38, 171–184. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2006.00186.x
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2000a). Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation of instruction (first published in 1958). In I. Westbury, S. T. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139–159). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2000b). The significance of classical theories of Bildung for a contemporary concept of allgemeinBildung. In I. Westbury, K. Riquarts, & S. T. Hopmann (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 85–107). Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2001a). Dannelsesteori og didaktik – nye studier (Bildung-theory and didactics – new studies, first published in 1985) (B. Christensen, Trans. 2nd ed.). Århus: Forlaget Klim.
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2001b). Kategorial dannelse. Bidrag til en dannelsesteoretisk fortolkning av moderne didaktikk (Categorical Bildung. Contributions to a Bildung-theoretical interpretation of modern didactics, first published in 1958). In E. L. Dale (Eds.), Om utdanning – klassiske tekster (pp. 167–204). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
   Google Scholar
• Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: Theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12, 383–409. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00011-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lardner, T. (1989). Research in the classroom: Rethinking classrooms: Perspectives on teaching and learning styles. The English Journal, 78, 88–89. doi: 10.2307/819497
   Google Scholar
• Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2014). Better than best practice. Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Linden, J., & Renshaw, P. (2004). Dialogic learning. Shifting perspectives to learning, instruction and teaching. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Littleton, K., & Howe, C. (2010). Educational dialogues. Understanding and promoting productive interaction. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Loflin, M. D., Guyette, T. W., Barron, N., & Marlin, M. (1972). Reconstruction in the analysis of verbal interaction. American Educational Research Journal, 9, 101–112. doi: 10.3102/00028312009001101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundgren, U. P. (2015). What’s in a name? That which we call a crisis? A commentary on Michael Young’s article “Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory”. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(6), 787–801. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2015.1095354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. (2012). Embedded literacy: Knowledge as meaning. Linguistics and Education, 24, 23–37. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNaught, L., Maton, K., Martin, J. R., & Matruglio, E. (2013). Jointly constructing semantic waves: Implications for teacher training. Linguistics and Education, 24, 50–63. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menck, P. (2000). Content: Still in question. In I. Westbury, S. T. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 177–193). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Menck, P. (2010). The formation of conscience: A lost topic of Didaktik. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33, 261–275. doi: 10.1080/00220270010014560
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the devopment of children’s thinking. A sociocultural approach. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Midtsundstad, J. H. (2011). School performance and diversity. In T. Werler (Eds.), Heterogeneity. General didactics meets the stranger (pp. 137–158). Münster: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Mills, K. A. (2009). Floating on a sea of talk: Reading comprehension through speaking and listening. The Reading Teacher, 63, 325–329. doi: 10.1598/RT.63.4.8
   Google Scholar
• Noor, N. M., Aman, I., Mustaffa, R., & Seong, T. K. (2010). Teacher’s verbal feedback on students’ response: A Malaysian esl classroom discourse analysis. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7, 398–405. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.054
   Google Scholar
• Pestalozzi, J. H. (1977). How Gertrude teaches her children: An attempt to help mothers to teach their own children and an account of the method (first published in 1801) (L. E. Holland & F. C. Turner, Trans.). New York: Gordon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reindal, S. M. (2013). Bildung, the Bologna process and Kierkegaard’s concept of subjective thinking. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 32, 533–549. doi: 10.1007/s11217-012-9344-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative (K. Blamey & D. Pellauer, Trans. Vol. I). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Staab, C. F. (1991). Teachers’ practices with regard to oral language. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 37, 31–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Standish, P. (2012). “This’ is prodused by a brain-process’! Wittgenstein, transparency and psychology today. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46, 61–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, R. W. (1998). Topic-based analysis of classroom discourse. System, 26, 303–318. doi: 10.1016/S0346-251X(98)00026-8
   Google Scholar
• Uljens, M. (2002). The idea of a universal theory of education-an impossible but necessary project? Journal of the Philosophy of Education, 36(3), 353–375. doi: 10.1111/1467-9752.00281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verene, D. P. (1981). Vico’s science of imagination. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vico, G. (1997). Vor tids studiemetode (On the study methods of our time, first published in 1708) (C.-K. Jørgensen, Trans. Vol. 4). København: Museum Tusculanums Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Wagenschein, M. (2000). Teaching to understand: On the concept of the exemplary in teaching. In I. Westbury, S. T. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 161–175). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, K. L. (1990). Mimesis as make-believe. On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, Ilmi. (2008). Mimesis, didaktikk og digitale læremidler (Mimesis, Didaktik and digital media). Phd-thesis, Trondheim: The Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, Ilmi. (2010). Mimetisk didaktikk: Om undervisning som kunst (Mimetic didactics: On teaching as an art-form). In J. H. Midtsundstad & I. Willbergh (Eds.), Didaktikk – nye teoretiske perspektiver på undervisning. Oslo: Cappelen Damm.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, Ilmi. (2011). The role of imagination when teaching the diverse group. In S. Hillen, Tanja Sturm & Ilmi Willbergh (Eds.), Challenges facing contemporary didactics: Diversity of students and the role of new media in teaching and learning (pp. 61–73). Münster: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, Ilmi. (2015a). The problems of ‘competence’ and alternatives from the Scandinavian perspective of Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47, 334–354. doi:10.1080/00220272.2014.1002112.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, Ilmi. (2015b). Freedom of speech in the classroom. In S. A. Hillen & C. Aprea (Eds.), Instrumentalism in education– where is ‘bildung’ left? (pp. 43–58). Münster: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar