Pragmatismus und seine Rezeption in der deutschen Sportpädagogik

A discourse analysis of sports pedagogy regarding the pragmatic turn shows clearly that sports pedagogy has taken up ideas from other disciplines only in a coincidental or haphazard way. Genuine new forms of action or reflection were not recognized or did not show themselves in the discipline outside of common pedagogical discourses. Such resistance concerning concepts from other disciplines shows itself especially clearly in the turns following the pragmatic turn. Only where the “narrative turn” is concerned do we see traces of this discourse in sports pedagogy as well. However, these traces have already faded in the last 10 years. There are two reasons that sports pedagogy does not engage in discourse with other disciplines. Firstly, the obvious value of sport and physical exercise can make it seem unnecessary for sports pedagogy to meddle in the arguments of pedagogic worth experienced in other subjects. Secondly, the discipline still appears to be caught up in the mythology and terminology of German idealism.     

Science Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta‐Analysis

Although science has received much attention as a political and educational initiative, students with learning disabilities (LD) perform significantly lower than their nondisabled peers. This meta‐analysis evaluates the effectiveness of instructional strategies in science for students with LD. Twelve studies were examined, summarized, and grouped according to the type of strategy implemented. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each study. Across all studies, a mean ES of .78 was obtained, indicating a moderate positive effect on students with LD science achievement. Findings also align with past reviews of inquiry‐based instruction for students with special needs, indicating that students with LD need structure within an inquiry science approach in order to be successful. Additionally, results suggest that mnemonic instruction is highly effective at increasing learning disabled students' acquisition and retention of science facts.     

Young Children’s Ability to Produce Valid and Relevant Counter-Arguments

In collaborative problem solving, children produce and evaluate arguments for proposals. We investigated whether 3- and 5-year-olds (N = 192) can produce and evaluate arguments against those arguments (i.e., counter-arguments). In Study 1, each child within a peer dyad was privately given a reason to prefer one over another solution to a task. One child, however, was given further information that would refute the reasoning of their partner. Five-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds, identified and produced valid and relevant counter-arguments. In Study 2, 3-year-olds were given discourse training (discourse that contrasted valid and invalid counter-arguments) and then given the same problem-solving tasks. After training, 3-year-olds could also identify and produce valid and relevant counter-arguments. Thus, participating in discourse about reasons facilitates children’s counter-argumentation.