Berliner Modell

The Berlin model ( among others also Berlin School of didactics or " teaching - learning - theoretical didactics " ) was developed by Paul Heimann ( 1901-1967 ) developed in distinction from the educational theory didactics Wolfgang Klafki. Amidst allegations, Klafki show in his humanities embossed didactics " stratosphere thinking", he designed a practical decision model. It should enable the teachers to analyze on a purely empirical, value-free basis initially his own teaching theory and to make as didactic decisions made ​​transparent. Also it is designed to help teachers prepare lessons, to take into account as many factors affecting the teaching and sometimes at all to get " the look ". In this way, targeted and planned teaching and learning should be made possible.

The model

The Berlin-based model would help, considering the ever varying conditions and situations into meaningful decisions about the "why", " what" and "how" to come, "Where ", in a group. There are tools for the analysis and planning of individual steps and for subsequent reflection and evaluation of work units or group lessons.

Systematic teaching analysis on an empirical basis Heimann found so-called " formal constants " (including categories) of instruction that occur independent of time in each classroom. The lessons factors determined in this way could serve as a guide in the planning of lessons. Heimann certain six of these constants in two fields:

• Two factors condition ( condition fields ) anthropogenic conditions and
• Socio-cultural requirements of all stakeholders

• Intentions / objectives
• Content / articles
• Methods / ways
• Medium / Media

Condition factors

The anthropogenic conditions of participants

• What learning background, the individual student?
• What level of development have the individual?
• What is the attitude / motivation, along with acceptance?
• In what habitat they live, and what results from ( attitudes, skills, learning styles )?
• Previous experience to all concerned?
• What is the composition of the group, who is leading, has influence? What is the climate?
• How is the behavior and the relationship of the participants and teachers to each other (that is, the members and the teacher )?
• What interests do they probably have?

The socio - cultural conditions of all involved

• Where the meeting take place?
• What physical conditions are there?
• How much time is available?
• What else is specified still unchanged?
• Who from the outside which influence and control rights? (eg, power is turned off )
• How old they are, in what stage of development, men and / or women (boys / girls)?
• What to expect the institution / school, the parents, the society?
• What is the approach of the institution / school?

Decision factors

• The aims and objectives which are to: What I want (we want ) to achieve? What is it?
• Where do these goals come as they justify themselves?
• How to "fit " these objectives in the context condition, on all of our requirements?
• Are those goals feasible, or must they be changed in view of terms and conditions?

• The contents / items at issue: To what content is it?
• Customize this content to the objectives and vice versa?
• How exactly should the contents be filled ( limited / extended ), so they do not go past the conditions of those involved?
• Are there any contradictions to the condition frame?

• The methods are the way in which to address the content and objectives can be achieved. " When I consider the conditions of the parties and the condition of the framework and the objectives and contents of a whole, I, I have the ideas then, how could I achieve this? "
• What steps do I find?
• What could I do, say, offer? How to build the content, structure or present?
• I possibly would have to change my strivings, because I can not find a way how I can reach them; or do I change my content decisions or the condition frame or my conditions? ( by I, for example, supply them a thing more information )

• The means, the media, which I need if I want to go this route: I have these resources / material, or I need to change the way because they are not available to me? ( For example, I lack a projector and I wanted to show images. )
• Adjust the media about the requirements of the participants, objectives, content, etc?

Central findings

The main findings of this model are:

• All six factors relate to each other. Among them there is strict interdependence. Each factor must be in the view of the other are considered ( Interdependenzannahme ). ( In the graphic representation, this is expressed by arrows. )
• This model considers planning ( a meeting / group hour) as a system of interrelated decisions: In each element is also included with each other, or the decision in a field has implications for the decision in the other fields. "If I met in a field a decision, I must therefore think through all other decisions, whether they agree in interaction " (see above).
• Also the condition of the framework must be taken into account in decisions, or depending on the goal, " I have to try to change the frame condition ".
• The condition and decision factors are presented here in a particular order. When planning but need not necessarily in that order to proceed, because all the factors influence each other. You can basically start in each field and then refer the decision of the other.
• If a scheduled meeting conducted, then consequences or results arising among all participants. The objectives have been achieved or not achieved, it has changed little or nothing has happened. This result finding a flow in the prerequisite consideration for the next meeting.

Development

The model was further developed by Wolfgang Schulz, a former employee Heimann, in the 1980s, the Hamburg model. A model of action is for a " emancipatory relevant, professional and pedagogical lessons " from the planning model Heimann. Schulz turns away from the purely descriptive analysis and teaching developed a normative model of critical education that is designed to enable the students to get rid of superfluous rule and to act in the utmost self-determination.