370 Bildung und Erziehung
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (18)
- Article (7)
- Article trade magazine (6)
- Workingpaper / Report (5)
- Bachelor Thesis (3)
- Book (2)
- Collection (2)
- Master's Thesis (2)
- Researchdata (1)
Keywords
- FBSK_Webseite (21)
- Promotion (5)
- Sozialarbeit (5)
- Ganztagsschule (4)
- Politische Bildung (4)
- Rechtsradikalismus (4)
- Schule (4)
- Bachelor (3)
- Demokratische Bildung (3)
- Erlebnisbericht (3)
Department/institution
Vor dem Hintergrund zunehmender Mediennutzung bei Heranwachsenden, der Präsenz rassismusrelevanter Inhalte in digitalen Medien sowie ihres Einflusses auf die gesellschaftlichen und damit auch schulischen Strukturen, zielt die vorliegende Arbeit darauf ab, die Bedeutung einer rassismuskritischen Medienbildung an Schulen herauszuarbeiten. Die zentrale Forschungsfrage lautet: Wie kann schulische Medienpädagogik im Sinne einer rassismuskritischen Medienbildung dazu beitragen, Schüler:innen zu einem reflektierten Umgang mit Rassismus in digitalen Medien zu befähigen? Dazu wird zunächst dargelegt, weshalb die Verbindung von Medienbildung und Rassismuskritik notwendig ist und es wird ein theoretisch-konzeptionelles Modell dieser Verbindung entwickelt. Auf dieser Grundlage soll verdeutlicht werden, in welchen Kompetenzen und auf welche Weise Schüler:innen durch rassismuskritische Medienbildung befähigt werden können, um rassistische Inhalte zu erkennen und kritisch-reflexiv damit umzugehen.
The DEMOCRAT Project’s work packages are built on each other. This evaluation report is the penultimate stage of the complex Education for democracy (EfD) process designed, tested, evaluated and shared for exploitation by the consortium. DEMOCRAT has outlined a European curriculum for EFD, based on a shared understanding of what democracy means, as well as a competence framework for responsible democratic citizenship (RDC). The curriculum has been piloted in a series of interventions in primary and secondary schools in the six EU member states in which DEMOCRAT has operated: Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain. In some countries, the testing stage also included interventions in teacher training at higher education institutes.
The national activities were designed on the basis of the DEMOCRAT competence framework (included in D2.1), taking into account preliminary national reports on education inequalities and the state of the art in EfD (D3.1) in the six participating countries. The national and local work that is evaluated in the present deliverable is also based on DEMOCRAT deliverable D5.1. (Design of local pilot projects (LPPs)), as well as on subsequently developed tools (see Annexed Guides) and includes the self-assessment of the pilot participants. A final elaboration of the national pilot interventions will be done when they are compiled into the DEMOCRAT Toolbox (D6.1., under preparation).
The results of the assessment of the national intervention were presented in the deliverable D5.2 and the results of the comparison of the intervention in the deliverable D5.3). It is worth noting that the various pilots/interventions, because of their limited scale and duration, are not considered as providing strictly scientific evidence about the efficiency and effectiveness of the learning approaches used in terms of RDC competence development. For the DEMOCRAT Project, the primary objective was to test and further develop the competence framework and the assessment tools, as well as to obtain insights of possible success and hindering factors for novel approaches in Education for Democracy. Pilots show that the school heads and teachers have a crucial role in education for democracy and that they can contribute significantly, as agents of research and development, as well as implementation. Here we present the results of the assessment of the German pilot interventions: Discrimination-sensitive project days.
Policy Brief: Education for Responsible Democratic Citizenship. A European Vision. Submitted Version
(2025)
Democracy is the cornerstone of European identity, which is complementary to national identities. In view of the challenges democracy is currently facing, at both European and national level, such as growing polarisation, increasing threats to human security and expanding digitalisation, it is important to defend and consolidate it, as a sine-qua-non element of “the European way of life”. Education for responsible democratic citizenship (RDC) or education for democracy (EfD) for short is a way of doing so. EfD strategies and tools to strengthen the democratic agency/capacity for action of citizens, the youth in particular, through transformative learning, has been the focus of the DEMOCRAT project (March 2023 to February 2026).
This Policy Brief was initially drafted after the seven first months of the DEMOCRAT project but is now being finalised with the experience of two-and-a-half years of project implementation in mind. Key findings and proposed policy actions presented here include:
· To safeguard democracy within the European Union, transformative education for democracy must be reinforced, also taking into account fast-moving digitalisation and fast-breached planetary boundaries.
· The shift to transformative education for democracy should be based on a coherent competence framework defined in complementarity with the frameworks of citizenship competences proposed by the EU (Key Competences for Lifelong Learning) and the Council of Europe (Competences for Democratic Culture). The four key RDC competences identified by DEMOCRAT are: Solidary Participation, Deliberation, Judgement, and Democratic Resilience.
· The above competence framework should be translated by EU member states and schools in different parts of Europe into a sample curriculum for responsible democratic citizenship adjusted to their education systems and societies.
· Schools have to be laboratories of democratic practice on a daily basis and across subjects, not just for a few hours of civic education or education for democracy per week, and need to connect with a conducive local, regional, national, European, global and digital environment.
· Students need to be aware of both their rights and responsibilities, and be guided to act on both, within their peer groups and in relation to their teachers, parents, local authorities and other relevant stakeholders.
A crucial aspect of any approach to education for democracy is the competence of the teacher to create an environment in which the students can learn democracy in action and not just in words
The DEMOCRAT Project’s work packages are built on each other. This evaluation report is the penultimate stage of the complex Education for democracy (EfD) process designed, tested, evaluated and shared for exploitation by the consortium. DEMOCRAT has outlined a European curriculum for EFD, based on a shared understanding of what democracy means, as well as a competence framework for responsible democratic citizenship (RDC). The curriculum has been piloted in a series of interventions in primary and secondary schools in the six EU member states in which DEMOCRAT has operated: Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain. In some countries, the testing stage also included interventions in teacher training at higher education institutes.
The national activities were designed on the basis of the DEMOCRAT competence framework (included in D2.1), taking into account preliminary national reports on education inequalities and the state of the art in EfD (D3.1) in the six participating countries. The national and local work that is evaluated in the present deliverable is also based on DEMOCRAT deliverable D5.1. (Design of local pilot projects (LPPs)), as well as on subsequently developed tools (see Annexed Guides) and includes the self-assessment of the pilot participants. A final elaboration of the national pilot interventions will be done when they are compiled into the DEMOCRAT Toolbox (D6.1., under preparation).
The results of the assessment of the national intervention were presented in the deliverable D5.2 and the results of the comparison of the intervention in the deliverable D5.3). It is worth noting that the various pilots/interventions, because of their limited scale and duration, are not considered as providing strictly scientific evidence about the efficiency and effectiveness of the learning approaches used in terms of RDC competence development. For the DEMOCRAT Project, the primary objective was to test and further develop the competence framework and the assessment tools, as well as to obtain insights of possible success and hindering factors for novel approaches in Education for Democracy. Pilots show that the school heads and teachers have a crucial role in education for democracy and that they can contribute significantly, as agents of research and development, as well as implementation. Here we present the results of the assessment of the German pilot interventions: Mediator Training.
Mit dem Rechtsanspruch auf Ganztagsförderung für Kinder im Grundschulalter erfahren Fragen des Verhältnisses von Kinder- und Jugendhilfe und Schule neue Aktualität. Neujustierungen werden erkennbar etwa mit Blick auf die strukturelle Ebene der Steuerung in den Kommunen, wie auch auf der Ebene der professionellen Gestaltung, aber auch mit Blick auf zentrale Perspektiven und Ansprüche in Hinblick auf Bildungsgerechtigkeit und Kinderschutz. Wie sich die zum Teil widersprüchlichen Anforderungen zeigen, die von Seiten der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe zu bearbeiten sind, werden in den Beiträgen der vorliegenden Schwerpunktausgabe behandelt.
Die vorliegende Studie untersucht den Einfluss und die Effekte der pädagogische Prozessqualität im Ganztag (Autonomie, Interesse und Beziehungsqualität) auf das schulische Wohlbefinden von 800 Drittklässler*innen an 31 Düsseldorfer Grundschulen im Rahmen des Projekts „Zukunft des Ganztags an Düsseldorfer Grundschulen“. Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die sozialräumliche Verortung der Schulen (gemessen über den Sozialindex NRW) keinen Einfluss auf die Prozessqualität im Ganztag (gemessen über Autonomie, das Interesse an Ganztagsangeboten und der Beziehung zu Betreuungspersonen) hat. Vertiefende Mehrebenenanalysen zeigen, dass insbesondere das Interesse an den Ganztagsangeboten und die Beziehungsqualität signifikant zum schulischen Wohlbefinden beitragen, während die Autonomie keinen signifikanten Einfluss aufweist. Mädchen zeigten ein höheres Interesse an Ganztagsangeboten als Jungen. Ein höherer Sozialindex ist mit geringerem Wohlbefinden assoziiert. Diese Ergebnisse unterstreichen die zentrale Bedeutung des Sozialraums und der Prozessqualität für das Wohlbefinden der Schüler*innen im Ganztag.
Die Sichtbarkeit von Forschungsleistungen, sowohl in die akademische Fachwelt als auch in die breite Öffentlichkeit hinein, gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung. Beide Ebenen sind vergeschlechtlicht (Gender Visibility Gap). Dies zeigt sich darin, dass die Forschung von Wissenschaftlerinnen weniger sichtbar ist bzw. gemacht wird und somit weniger Anerkennung erhält als die von Kollegen, was neben anderen Faktoren dazu führen kann, dass Wissenschaftlerinnen das Hochschulsystem verlassen. Davon ausgehend stellt der Beitrag die Frage, welche Rolle der in diesem Kontext bisher wenig im Mittelpunkt der Forschung stehenden Hochschulkommunikation im Prozess der Sichtbarmachung von Wissenschaftlerinnen zukommt. Es wird vor dem Hintergrund macht- und repräsentationstheoretischer Perspektiven diskutiert, wie sich Mitarbeitende der Hochschulkommunikation im Prozess der Sichtbarmachung von Wissenschaftlerinnen positionieren und inwiefern sie sich hier in der (Mit-)Verantwortung sehen. Ein zentraler Befund ist, dass diese Akteursgruppe ihren Einfluss mit Rekurs auf wissenschaftsexterne, journalistische Kriterien, die es zu erfüllen gilt, ein Stück weit relativiert.