Back to the News
Genetisches Lernen zwischen Wunschdenken und Wirklichkeit
Genetic Learning between Wishful Thinking and Reality
Under this title Alexander Engelbrecht, collaborator at Rostock university, by the periodical MNU (Der Mathematische und Naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht) 56/8 (Dec. 2003) p. 464-470 published an extensive article critically concerning with Wagenschein. This paper is mainly a synopsis of Engelbrecht's dissertation: "Martin Wagenschein als Didaktiker - eine kritische Reflexion seines Beitrages zur Didaktik" (Martin Wagenschein as didactician - a critical reflexion on his contribution to didactics) (Rostock 2003), appeared also as a book "Kritik der Paedagogik Martin Wagenscheins - Eine Reflexion seines Beitrages zur Didaktik" in the series 'Didaktik' as No. 8 by LIT - Verlag Muenster, ISBN 3-8258-7201-7.
Here is only room for the translated abstract published by MNU:
Martin Wagenschein was and is by a greater part recepted benevolently, though hard criticism was not missing. But neither acceptance nor critics can explain why Wagenschein's ideas for education remained without consequences. This paper tries to explain the lack of effectiveness of "genetic learning" to education. The main reason might be founded in Wagenschein's opinion of learning, reducing it to only one and little probable of the varieties of learning processes. Genuine instruction according to Wagenschein cannot be performed as it is indeterminable - fundamentally and all the more by the manner proposed by Wagenschein. This is proven by an example of instruction.
Right away the editor of this homepage reacted with an answer published besides others by MNU 57/4 (Jun. 2004). A detailed answer of Engelbrecht is published there, too, unfortunally very badly abridged.
Here is only the place to remark that those allegations mainly depend on superficial investigation but -or better expressed even for this reason- are to be taken serious.