Back to the Main Entrance

No -> Wagenschein < - Yes

This is a place to become familiar to some reproaches to Wagenschein and some attempts to encounter them:
(Sorry, the articles themselves are not (yet?) translated...).

Werner Kroebel: Stellungnahme zu dem Buch Martin Wagenschein, Ursprüngliches Verstehen und exaktes Denken (1967)[PDF]
H. Settler: Vom Sinn und Widersinn des Physikunterrichtes (1967)[PDF]
These two papers in the German "MNU" periodical (Der Mathematische und Naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht) triggered a passionate discussion which Wagenschein at least at this forum terminated by his paper:
Martin Wagenschein: Erwiderung auf W. Kroebels Kritik an meinen Vorschlägen zum Physikunterricht (1968)[PDF]
For a rather long period after this roaring year papers stayed rather silent, even when there were eager discussions on meetings and in the auditorium.
A revival of the public discussion was released -again in the MNU periodical- by the paper of Alexander Engelbrecht (2003),
again starting a wild reaction:
Klaus Kohl: Die Wirklichkeit des genetischen Lehrens, nur Wunschdenken? - Eine Entgegnung (2004)[PDF]
Ruedi Gunz: Kann Unterricht nach Wagenschein wirklich nicht gelingen? and Peter Klein: Der im Grabe rotierende Wagenschein, or: Sieht so "genetisches Lernen aus? (2004)[PDF]
can be downloaded here.
Further letters to the editor by Genevieve Appenzeller, Peter Stettler, Walter Koehnlein, H.J. Schack are printed in MNU 4(2004).
Also the first part of the extensive answer to these papers " Antwort von A. Engelbrecht zu den Zuschriften in Heft 4-2004" (2004)[PDF]
can be read there.
Sometimes it's an accidential hit to hear some gossip or read an important statement. So it happened to me with the paper of Micha Brumlik: Ein ruhiges Anschauen des Grauens? Zur Unzulaenglichkeit des reformpaedagogischen Erfahrungsbegriffs (2004)[PDF]
where the author feels obliged to dispute the political character of Wagenschein.

My personal estimation of these critics can be read here too (translated): Criticism on Wagenschein, from Kroebel until today (2005)
Have fun!

But there is constructive criticism, too - criticism appreciating Wagenschein's, work but explaining why he did not reach his goals - could not reach them. An example is the paper of Heinz Muckenfuss from the pedagogical university (PH) Weingarten "Grundpositionen Wagenscheins - kritisch hinterfragt" (1996)[PDF].