TY - CONF

T1 - Self-assurance of pedagogy for intellectual disabilities as a science: Conceptual considerations for the continuation of a thought style analysis

AU - Klix, Jonathan

PY - 2025/9/8

Y1 - 2025/9/8

N2 - What is the so-called pedagogy of the mentally retarded? This supposedly trivial question is the starting point of the first systematic and theoretical study of the so-called pedagogy of the mentally retarded (hereafter: PID), which has worked out the facts of the thinking style of PID on the basis of the eight textbooks published between 1991 and 2021 (see Klix in prep.). The textbook analysis shows that the constitution of PID based on a presumed group of people with so-called mental retardation is the status quo of PID. The reference to this group of people significantly constitutes the self-conception as a science, the fields of knowledge, the relevance of the reference sciences and the basic assumptions, which are explicitly emphasised as a disciplinary consensus. The textbook analysis also shows that the group of people assumed by the PbgB is presented as heterogeneous along categories of difference. However, these assumptions of heterogeneity are not taken up in the self-descriptions. PbgB only succeeds in constituting itself as a science by accepting the standardisation of relative difference and the explicit heterogeneity of the group of people. In its disciplinary self-descriptions, PbgB does not do justice to the conceded heterogeneity of its group of people, which is identified as a fundamental constitutional problem of academic PbgB. Based on these findings, which reveal the textbook knowledge of PbgB, further components of the thinking style of PbgB can now be analysed in order to achieve the goal of disciplinary self-assurance (cf. Moser, 2003). Questions of disciplinary constitutions of the special educational field of PID are therefore also at the centre of the research project outlined here. The following discourse will consider the notion of pedagogy for intellectual disabilities as a scientific discipline, with a particular focus on the conceptual underpinnings that facilitate the ongoing theoretical analysis of thinking.Fleck himself acknowledges that the apprenticeship period in science is analogous to those in the trades, arts, or religions. It is characterised by a form of authoritarian thought suggestion (cf. Schäfer & Schnelle 2015, XXXVI). The metaphor of the 'sacrament of initiation' (Fleck 2019 [1935], 111) supports the separation between the initiator and the recipient, i.e. on the one hand the representative of the esoteric circle who introduces the respective learning individual to the consecration of the thinking style. However, as Fleck (ibid.) also asserts, textbooks alone are insufficient for acquiring knowledge about a particular thinking style. Hence, the present research project aims to investigate the practices of thinking style-related initiation processes, with the objective of ascertaining how students learn to perceive the world in a manner that is essential for belonging to the thinking collective.The objective of this research project, which is still in its initial stages, is to identify and analyse the unresolved tension in German-language pedagogy for intellectual disabilities (PID). This tension arises from the discursive constitution of PID as a unit based on a standardised group of people. The central question guiding this research is: how do students gain access to thinking styles in university practices?The project’s foundation is rooted in discourse-analytical fragments of knowledge derived from written data, such as textbooks, which reveal the assumptions underpinning the thinking style. However, an analysis that moves beyond textual products enables the examination of practices that shape the thinking style in real-world contexts.The innovative potential of Fleck’s theory has already been substantiated through the analysis of textbooks (see Klix, in prep.). Building on this, the project will shift its focus to practices that diverge from textually written knowledge, thereby extending the theoretical analysis of thinking styles in pedagogy.Method:Since Fleck's theory is a theory and history of science that entails almost no direct methodological consequences, various connections of thinking style-related studies coexist. Andersen et al. (2018b, 64-65) attempt to systematise the impossibility of a universal definition of an approach to disciplinary forms of action on the basis of three conditions along the research process: They list (1) the type of data collection, (2) the form of data analysis and (3) their own professional localisation (ibid.). While for (1) they name narrative and ethnographic field approaches in addition to discourse analysis, the last two, with their focus on products of field observation or information from the participating actors, appear to be the most helpful for the investigation of disciplinary bodies of knowledge pursued here. With regard to data analysis (2), Andersen et al. (2018b, 65) refer to qualitative analyses of positioning processes, which can typically be worked out in narrative analyses. In ethnographic research approaches, on the other hand, spatial practices, which can also be understood here as semiotic landscapes in a corpus linguistic understanding, can be approached, which provide information about the constitution of the space characterised by the style of thinking (cf. Andersen et al., 2018, 65). According to Andersen et al. (2018b, 64-65), the last condition mentioned is the subject-specific localisation of the researchers (3), which must be taken into account insofar as ‘subject descriptions [...] like all descriptions of the perceived world [...] are per se perspective-bound’ (Andersen et al. 2018b, 64). On the one hand, a thinking-style-related analysis of one's own discipline makes it possible for the analysing person qua their own initiation in the sense of Fleck's (2015 [1935], 121) ‘Gestaltsehen’, meaning that they not only see unconnected details, but also recognise an emergent whole. In doing so, however, they always run the risk of not seeing what constitutes the style of thinking as an unquestioned premise and must therefore always be critically reflected upon.Conclusion:The poster is intended to present the possible approaches of a qualitative-empirical investigation of the initiation rituals of the PbgB thinking style following the textbook analysis and to offer the opportunity to discuss these approaches. As a draft of a research project to be realised, it does not provide any conclusive findings, but discusses which forms of data collection should be included and how an analytical approach can be created.By analysing textbook knowledge in actual university practice, knowledge about the facts with which students gain access to the subject and which presumably accompany them during their studies and often subsequent work as a teacher can be explicated. The realisation that although the PbgB describes the group of people it assumes as heterogeneous, it is ultimately constituted along a homogenised group of people seems central. While this problem is not resolved in the textbooks, the question here is how the PbgB deals with this unresolved tension in its university practice. The textbook analysis also shows that the group of people assumed by the PbgB is presented as heterogeneous along categories of difference. However, these assumptions of heterogeneity are not adopted in the self-descriptions. The PbgB only succeeds in constituting itself as a science by accepting the standardisation of relative difference and the explicit heterogeneity of the group of people. PbgB does not do justice to the conceded heterogeneity of its group of people in the disciplinary self-descriptions, which is identified as a fundamental constitutional problem of academic PbgB. Without itself being a contribution to pedagogical practice, this project therefore sees itself as a contribution to the development of the discipline by reflecting on it.References:Andersen, C., Ängsal, M. P., Czachur, W., Dreesen, P., Fix, U., Kalwa, N., & others. (2018). Erkenntnis als soziale Praxis: Ludwik Flecks Wissenschaftstheorie aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Sicht. In C. Andersen, U. Fix, & J. Schiewe (Eds.), Denkstile in der deutschen Sprachwissenschaft: Bausteine einer Fachgeschichte aus dem Blickwinkel der Wissenschaftstheorie Ludwik Flecks (pp. 11–65). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Fleck, L. (2015). Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv (10th ed.). (L. Schäfer & T. Schnelle, Eds.). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp. (Original work published 1935)Klix, J. (in preparation). Die Selbstvergewisserung von Einheit in der Pädagogik bei geistiger Behinderung: Eine denkstiltheoretische Lehrbuchanalyse (Doctoral dissertation). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Sonderpädagogik, Hannover.Moser, V. (2003). Konstruktion und Kritik: Sonderpädagogik als Disziplin. Opladen, Germany: Leske + Budrich.Schäfer, L., & Schnelle, T. (2015). Ludwik Flecks Begründung der soziologischen Betrachtungsweise in der Wissenschaftstheorie. In L. Fleck, Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv (10th ed., pp. VII–XLIX). L. Schäfer & T. Schnelle (Eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Spitzmüller, J., & Warnke, I. (2011). Discourse linguistics: An introduction to theories and methods of transtextual language analysis. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.

AB - What is the so-called pedagogy of the mentally retarded? This supposedly trivial question is the starting point of the first systematic and theoretical study of the so-called pedagogy of the mentally retarded (hereafter: PID), which has worked out the facts of the thinking style of PID on the basis of the eight textbooks published between 1991 and 2021 (see Klix in prep.). The textbook analysis shows that the constitution of PID based on a presumed group of people with so-called mental retardation is the status quo of PID. The reference to this group of people significantly constitutes the self-conception as a science, the fields of knowledge, the relevance of the reference sciences and the basic assumptions, which are explicitly emphasised as a disciplinary consensus. The textbook analysis also shows that the group of people assumed by the PbgB is presented as heterogeneous along categories of difference. However, these assumptions of heterogeneity are not taken up in the self-descriptions. PbgB only succeeds in constituting itself as a science by accepting the standardisation of relative difference and the explicit heterogeneity of the group of people. In its disciplinary self-descriptions, PbgB does not do justice to the conceded heterogeneity of its group of people, which is identified as a fundamental constitutional problem of academic PbgB. Based on these findings, which reveal the textbook knowledge of PbgB, further components of the thinking style of PbgB can now be analysed in order to achieve the goal of disciplinary self-assurance (cf. Moser, 2003). Questions of disciplinary constitutions of the special educational field of PID are therefore also at the centre of the research project outlined here. The following discourse will consider the notion of pedagogy for intellectual disabilities as a scientific discipline, with a particular focus on the conceptual underpinnings that facilitate the ongoing theoretical analysis of thinking.Fleck himself acknowledges that the apprenticeship period in science is analogous to those in the trades, arts, or religions. It is characterised by a form of authoritarian thought suggestion (cf. Schäfer & Schnelle 2015, XXXVI). The metaphor of the 'sacrament of initiation' (Fleck 2019 [1935], 111) supports the separation between the initiator and the recipient, i.e. on the one hand the representative of the esoteric circle who introduces the respective learning individual to the consecration of the thinking style. However, as Fleck (ibid.) also asserts, textbooks alone are insufficient for acquiring knowledge about a particular thinking style. Hence, the present research project aims to investigate the practices of thinking style-related initiation processes, with the objective of ascertaining how students learn to perceive the world in a manner that is essential for belonging to the thinking collective.The objective of this research project, which is still in its initial stages, is to identify and analyse the unresolved tension in German-language pedagogy for intellectual disabilities (PID). This tension arises from the discursive constitution of PID as a unit based on a standardised group of people. The central question guiding this research is: how do students gain access to thinking styles in university practices?The project’s foundation is rooted in discourse-analytical fragments of knowledge derived from written data, such as textbooks, which reveal the assumptions underpinning the thinking style. However, an analysis that moves beyond textual products enables the examination of practices that shape the thinking style in real-world contexts.The innovative potential of Fleck’s theory has already been substantiated through the analysis of textbooks (see Klix, in prep.). Building on this, the project will shift its focus to practices that diverge from textually written knowledge, thereby extending the theoretical analysis of thinking styles in pedagogy.Method:Since Fleck's theory is a theory and history of science that entails almost no direct methodological consequences, various connections of thinking style-related studies coexist. Andersen et al. (2018b, 64-65) attempt to systematise the impossibility of a universal definition of an approach to disciplinary forms of action on the basis of three conditions along the research process: They list (1) the type of data collection, (2) the form of data analysis and (3) their own professional localisation (ibid.). While for (1) they name narrative and ethnographic field approaches in addition to discourse analysis, the last two, with their focus on products of field observation or information from the participating actors, appear to be the most helpful for the investigation of disciplinary bodies of knowledge pursued here. With regard to data analysis (2), Andersen et al. (2018b, 65) refer to qualitative analyses of positioning processes, which can typically be worked out in narrative analyses. In ethnographic research approaches, on the other hand, spatial practices, which can also be understood here as semiotic landscapes in a corpus linguistic understanding, can be approached, which provide information about the constitution of the space characterised by the style of thinking (cf. Andersen et al., 2018, 65). According to Andersen et al. (2018b, 64-65), the last condition mentioned is the subject-specific localisation of the researchers (3), which must be taken into account insofar as ‘subject descriptions [...] like all descriptions of the perceived world [...] are per se perspective-bound’ (Andersen et al. 2018b, 64). On the one hand, a thinking-style-related analysis of one's own discipline makes it possible for the analysing person qua their own initiation in the sense of Fleck's (2015 [1935], 121) ‘Gestaltsehen’, meaning that they not only see unconnected details, but also recognise an emergent whole. In doing so, however, they always run the risk of not seeing what constitutes the style of thinking as an unquestioned premise and must therefore always be critically reflected upon.Conclusion:The poster is intended to present the possible approaches of a qualitative-empirical investigation of the initiation rituals of the PbgB thinking style following the textbook analysis and to offer the opportunity to discuss these approaches. As a draft of a research project to be realised, it does not provide any conclusive findings, but discusses which forms of data collection should be included and how an analytical approach can be created.By analysing textbook knowledge in actual university practice, knowledge about the facts with which students gain access to the subject and which presumably accompany them during their studies and often subsequent work as a teacher can be explicated. The realisation that although the PbgB describes the group of people it assumes as heterogeneous, it is ultimately constituted along a homogenised group of people seems central. While this problem is not resolved in the textbooks, the question here is how the PbgB deals with this unresolved tension in its university practice. The textbook analysis also shows that the group of people assumed by the PbgB is presented as heterogeneous along categories of difference. However, these assumptions of heterogeneity are not adopted in the self-descriptions. The PbgB only succeeds in constituting itself as a science by accepting the standardisation of relative difference and the explicit heterogeneity of the group of people. PbgB does not do justice to the conceded heterogeneity of its group of people in the disciplinary self-descriptions, which is identified as a fundamental constitutional problem of academic PbgB. Without itself being a contribution to pedagogical practice, this project therefore sees itself as a contribution to the development of the discipline by reflecting on it.References:Andersen, C., Ängsal, M. P., Czachur, W., Dreesen, P., Fix, U., Kalwa, N., & others. (2018). Erkenntnis als soziale Praxis: Ludwik Flecks Wissenschaftstheorie aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Sicht. In C. Andersen, U. Fix, & J. Schiewe (Eds.), Denkstile in der deutschen Sprachwissenschaft: Bausteine einer Fachgeschichte aus dem Blickwinkel der Wissenschaftstheorie Ludwik Flecks (pp. 11–65). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Fleck, L. (2015). Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv (10th ed.). (L. Schäfer & T. Schnelle, Eds.). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp. (Original work published 1935)Klix, J. (in preparation). Die Selbstvergewisserung von Einheit in der Pädagogik bei geistiger Behinderung: Eine denkstiltheoretische Lehrbuchanalyse (Doctoral dissertation). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Sonderpädagogik, Hannover.Moser, V. (2003). Konstruktion und Kritik: Sonderpädagogik als Disziplin. Opladen, Germany: Leske + Budrich.Schäfer, L., & Schnelle, T. (2015). Ludwik Flecks Begründung der soziologischen Betrachtungsweise in der Wissenschaftstheorie. In L. Fleck, Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv (10th ed., pp. VII–XLIX). L. Schäfer & T. Schnelle (Eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Spitzmüller, J., & Warnke, I. (2011). Discourse linguistics: An introduction to theories and methods of transtextual language analysis. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.

M3 - Poster

T2 - European Conference on Educational Research, ECER 2025

Y2 - 9 September 2025 through 12 September 2025

ER -