@inproceedings{BorowskiGlowinskiFristeretal.2018, author = {Borowski, Andreas and Glowinski, Ingrid and Frister, Jonas and H{\"o}ttecke, Dietmar and Buth, Katrin and Koenen, Jenna and Masanek, Nicole and Reichwein, Wilko and Scholten, Nina and Sprenger, Sandra and Stender, Peter and W{\"o}hlke, Carina and Komorek, Michael and Freckmann, Janine and Hofmann, Josefine and Niesel, Verena and Richter, Chris and Mehlmann, Nelli and Bikner-Ahsbahs, Angelika and Unverricht, Katja and Schanze, Sascha and Bittorf, Robert Marten and Meier, Monique and Grospietsch, Finja and Mayer, J{\"u}rgen and Gimbel, Katharina and Ziepprecht, Kathrin and Hofmann, Judith and Kramer, Charlotte and M{\"u}ller, Britta-Kornelia and Rohde, Andreas and Z{\"u}hlsdorf, Felix and Winkler, Iris and Laging, Ralf and Peter, Carina and Schween, Michael and H{\"a}rle, Gerhard and Busse, Beatrix and Mahner, Sebastian and K{\"o}stler, Verena and Kufner, Sabrina and M{\"a}gdefrau, Jutta and M{\"u}ller, Christian and Beck, Christina and Kriehuber, Eva and Boch, Florian and Engl, Anna-Teresa and Helzel, Andreas and Pickert, Tina and Reiter, Christian and Blasini, Bettina and Nerdel, Claudia and Lewalter, Doris and Schiffhauer, Silke and Richter-Gebert, J{\"u}rgen and Bannert, Maria and Maahs, Mirjam and Reißner, Maria and Ungar, Patrizia and von Wachter, Jana-Kristin and Hellmann, Katharina and Zaki, Katja and Pohlenz, Philipp}, title = {Koh{\"a}renz in der universit{\"a}ren Lehrerbildung}, editor = {Glowinski, Ingrid and Borowski, Andreas and Gillen, Julia and Schanze, Sascha and von Meien, Joachim}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-438-8}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-414267}, year = {2018}, abstract = {One area that is supported by the project "Qualit{\"a}tsoffensive Lehrerbildung" (funded by BMBF) is the improvement of collaboration and coordination between studies in the discipline, studies in pedagogical content knowledge, and studies in pedagogical knowledge during teacher education at university. Aiming a better coordination among these three parts of teacher education at university, many of the supported projects have designed and realized university-specific approaches. This conference proceedings volume comprises contributions by 15 of these projects. Seven of those were introduced and discussed in workshops on the occasion of two cross-regional project-conferences in Hannover and Potsdam. Overall, the contributions give a theoretically funded as well as a practice-oriented overview of current approaches and concepts to achieve a better connection between study units concerning studies in content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. The volume presents university projects, which take effect on different levels (at the level of curriculum and content, at a collegiate level, at the level of structural conditions of universities). The different approaches are described in a way that they can provide a basis for transfer to other subjects or further universities. The contributions are aimed at teacher educators as well as other actors working in the field of teaching- and quality development at universities. All of them can take transferable ideas and impulses from the described concepts and formats.}, language = {de} } @article{BeckKriehuberBochetal.2018, author = {Beck, Christina and Kriehuber, Eva and Boch, Florian and Engl, Anna-Teresa and Helzel, Andreas and Pickert, Tina and Reiter, Christian and Blasini, Bettina and Nerdel, Claudia}, title = {Vernetzung von Fachwissenschaft, Fachdidaktik, Erziehungswissenschaft und Schulpraxis}, series = {Koh{\"a}renz in der universit{\"a}ren Lehrerbildung}, journal = {Koh{\"a}renz in der universit{\"a}ren Lehrerbildung}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-438-8}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-418670}, pages = {309 -- 330}, year = {2018}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlickeSeebauerHudsonetal.2020, author = {Kuhlicke, Christian and Seebauer, Sebastian and Hudson, Paul and Begg, Chloe and Bubeck, Philip and Dittmer, Cordula and Grothmann, Torsten and Heidenreich, Anna and Kreibich, Heidi and Lorenz, Daniel F. and Masson, Torsten and Reiter, Jessica and Thaler, Thomas and Thieken, Annegret and Bamberg, Sebastian}, title = {The behavioral turn in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications}, series = {WIREs Water}, volume = {7}, journal = {WIREs Water}, number = {3}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {2049-1948}, doi = {10.1002/wat2.1418}, pages = {1 -- 22}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Recent policy changes highlight the need for citizens to take adaptive actions to reduce flood-related impacts. Here, we argue that these changes represent a wider behavioral turn in flood risk management (FRM). The behavioral turn is based on three fundamental assumptions: first, that the motivations of citizens to take adaptive actions can be well understood so that these motivations can be targeted in the practice of FRM; second, that private adaptive measures and actions are effective in reducing flood risk; and third, that individuals have the capacities to implement such measures. We assess the extent to which the assumptions can be supported by empirical evidence. We do this by engaging with three intellectual catchments. We turn to research by psychologists and other behavioral scientists which focus on the sociopsychological factors which influence individual motivations (Assumption 1). We engage with economists, engineers, and quantitative risk analysts who explore the extent to which individuals can reduce flood related impacts by quantifying the effectiveness and efficiency of household-level adaptive measures (Assumption 2). We converse with human geographers and sociologists who explore the types of capacities households require to adapt to and cope with threatening events (Assumption 3). We believe that an investigation of the behavioral turn is important because if the outlined assumptions do not hold, there is a risk of creating and strengthening inequalities in FRM. Therefore, we outline the current intellectual and empirical knowledge as well as future research needs. Generally, we argue that more collaboration across intellectual catchments is needed, that future research should be more theoretically grounded and become methodologically more rigorous and at the same time focus more explicitly on the normative underpinnings of the behavioral turn.}, language = {en} } @misc{KuhlickeSeebauerHudsonetal.2020, author = {Kuhlicke, Christian and Seebauer, Sebastian and Hudson, Paul and Begg, Chloe and Bubeck, Philip and Dittmer, Cordula and Grothmann, Torsten and Heidenreich, Anna and Kreibich, Heidi and Lorenz, Daniel F. and Masson, Torsten and Reiter, Jessica and Thaler, Thomas and Thieken, Annegret and Bamberg, Sebastian}, title = {The behavioral turn in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications}, series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {3}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-51769}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-517696}, pages = {24}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Recent policy changes highlight the need for citizens to take adaptive actions to reduce flood-related impacts. Here, we argue that these changes represent a wider behavioral turn in flood risk management (FRM). The behavioral turn is based on three fundamental assumptions: first, that the motivations of citizens to take adaptive actions can be well understood so that these motivations can be targeted in the practice of FRM; second, that private adaptive measures and actions are effective in reducing flood risk; and third, that individuals have the capacities to implement such measures. We assess the extent to which the assumptions can be supported by empirical evidence. We do this by engaging with three intellectual catchments. We turn to research by psychologists and other behavioral scientists which focus on the sociopsychological factors which influence individual motivations (Assumption 1). We engage with economists, engineers, and quantitative risk analysts who explore the extent to which individuals can reduce flood related impacts by quantifying the effectiveness and efficiency of household-level adaptive measures (Assumption 2). We converse with human geographers and sociologists who explore the types of capacities households require to adapt to and cope with threatening events (Assumption 3). We believe that an investigation of the behavioral turn is important because if the outlined assumptions do not hold, there is a risk of creating and strengthening inequalities in FRM. Therefore, we outline the current intellectual and empirical knowledge as well as future research needs. Generally, we argue that more collaboration across intellectual catchments is needed, that future research should be more theoretically grounded and become methodologically more rigorous and at the same time focus more explicitly on the normative underpinnings of the behavioral turn.}, language = {en} }