Proxemic Analysis in Didactics
Author(s):
Conference:
ECER 2008
Format:
Paper

Session Information

27 SES 09A, Studies of Interaction & Communication

Paper Session

Time:
2008-09-12
10:30-12:00
Room:
B3 316
Chair:
Kirsti Klette

Contribution

This paper reports on an investigation of non-verbal practices by primary school teachers. Following Bateson (1951), we suggest that non verbal practices are privileged ways to specify relationship in interactions. To describe classroom situations and teacher's actions, we have used concepts from didactics of mathematics (Brousseau, 1998 ; Chevallard, 1992 ; Sensevy, Mercier, Schubauer-Leoni, 2000), as they are elaborated in the Joint Action Theory (Sensevy & Mercier, 2007 ; Sensevy, 2008 ) and from anthropology (Mauss, 1936 ; Bateson, ibid ; Hall, 1963, 1966). Our description of non-verbal behaviors takes support on the proxemic theory (Hall, ibid), which is based on human perception of space. Proxemic theory allow us to consider teacher et student's behaviors with concepts of “distance” and “territory”, rather than “signal” (Shannon & Weaver, 1948), within an “orchestral” approach rather than a “telegraphic” approach (Winkin, 2000). Our basic hypothesis is : « what is close, for me, is more important than what is remote ». Didactic and Joint Action Theory allow us to consider proxemic adjustments in teacher's practices by taking into consideration subject matter content and learning-teaching stakes. These didactic and proxemic conceptual tools have been used to analyze classroom situations and teacher's actions, most of them in the first year of French primary school. They form the background of a specific methodology for video-data analysis, that aims at showing how teachers use proxemic techniques as an important part of didactic relationship. In this paper, we attempt to show the main characteristics of this methodology, which is based on « no-sound video watching » (Forest, 2006). We present some results of the study through two empirical examples. The first example is a compilation of dynamics patterns that we named « didactic self-effacement ». We observed these patterns with different teachers, and we explore the idea that they contribute to the management of joint-attention (Eilan, 2005). The second example is an interaction study of a short moment of teaching and learning, occurring in a reading lesson about verbal forms. This example reveals the way in which the body language techniques are used in synergy with other techniques, such as involving material or language-based ones. We envisage in conclusion epistemological implications of this type of integrated analysis for communication studies, around some concepts as fitting ( [agencement] Deleuze & Guattari, 1980), and analogic-digital distinction (Bateson, ibid ; Wilder, 1998), in order to provide a better understanding of the semiosis process analyzed in the Joint Action Theory descriptions.

Method

Video analysis, no-sound video watching, proxemic analysis, didactic analysis

Expected Outcomes

epistemological implications of this type of analysis for communication studies.

References

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford university press Bateson, G., Ruesh, J. (1951). Communication. The social Matrix of Psychiatry. New York: Norton & Company. Birdwhistell, R. (1952). Introduction to Kinesics. Louisville: University of Kentucky Press. Brousseau, G. (1986). La relation didactique : le milieu. Actes de la 4ème école d'été de didactique des mathématiques, 2/3, 54-68. Paris: IREM Paris 7Brousseau, G. (1998). Théorie des situations didactiques. Grenoble: La Pensée sauvage. Brousseau, G., Warfield, V. (1999). "Gaël case". The journal of mathematical behavior, vol 18, issue 1, 7-52. Chevallard, Y. (1992). Concepts fondamentaux de la didactique : perspectives apportées par une approche anthropologique. Recherches en didactique des mathématiques, 12/1, 73-112. Deleuze, G., Guattari, F. (1980). "Of the Refrain". In A Thousand Plateaus, 310-350 (Brian Massumi, trad.). Minneapolis: University Of Minnesota Press Eilan, N., Hoerl C., McCormack T., Roessler J. [dir] (2005). Joint Attention : Communication and Other Minds. Oxford: OUP. Forest, D. (2006). "Analyse proxémique d’interactions didactiques". Carrefour de l’Education, 21, 73-94 Hall, E. T. (1963). "A system for a notation of proxemic Behavior". American Anthropologist, 65, 1003-1026. Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New-York: Doubleday. Mauss, M. (1936/1997). Sociologie et Anthropologie. Paris: PUF Sensevy, G., Mercier, A. [dir.] (2007). Agir ensemble, l'action didactique conjointe du professeur et des élèves. Rennes: PUR. Sensevy, G. (2008). The Joint Action Theory: An Outline. Seminar at the University of Örebro, Sweden, January. Shannon, C.E., Weaver, W. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, pp. 379-423 and 623-656. Watzlawick, P., Helmick-Beavin, J., Jackson, D.D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication. New-York: Norton. Wilder, C. (1998). Being Analog. In A. Berger (ed.) The Postmodern Presence. London: Sage. Winkin, Y. (2000). La nouvelle communication. Paris: Seuil. Wittgenstein, L.(1953/2001). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

Author Information

CREAD Rennes2-IUFM de Bretagne
BREST
72

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.