27 SES 09 B, Tools for Studying Teaching Practices
We present one episode in an engineering process at primary school level in mathematics. We observe the co-elaboration between teachers and researchers of learning sequences in first grade. This programme is for the building of basic numerical capacities of six-year-old pupils. It is part of a design-based research: Arithmetic and Comprehension at Elementary School (ACE), which has the particularity of being a cooperative engineering. Sensevy, Forest, Quilio and Morales (2013) describe it as an iterative structure which is founded on a principle of symmetry between teachers and researchers. There are not those ‘who act’ and those ‘who think’; all the participants are necessarely involved in the conceptual work. Both teachers and researchers have to work together on the knowledge at stake, and share common ends and means as regards the learning of pupils. The authors present some fundamental issues: (i) teachers and researchers have to share their raisons d’être, making explicit their relationship to the knowledge system at stake, both for themselves and the group, and they do this in order to build a common design rationale. (ii) A common vocabulary and a common background must be constructed. (iii) By transforming practice, i.e. by implementing learning sequences, understanding is acquired which results in transforming pratice anew, and so one. As in the lesson studies (Miyakawa & Winsløw, 2009), the relevance of the used strategies and each point of the cooperative engineering are assessed by the group.
This research is being implemented for the third school year (2013-2014) with 120 French experimental classes, but the process of this engineering began earlier in 2011-2012. During this first year, one initial group (termed sphère 1), composed of researchers in mathematics education, PhD students, teacher trainers and four study-class’ teachers, had to design a curriculum in order to enable the pupils to build a first-hand relationship to the system of knowledge at stake. In this way, the initial elaborated situations were implemented in the four study-classes. A second group (termed sphère 2), composed of 60 teachers, experimented the engineering the following year (2012-2013). Both of the two groups met regulary in a training session to work out together and redesign the implementation process of the curriculum during the course of the engineering project. The third year, 60 new teachers joined the group and in turn experimented the engineering. During these three years a thought collective (Fleck, 1981) was constructed in this way.
Our study concerns 14 teachers and a researcher from Marseille, who composed one sub-group. We will try to show one moment of this sub-group’s work and we will consider how teachers who experimented this project for the first time reflect with the researcher on a didactic object. We will attempt to clarify the nature of the cooperative work.
Fleck, L. (1981). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago : University of Chicago Press. Glock, H.-J. (1996). A Wittgenstein dictionary. Oxford : Blackwell publishers. Miyakawa, T. & Winsløw, C. (2009). Un dispositif japonais pour le travail en équipe d’enseignants : étude collective d’une leçon. Education & didactique, 3(1), 77-90. Sensevy, G. (2012). About the Joint Action Theory in Didactics. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 15, 503-516. Sensevy, G., Forest, D., Quilio, S. & Morales, G. (2013). Cooperative engineering as a specific design-based research. ZDM, 45(7), 1031-1043.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.