In educational research in the social sciences, little attention has been focused – until quite recently - on the circulation of knowledge between various professional actors, despite the fact that most educational institutions are seen nowadays as places where multiple local initiatives meet and outside partners intervene. We assume that such areas of professional transactions become particularly visible when pedagogical and educational expertise come together with types of knowledge from other sectors. We wish to examine the mechanisms of transposition and reappropriation, competition and cooperation, as well as tactical choices leading to a selection of knowledge or withholding of information.

With this in view, we have chosen to study the field of inclusive education in France. Given that the objective of inclusive education has been reasserted in educational policy (Loi d'orientation et de programmation pour la Refondation de l'école de la République, 2013), what are the effects on the regulation of educational intervention? Which types of knowledge are prioritized? How do different professions belonging to different sectors (education, health, social work, etc.) share information on pupils and students, given the incentive to work in partnership?

In this research, four fields of investigation are in comparison, ranging from agitated children in nursery school to dyslexic students at university level. The paper will, however, focus only on one of them, that is the relationship between teachers and speech and language therapists around primary and secondary school-aged pupils with specific language difficulties (dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia etc.). In France, speech and language therapists are a paramedical profession and play a considerable part in the provision for children with written and spoken language difficulties. Therefore, they work on skills that are taught at school by ordinary class-teachers. It has been observed in previous field-studies that relationships between teachers and speech and language therapists are often complex and that professional secrecy is a major hindrance to knowledge circulation. Not only is professional secrecy a rhetorical argument used by speech and language therapists, it also affects actual practice.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how professional identities may restrict or impede communication and the sharing of information, despite institutionalized forms of partnership. The research is carried out in a sociological perspective and incorporates contributions from the sociology of education, the sociology of profession and social policy.

BERNSTEIN, B. (1971). Open schools, open society? In COSIN B. R. et al (eds). School and society: a sociological reader. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 66-69. FREIDSON E. (1970). Profession of medicine. A study of the sociology of applied knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. MERINI C. (1999). Le partenariat en formation : de la modélisation à une application. Paris : L’Harmattan. MOREL S. (2014). La médicalisation de l’échec scolaire. Paris : La Dispute. TARDIF M. & LEVASSEUR L. (2010). La division du travail éducatif. Une perspective nord-américaine. Paris : PUF SIMMEL G. (1906). “The Sociology of Secrecy and of the Secret Societies”, American Journal of Sociology, 11(1906), p. 441-498 FÉRONI I. (2000). « L’identité infirmière vue par ses élites. Pièges et limites d’une rhétorique professionnelle ». In G. Cresson & F.-X. Schweyer, Professions et institutions de santé face à l’organisation du travail. Aspects sociologiques. Rennes : Presses de l’EHESP, p. 31-36.