The pandemic brings institutions into crisis by modifying practices that until then structured the social bond. The various devices for remote learning established in order to maintain pedagogical continuity have been as much objects of experience as of reflection in the field of educational sciences. Since they modify the symbolic coordinates of this structural place that is education, we will explore what are the repercussions of a pedagogical situation brought about by videoconference on the involvement of the students' social bond. If, after Arendt, we consider the crisis as a structural condition of the subject and of society, how can we move away from productivist imperatives? How can an understanding of the phantasmatic life of students in remote learning situations shed light on the specificity of the current crisis, on processes inherent in the educational situation and on contemporary educational issues? We will explore the articulation of the social demand, as it manifests, with the individual position of students, revealing unconscious concerns. We will analyze and writings from a remote learning pedagogical experience with students in their 2nd year pursuing a Bachelor in Education, devoted to the presentation of clinical cases on education drawn from the psychoanalytical literature. The reconfiguration of paradoxical modes of presence/absence and the ways to preserve the bond will lead us to address the place of the body, of fantasy and intersubjectivity in the educational relationship. We will see how the latter is damaged by the limitation of identification possibilities, of transferential dynamics or of cathexis in informal spaces as defined by Roussillon. We will also point out how this device crystallizes the phantasmatic preoccupations of students on image and gaze in the pedagogical situation. Indeed, education becomes a possible scene where the subject imagines himself being looked at, as expressed by Lacan, referring to Merleau Ponty to emphasize the function of vision In that sense, we will consider the teacher's place as the one who looks, since by addressing the student he recognizes him, and is also looked at, with whom one can identify, on whom one can project one's own affects and then, who arouses curiosity. By apprehending training as a space of transformation, we will try to answer the following questions: through this crisis, are the social and institutional demands the same as the students’ individual concerns? How can we make them heard? How can we respond to them?

Agamben, G. (2008). Qu’est-ce que le contemporain ? Paris : Payot & Rivages. Agamben, G. (2015). Usage des corps. Paris : Seuil. Arendt, H. (1961) Between Past and Future. London: Penguin Classics. Foucault, M. (1969). The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Vintage. Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. Penguin Classics, 2014 Lacan, J. (1966). Écrits. Paris : Seuil. Lacan, J. (1964/1973). Les quatre concepts fondamentaux de la psychanalyse. Paris : Seuil. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The visible and the invisible. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Roussillon R., 1987. Espaces et pratiques institutionnelles. Le débarras et l’interstice. In : R. Kaës (Eds). L’institution et les institutions (pp.157-178). Paris : Dunod.