The respective curricula for compulsory school in French-speaking Switzerland and German-speaking Switzerland now require teachers to (a) implement a competency-based approach in all subjects, and (b) integrate the development of "life skills" into their subject teaching (Cronin et al., 2020). It is in this context of change that PROJEPS/PROJEBS emerged, a second-generation didactic engineering project (Perrin-Glorian, 2011) aimed at the collective creation, experimentation and publication of curricular resources in physical education (PE). In line with recent initiatives aiming to harmonise training and teaching practices in PE in the two main linguistic regions of the country (e.g., Hayoz et al., 2021), this project is situated at the interface of different epistemologies and linguistic cultures. It mobilises three groups of participants with distinct profiles and mandates: (a) a steering group composed of five experts with a researcher/teacher trainer profile, whose mandate is to supervise and assess the creation and publication of the curriculum resources, (b) a group of drafters composed of five bilingual pairs of drafters with a teacher trainer/teacher profile, whose mandate is to create resources with reference to different physical activities and grades, and (c) a group of experimenters composed of volunteer teachers who are responsible for experimenting with the resources produced and providing feedback to the drafters on this experimentation. The challenge is therefore to publish curricular resources that meet the requirements of both the curriculum for French-speaking Switzerland and the curriculum for German-speaking Switzerland, and that are suitable for all types of teachers who teach PE in compulsory schools (generalists and specialists, depending on the cantons).

The theoretical background of this study is based on the didactic engineering framework (Artigue, 2002; Perrin-Glorian, 2011). In the early 80s, didactic engineering was presented as a research methodology that could bring up didactic phenomena under controlled conditions as close as possible to the normal functioning of a class. Didactic engineering for development and training is a second-generation didactic engineering which deals with two dimensions. At a first level, it is a question of testing the theoretical validity of the curriculum resources produced and identifying the essential properties of the engineering. At a second level, it is a question of studying the adaptability of these curriculum resources to ordinary teaching. Indeed, in didactic engineering approaches, it is common for the produced curricular resources to be reinterpreted by their users, with the risk that their learning potential is reduced (Perrin-Glorian, 2011; Lenzen et al., 2022).

This contribution aims to study the collaboration between participants at three stages of the didactic engineering process: (a) within a pair of drafters during the drafting of a curricular resource in badminton for pupils of 7-8H (10 to 12 years old), consisting of a scholastic form of practice (SFP – Mascret & Dhellemmes, 2011) and some learning situations; (b) between this pair of drafters and their assigned expert from the steering group; and (c) between this pair of drafters and four experimenters. It focuses more specifically on the negotiations and compromises between these participants and their consequences in terms of the evolution of the resources produced and the teaching of PE.

The following traces of this collaborative process were analysed: successive versions of the targeted curricular resource; notes of the working sessions between the drafters and the expert; written feedback from the experimenters; focus group with the pair of drafters. The analysis consisted, firstly, in identifying, at each of the three levels of the process, a significant critical incident, defined in the context of collaborative research as "an event [...] that proves to be significant for the subject and for the people with whom this subject interacts in his or her professional space; this event [...] is perceived as being able to change the course of things" (Leclerc et al., 2010, p. 17, our translation). In the context of this study, a critical incident is considered significant if it either results in an evolution of the targeted curricular resource or leads to a modification of the teaching practice in PE. At the third level of the process (experimentation), we finally selected two critical incidents, respectively corresponding to the two criteria mentioned above. In a second step, the traces corresponding to the selected critical incidents were analysed in depth to describe the effects of the collaboration in terms of the content of the curricular resource produced and/or the characteristics of the teaching practice resulting from the use of this resource.

At the first level of the didactic engineering process, the drafter in charge of the draft of the resource had imagined a SFP based on Shuttle Time (Swiss Badminton, 2022), including times of collective play, opposition play as well as technical workshops. This draft was considered too heterogeneous by the second drafter. During a working session, the drafters referred to the definition of the competency-based approach and to the recommendations of the steering group to refocus the SFP on a competency in the opposition play. At the second level, the expert still considered the SFP to be too heterogeneous and complex. The drafters and the expert clarified what the FPS should aim to achieve and the meaning of the roles assigned to the pupils. Confronted with their own professional epistemologies (Amade-Escot, 2014), the three partners finally agreed on a SFP ready for experimentation. At the third level, two critical incidents deserve to be developed. The first concerns the modification of the teaching practice of an experimenter in the direction of a lower topogenetic posture (Loquet, 2007), more likely to contribute to the development of "life skills" (e.g., learning strategies, reflective practice), as illustrated by this written feedback: “I have a lot of time to observe the pupils […], I am forced to respect the 4’ timing without speaking, interrupting, intervening (very interesting and formative for me)”. The second critical incident lies in the simplification of the SFP following the observation of the experimenters that there were too many forms to fill in and too many indicators for the pupils to observe during the matches. This feedback from the experimenters led the drafters, in agreement with their assigned expert, to eliminate the doubles matches and keep only the singles matches, which reduced the teaching content and simplified the pupils’ observation task.

Amade-Escot, C. (2014). De la nécessité d’une observation didactique pour accéder à l’épistémologie pratique des professeurs. Recherches en éducation, 19, 18-29. https://doi.org/10.4000/ree.8284 Artigue, M. (2002). Didactical engineering as a framework for the conception of teaching products. In R. Biehler, R.W. Scholz, R. Sträßer and B. Winkelmann (Eds.), Didactics of mathematics as a scientific discipline (pp. 27-39). New York: Kluwer Academics Publishers. Cronin, L., Marchant, D., Johnson, L., Huntley, E., Kosteli, M.C., Varga, J., & Ellison, P. (2020). Life skills development in physical education: A self-determination theory-based investigation across the school term. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101711. Hayoz, C., Lanthemann, N., Patelli, G. & Grossrieder, G. (Eds.) (2021). Apprendre et enseigner l’éducation physique. Repères didactiques pour une approche par compétences/Kompetenzorientiertes Lernen und Lehren im Bewegungs- und Sportunterricht. Le Mont-sur-Lausanne : Éditions LEP. Leclerc, C., Bourassa, B. & Filteau, O. (2010). Utilisation de la méthode des incidents critiques dans une perspective d’explicitation, d’analyse critique et de transformation des pratiques professionnelles. Éducation et francophonie, 38(1), 11-32. https://doi.org/10.7202/039977ar Lenzen, B., Barthe, C., Cordoba, A., Deriaz, D., Poussin, B., Pürro, C., Saillen, l., Suter, Y. & Voisard, N. (2022). Merging observational and interview data to study and improve the adaptibility of the products of didactic engineering to ordinary teaching in physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 27(2), 186-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.1999917 Loquet, M. (2007). Les techniques didactiques du professeur. In C. Amade-Escot (Ed.), Le didactique (pp. 49-62). Paris : Éditions Revue EP.S. Mascret, N. & Dhellemmes, R. (2011). Culture sportive et culture scolaire des APSA. In M. Travert & N. Mascret (Eds.), La culture sportive (pp. 99-115). Paris : Éditions EP&S. Perrin-Glorian, M.-J. (2011). L’ingénierie didactique à l’interface de la recherche avec l’enseignement. Développement de ressources et formation des enseignants. In C. Margolinas, M. Abboud-Blanchard, L. Bueno-Ravel & N. Douek (Eds.), En amont et en aval des ingénieries didactiques (pp. 57-78). Grenoble : La Pensée sauvage. Swiss Badminton (2022). Shuttle Time Switzerland. Retrieved September 6, 2022, from https://shuttletime.ch.