The “Ready To Think” Of The Aid In The Primary School : A Comparative Study In Three Different Disciplines

Author(s):

Marlot Corinne(presenting / submitting)Marie Toullec-Thery(presenting)Guylene Motais-Louvel

Conference:

ECER 2012

Network:

27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching

Format:

Paper

Session Information

27 SES 08 A, Parallel Paper Session

Parallel Paper Session

Time:

2012-09-20

09:00-10:30

Room:

ESI 3 - Aula m

Chair:

Gérard Sensevy

Contribution

This presentation proposes the synthesis of a research program which put together nine case studies realised in pre- and primary schools in mathematic, french and science. This program focuses on teaching practices for students with learning difficulties.

Our researches, fixed in Joint Action Theory in Didactic (Sensevy & Mercier, 2007), try to clarify what could be some of the joint action resolutions when the teacher helps his students.

Our previous research works (Marlot 2009 ; Toullec-Théry 2006 & 2009) brought us to consider that the non-specialised aid practices were highly separatist between efficient and non-efficient students. This comparative study tries to point out some of the « ready to think » of the non-specialised aid, in the purpose of enlarging the matter of the learning difficulties to this of the learning inequalities construction (Rochex et Crinon, 2011). Our approach is typically didactic : we consider the knowledge construction in situ.

Our theoretical framework uses the notion of Passive didactic differentiation (Différenciation didactique passive in Sensevy, Maurice, Clanet & Murillo, 2008). This notion indeed points out the fact that the teacher, in the necessity of making the knowledge progress in the time of the class, increases the gaps between the students.

We also lean on a second key notion, the “practical epistemology” (Sensevy, 2006 ; Marlot, 2008, 2009) wich reveals some of the determination of these separatist practices. This “practical epistemology” of the teacher directs the teaching action on the basis of theories wich he joined during his training and work experience. We can see it like a set of elements that could be divided into two distinct categories : (1) the elements wich existed prior the situation of aid (2) the elements wich are selected by the situation itself. Everything happens as if it was certain aspects of the learning situation wich select certains elements of the “practical epistemology”, rather than others. If these various elements guide the choice of the learning situation and the teacher action, they also re-inform the researcher’s didactic analysis in order to point with it some determinations of these separatist learning practices.

Method

The data have been collected and analysed according to a process of inquiry based on an clinical and experimental approach (Leutenneger, 2000). The filmed session is always preceded by a short interview. A second interview allows the teacher to speak in the presence of video, on one or several key- episodes identified by the researcher and the teacher. In order to understand how the teacher progressively adjust the learning environnement i.e the “milieu”, we realize our didactic analysis on a very fine grain, that provides access to the utterance or to the turn to speak. Then, from the discourses of teachers, we seek to capture some of the determinations of their action by identifying the significant elements of their “practical epistemology”. Finally, we perform a comparative analysis in order to understand (1) how each one of the nine teachers guides the low-level students (with wich kind of mobilized practice) (2) the reasons that determine the choice of a practice rather than another.

Expected Outcomes

Comparison of these nine case studies allowed us to point two types of aid posture. In the posture of “caring” teachers want that the students explain themselves their own difficulties. In this posture, the teachers don’t expose necessarily to the students all the resources they would need to achieve the task. In the position of “coach”, teachers implement forms of imitation and repetition of the proper procedure with particular emphasis on “technical”. It seems that for these teachers the desire to “succeed” takes precedence over the desire to “learn”. We then put in light, what we can appoint an effect of illusion ie a delusion. We find that the teachers let the knowledge escape. Whatever is the form of aid, we can observe dominant practices (Bautier, 2006) that act as “ready to think”. The latter contribute to the developpement of a doxa of aid wich cross the teaching profession. This doxa freezes students and teachers in the reproduction of techniques and methods, or even “tricks” or “formula” that provide only an illusive success wich, when repeated, generates a passive didactic differenciation wich ultimately aims to exclude the very people that the situation of aid wanted originally re-include.

References

-Bautier, E. (2006). Le rôle des pratiques des maîtres dans les difficultés scolaires des élèves. Recherche & Formation. N° 51 pp 106-118. -Leutenegger, F. (2000). Construction d’une clinique pour le didactique. Une étude des phénomènes temporels de l’enseignement. Recherche en didactique des mathématiques, 20.2, pp. 209-250. -Marlot, C. (à paraître). Glissement de Jeu d’Apprentissage et capital d’adéquation des élèves : une étude de cas à l’école élémentaire en classe de sciences. In B. Gruson, D. Forest & M. Loquet (Eds.) Jeux de savoir. Rennes : Presses universitaires de Rennes. -Marlot, C. & Toullec-Théry, M. (2011). Caractérisation didactique des gestes de l’aide à l’école élémentaire : une étude comparative de deux cas didactiques limite en mathématiques. Education et didactique. N°2, vol.5.p 129-154. Rennes :PUR -Rochex, J.Y., Crinon, J. (2011). La construction des inégalités scolaires. Au cœur des pratiques et des dispositifs d’enseignement. Rennes : Presses Universitaires de Rennes. -Toullec-Théry, M. (à paraître). Dans le regroupement d’adaptation, existe-t-il des régimes d’attention spécifiques aux maîtres spécialisés à dominante pédagogique? In B. Gruson, D. Forest & M. Loquet (Eds.) Jeux de savoir. Rennes : Presses universitaires de Rennes. -Toullec-Théry, M., Marlot, C. (à paraître). L’aide ordinaire en classe et dans les dispositifs d’Aide Personnalisée à l’école primaire : une approche comparatiste en didactique. In C. Marlot & M. Toullec-Théry (coord.), Diversification des parcours des élèves : pratiques enseignantes et organisations scolaires en question. Recherche En Education. Hors série n°4. -Sensevy, G., Mercier, A. (2007). Agir ensemble : l’action didactique conjointe du professeur et des élèves. Rennes : Presses universitaires de Rennes. -Sensevy, G., Maurice, J.J., Clanet, J. & Murillo, A. (2008). La différenciation didactique passive : un essai de définition et d’illustration. Les Dossiers des Sciences de l’Education, 20, 105-122.

Author Information

Marlot Corinne (presenting / submitting)

University

Science of education / IUFM

Saint-Denis Cedex

Marie Toullec-Thery (presenting)

université de Nantes

science of education

Nantes

Guylene Motais-Louvel

CREAD

BRUZ

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 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.