2002
DOI: 10.1080/14926150209556538
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Le système complexe et cohérent des pratiques des enseignants de mathématiques: Une double approche

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
37

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
18
0
37
Order By: Relevance
“…For general analysis (macro), we used mainly the following three dimensions: a) The structure of lessons (Borko, Stecher, Alonz, Moncure, & McClam, 2005) or what other researchers call episodes (Robert & Rogalski, 2002) or didactic phases : a description of the sequence of the key moments in order to shed light on the logic of the course. The identification of these moments is based, on one hand, on the pre-recording interviews: during these interviews, the teacher is asked to describe the key moments of the course and their sequence (Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For general analysis (macro), we used mainly the following three dimensions: a) The structure of lessons (Borko, Stecher, Alonz, Moncure, & McClam, 2005) or what other researchers call episodes (Robert & Rogalski, 2002) or didactic phases : a description of the sequence of the key moments in order to shed light on the logic of the course. The identification of these moments is based, on one hand, on the pre-recording interviews: during these interviews, the teacher is asked to describe the key moments of the course and their sequence (Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, one of the three dimensions considered in the research of Robert & Rogalski (2002) has to do with student activities in the classroom: the tasks they are given related to the acquisition of content; the forms of student work (individual, large group, teams); and the nature of interactions with the teacher. Campbell & Erdogan (2005) have analyzed student actions in the science classroom; Chin (2006Chin ( , 2007 and Erdogan & Campbell (2008) have studied interactions in science class between the students and the teacher, with a focus on questions and feedback; Tiberghien & Malkoon (2007) and Tiberghien, Malkoun, Buty, Souassy, & Mortimer (2007) have specifically devoted their research to analyzing the knowledge addressed in physics class on different time scales, as well as the relationship between teaching practices and what students learn, by using the notion of facets of knowledge (Minstrell, 1992;Ohlsson, 1996).…”
Section: Teaching Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…La double approche didactique et ergonomique (Robert et Rogalski, 2002, 2005 est un cadre qui permet d'analyser les pratiques enseignantes en tenant compte du fait que ces pratiques visent non seulement l'apprentissage des élèves, mais aussi une réponse à des volontés ou à des contraintes personnelles ou professionnelles des enseignants. Les aides que l'enseignant propose en classe font partie de sa pratique professionnelle.…”
Section: La Double Approche Didactique Et Ergonomique Des Pratiques Eunclassified
“…Mais ces mêmes travaux montrent également une certaine stabilité de ces pratiques en ce qui concerne l'organisation temporelle, les conditions de passation des consignes et les interactions maître-élèves. De nombreux travaux récents cherchent désormais à caractériser les pratiques enseignantes non plus à partir de pratiques isolées, mais plutôt à partir de configurations relati vement stables (Butlen, Masselot & Pézard, 2003 ;Clanet, 2005Clanet, , 2007 ; Pariès, Robert & Rogalski, 2008 ;Robert & Rogalski, 2002).…”
Section: Contenu Des Actions Verbalesunclassified