Abstracts
Résumé
Cet article présente les résultats d’une étude ayant pour objectif la construction et la validation d’une nouvelle échelle de mesure des négociations perçues entre le professeur et ses élèves en éducation physique (ENPEP). La fidélité et la validité de cette échelle ont été vérifiées auprès d’un échantillon de 549 élèves de l’enseignement secondaire supérieur en Belgique francophone. Les résultats révèlent que l’échelle possède une bonne cohérence interne et une structure factorielle conforme au cadre conceptuel postulé. Ce dernier distingue trois formes de négociation : la négociation distributive en faveur du professeur, la négociation distributive en faveur des élèves et la négociation intégrative. Cette échelle constitue un instrument pouvant être utilisé pour étudier l’activité de négociation en éducation physique, ses déterminants et ses effets.
Mots-clés :
- Validation,
- échelle,
- négociations,
- éducation physique
Abstract
This article presents the results of a study dealing with the construction and validation of a new scale measuring perceived negotiations between the pro fessor and his or her students in physical education (PNPES). The assessment of its validity and reliability is based on a sample of 549 secondary school students from French-speaking Belgium. The results reveal that the PNPES has adequate levels of internal consistency and a factorial structure that is coherent with the postulated conceptual framework. This framework distinguishes three forms of negotiation: distributive negotiation in favour of the professor, distributive negotiation in favour of the students and integrative negotiation. This scale constitutes an instrument which can be used to study the activity of negotiation in physical education, its determinants and its effects.
Keywords:
- Validation,
- scale,
- negotiations,
- physical education
Resumo
Este artigo apresenta os resultados de um estudo cujo objectivo era a construção e a validação de uma nova escala de medida da percepção das negociações entre o professor e os seus alunos em Educação Física (ENPEP). a fidelidade e a validade desta escala foram verificadas através de uma amostra de 549 alunos do ensino secundário na Bélgica francófona. os resultados mostram que a escala possui uma boa coerência interna e uma estrutura distributiva conforme o quadro conceptual postulado. Este último distingue três formas de negociação: a negociação distributiva a favor do professor, a negociação distributiva a favor dos alunos e a negociação integrativa. Esta escala constitui um instrumento que pode ser utilizado para estudar os determinantes e os efeitos da actividade de negociação em Educação Física.
Palavras chaves:
- Validação,
- escala,
- negociações,
- educação física
Appendices
Références
- Beersma, B., & De Dreu, C. K.W. (1999). Negotiation processes and outcomes in pro- socially and egoistically motivated groups. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4), 385-402.
- Beersma, B., & De Dreu, C.K.W. (2002). Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups: effects of task structure, decision rule, and social motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(2), 227-252.
- Bellenger, L. (2003). La négociation. Paris: PUF.
- Bertone, S., Méard, J., Flavier, É., Euzet, J.-P., & Durand, M. (2002). Undisciplined actions and teacher-student transactions during two physical education lessons. European Physical Education Review, 8(2), 99-117.
- Bourque, R., & Thuderoz, C. (2002). Sociologie de la négociation. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
- Churchill, G.A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64-73.
- Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
- Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
- Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.
- De Dreu, C.K.W., Beersma, B., Stroebe, K., & Euwema, M.C. (2006). Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(6), 927-943.
- De Dreu, C.K.W., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E.S., & Nauta, A. (2001). A theory- based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 645-668.
- Délivré, F. (2005). Le pouvoir de négocier. Paris: Dunod-InterÉditions.
- Deutsh, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: constructive and destructive processes. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- DeVellis, R.F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
- Dupont, C. (1994). La négociation: conduite, théorie, applications. Paris: Dalloz.
- Durand, C. (2003). L'analyse factorielle et l'analyse de fidélité, notes de cours et exemples. Montréal, Université de Montréal.
- Durand, M. (1996). L'enseignement en milieu scolaire. Paris: PUF.
- Durand, M. (2001). Chronomètre et survêtement: reflets de l'expérience quotidienne d'enseignants d'éducation physique. Paris: Éditions Revue EPS.
- Hastie, P., & Siedentop, D. (1999). An ecological perspective on physical education. European Physical Educational Review, 5(1), 9-29.
- Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
- Hurley, A.E., Scandura, T.A., Schriesheim, C.A., Brannick, M.T., Seers, A., Vandenberg, R.J., & Williams, L.J. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: guidelines, issues, and alternatives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(6), 667-683.
- Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. (2004). LISREL (Version 8.80) [Computer software]: Scientific Software International.
- Kelloway, E.K. (1995). Structural equation modelling in perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(3), 215-224.
- Mannix, E.A., Thompson, L.L., & Bazerman, M.H. (1989). Negotiation in small groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(3), 508-517.
- McDermott, R. (1977). Social relations as contexts for learning in school. Harvard Educational Review, 47(2), 198-213.
- Méard, J., & Bertone, S. (1998). L'autonomie de l'élève et intégration en éducation physique. Paris: PUF.
- Méard, J., & Bertone, S. (2004). Les transactions entre professeurs et élèves à propos des règles en éducation physique. Réflexions et propositions d’outils pour enseigner. In G. Carlier (éd.), Si l'on parlait du plaisir d'enseigner l'éducation physique (pp. 299309). Montpellier: Éditions AFRAPS.
- Neuville, S., Bourgeois, É., & Frenay, M. (2004). Validation d’un instrument de mesure des projets professionnels chez les étudiants en psychologie. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 27(1), 23-49.
- Pruitt, D.G. (1981). Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.
- Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G.A. (2000). A first course in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Roussel, P. (2005). Méthodes de développement d’échelles pour questionnaire d’enquête. In P. Roussel & F. Wacheux (éds), Management des ressources humaines (pp. 245276). Bruxelles: De Boeck université.
- Sarrazin, P., Tessier, D., & Trouilloud, D. (2006). Climat motivationnel instauré par l’enseignant et implication des élèves en classe: l’état des recherches. Revue française de pédagogie, 157, 147-177.
- Segard, J.-M. (2000). La négociation, à l’interface du projet professionnel et du projet éducatif. Les cahiers EPS de l'académie de Nantes, 22, 38-40.
- Siedentop, D. (1994). Apprendre à enseigner l'éducationphysique. Montréal: Gaëtan Morin Éditeur.
- Siedentop, D. (2002). Ecological perspectives in teaching research. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21, 427-440.
- Strauss, A. (1992). La trame de la négociation (traduit par I. Baszanger). Paris: L’Harmattan.
- Streiner, D.L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha end internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99-103.
- Sullivan, B.A., O’Connor, K.M., & Burris, E.R. (2006). Negotiator confidence: the impact of self-efficacy on tactics and outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 567-581.
- Vallerand, R.J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M.P. Zanna (éd.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 29, pp. 271 - 360). New York: Academic Press.
- Van de Vliert, E. (1997). Complex interpersonal conflict behavior. London: Psychology Press.
- Walton, R.E., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J.E., & McKersie, R.B. (1994). Strategic negotiations. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
- Walton, R.E., & McKersie, R.B. (1991). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations: an analysis of a social interaction system. Ithaca: ILR Press.
- Walton, R.E., & McKersie, R.B. (2007). Négociations sociales en relations internationales et pour les droits civiques. Négociations, 1, 123-162.