Abstracts
Résumé
Cet article vise à circonscrire, d’un point de vue structural, les principes relationnels qui balisent le champ scientifique du partenariat école-famille-communauté. L’analyse lexicométrique d’une série de définitions de ce concept met en évidence ses logiques d’usage. S’y rattache un ensemble d’antinomies repérées dans les discours scientifiques que nous circonscrivons. L’identification des dimensions structurales de ceux-ci met en évidence le caractère monolithique du champ scientifique du partenariat école-famille-communauté et nous amène à proposer une articulation entre ce concept et celui d’engagement parental.
Mots-clés :
- Partenariat école-famille-communauté,
- collaboration école-famille-communauté,
- engagement parental,
- discours,
- champ scientifique,
- antinomie,
- réductionnisme,
- contexte
Abstract
This article aims to identify, from a structural point of view, the relational principles that guide the scientific field of school-family-community partnership. The lexicometric analysis of a series of definitions on this concept shows its logical use. Multiple antinomies were identified in the scientific discourse that we circumscribed. The identification of these contradictions’ structural dimensions highlights the monolithic character of the school-family-community partnership scientific field and leads us to suggest a link between this concept and that of parental engagement.
Keywords:
- School-family-community partnership,
- school-family-community collaboration,
- parental engagement,
- discourse,
- scientific field,
- antinomy,
- reductionism,
- context
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Arum, R. (2000). « Schools and Communities: Ecological and Institutional Dimensions », Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 26, p. 395-418.
- Atkinson, R. (1999). « Discourses of Partnership and Empowerment in Contemporary British Urban Regeneration », Urban Studies, vol. 36, no 1, p. 59-72.
- Auerbach, S. (2007). « From Moral Supporters to Struggling Advocates: Reconceptualizing Parent Roles in Education Through the Experience of Working-Class Families of Color », Urban Education, vol. 42, no 3, p. 250-283.
- Baker, A.J.L, et L. Soden (1998). « Parent Involvement Research: Concerns, Challenges, and Conclusions », ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban and Minority Education Digest, p. 134.
- Becker, H.J., et J.L. Epstein (1982). « Parent Involvement: A Survey of Teacher Practices », Elementary School Journal, vol. 83, no 2, p. 85-102.
- Benzécri, J.-P., et al. (1980). Pratique de l’analyse des données. Analyse des correspondances : exposé élémentaire, Paris, Dunod.
- Bernstein, B. (2007). Pédagogie, contrôle symbolique et identité. Théorie, recherche, critique, Québec, Presses de l’Université Laval.
- Boulanger, D. (2014sp). « L’écosystémie sous l’angle des discours : mise en perspective de l’approche de Bronfenbrenner », Nouvelles Pratiques Sociales, vol. 26, no 2.
- Boulanger, D. (2014). « Un espace dialogique au coeur du développement scientifique du chercheur », Revue canadienne des jeunes chercheur(e)s et chercheurs en éducation, vol. 1, p. 1-5. Éditorial.
- Boulanger, D., et F. Larose (2013). « School-Family-Community Collaboration Mediated by Artifacts: Action Plans in a Canadian Intervention Program », Congrès de l’American Educational Research Association (AERA), San Francisco, 27 avril-1er mai, Actes du colloque accessibles sur le site de l’AERA.
- Boulanger, D., F. Larose, S. Larivée, Y. Couturier, C. Merini, F. Blain et V. Cusson (2011). « Critique des fondements et usages de l’écosystémie dans le domaine du partenariat école-famille-communauté : application d’une perspective contextuelle et socioculturelle dans le cadre du programme Famille, école, communauté, réussir ensemble », Service Social, vol. 56, no 3, p. 77-95.
- Bourdieu, P., et M. de Saint-Martin (1975). « Les catégories de l’entendement professoral », Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, vol. 1, no 3, p. 68-93.
- Bourdieu, P. (1976). « Le champ scientifique », Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, vol. 2, nos 2-3, p. 88-104.
- Bower, H.A., et D. Griffin (2011). « Can the Epstein Model of Parental Involvement Work in a High-Minority, High-Poverty Elementary School? A Case Study », Professional School Counseling, vol. 15, no 2, p. 77-87.
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and designs. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
- Cairney, T.H. (1994). « Family literacy: Moving towards new partnerships in education », Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, vol. 17, no 4, p. 262-275.
- Christenson, S.L. (1995). « Families and Schools: What is the Role of the School Psychologist? », School Psychology Quarterly, vol. 10, no 2, p. 118-132.
- Crozier, G., et J. Davies (2007). « Hard to reach parents or hard to reach schools? A discussion of homeschool relations, with particular reference to Bangladeshi and Pakistani parents », British Educational Research Journal, vol. 33, no 3, p. 295-313.
- David, M. (1993). Parents and education, gender and reform, Cambridge (UK) et Cambridge (MA), Polity Press.
- Doucet, F. (2011). « (Re)Constructing Home and School: Immigrant Parents, Agency, and the (Un)Desirability of Bridging Multiple Worlds », Teachers College Record, vol. 113, no 12, p. 2705-2738.
- Driessen, G., F. Smit, et P. Sleegers (2005). « Parental involvement and educational achievement », British Educational Research Journal, vol. 31, no 4, p. 509-532.
- Edwards, R., et P. Alldred (2000). « A Typology of Parental Involvement in Education Centring on Children and Young People: negotiating familialisation, institutionalisation and individualisation », British Journal of Sociology of Education, vol. 21, no 3, p. 435-455.
- Edwards, A., et J. Warin (1999). « Parental involvement in raising the achievement of primary school pupils: Why bother? », Oxford Review of Education, vol. 25, no 3, p. 325-341.
- Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research, Helsinki, Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
- Epstein, J.L. (1987). « Toward a theory of family-school connections: Teacher practices and parent involvement », in K. Hurrelmann, F. Kaufmann et F. Lösel (dir.), Social Intervention: Potential and Constraints, New York (NY), De Gruyter, p. 121-136.
- Epstein, J.L. (1995). « School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share », Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 76, no 9, p. 701-712.
- Epstein, J.L. (2010). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Preparing Educators and Improving Schools, Boulder (CO), Westview Press, 2e édition.
- Epstein, J.L., et J.H. Hollifield (1996). « Title I and School-Family-Community Partnerships: Using Research to Realize the Potential », Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, vol. 1, no 3, p. 263-278.
- Fernandez, G. (2010). Abriendo Caminos para la Educaciόn: A Case Study of a Parent Outreach Initiative Building on the Knowledge, Skills, and Resources of the Latina/o Community, thèse de doctorat, University of California, Santa Barbara (CA).
- Fortin, M.-F., J. Côté et F. Filion (2006). Fondements et étapes du processus de recherche, Montréal, Chenelière éducation.
- Gergen, K.J. et M.M. Gergen (1986). « Narrative form and the construction of psychological science », in T. Sarbin (dir.), Narrative Psychology: The Storied Nature of Human Conduct, New York (NY), Praeger, p. 22-44.
- Graue, M.E. (1998). « Representing Relationship Between Parents and Schools: Making Visible the Force of Theory », communication présentée au colloque « Reconceptualizing Early Chidhood Conference », Honolulu (HI).
- Graue, M.E. (2005). « Theorizing and Describing Preservice Teachers’ Images of Families and Schooling », Teachers College Record, vol. 107, no 1, p. 157-185.
- Graue, M.E., J. Kroeger et D. Prager (2001). « A Bakhtinian analysis of particular home-school relations », American Educational Research Journal, vol. 38, no 3, p. 467-498.
- Grenon, V. (2000). Méthodes factorielles en statistique textuelle: application à l’analyse du discours en matière d’informatique scolaire au Québec, mémoire, Faculté d’éducation, Université de Sherbrooke.
- Grignon, C., et J.-C. Passeron (1989). Le savant et le populaire. Misérabilisme et populisme en sociologie et en littérature, Paris, Seuil.
- Gutiérrez, K., et B. Rogoff (2003). « Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertories of practices », Educational Researcher, vol. 32, p. 19-25
- Gutiérrez, K. (2008). « Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space », Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 43, no 2, p. 148-164.
- Haynes, N., et M. Ben-Avie (1996). « Parents as full partners in education », in A. Booth et J.F. Dunn (dir.), Family-School Links: How Do They Affect Educational Outcomes?, Mahwah (NJ), Lawrence Erlbaum, p. 45-55.
- Hill, N.E., et L.C. Taylor (2004). « Parental school involvement and children’s academic achievement: Pragmatics and issues », Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 13, no 4, p. 161-164.
- Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., et H.M. Sandler (1997). « Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? », Review of Educational Research, vol. 67, no 1, p. 3-42.
- Jodelet, D. (2008). « Le mouvement de retour vers le sujet et l’approche des représentations sociales », Connexions, no 89, p. 25-46.
- Kratochwill, T.R., et K.E. Hoagwood (2005). « Evidence-Based Parent and Family Interventions in School Psychology: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations in Advancing Best Practices », School Psychology Quarterly, vol. 20, no 4, p. 504-511.
- Lareau, A. (1996). « Assessing parent involvement in schooling: A critical analysis », in A. Booth et J.F. Dunn (dir.), Family-School Links: How Do They Affect Educational Outcomes?, Mahwah (NJ), Lawrence Erlbaum, p. 57-64.
- Lareau, A., et E. McNamara Horvat (1999). « Moments of Social Inclusion and Exclusion. Race, Class, and Cultural Capital in Family-school Relationships », Sociology of Education, vol. 72, no 1, p. 37-53.
- Lareau, A., et V. Lopes Muñoz (2012). « “You’re Not Going to Call the Shots”: Structural Conflicts between the Principal and the PTO at a Suburban Public Elementary School », Sociology of Education, vol. 85, no 3, p. 201-218.
- Larose, F., Y. Couturier, J. Bédard et S. Charrette (2011). « Entre discipline et profession: la question des bonnes pratiques guidées par les résultats probants de la recherche (evidence based practice) en formation à l’enseignement », Les sciences de l’éducation pour l’Ère nouvelle, vol. 44, no 2, p. 31-48.
- Lawrence-Lightfoot, S.L. (1978). Worlds Apart: Relationships Between Families and Schools, New York (NY), Basic Books.
- Leimdorfer, F., et A. Salem (1995). « Usages de la lexicométrie en analyse de discours », Cahiers des sciences humaines, vol. 31, no 1, p. 131-143.
- Lightfoot, D. (2004). « “Some Parents Just Don’t Care”: Decoding the Meanings of Parental Involvement in Urban Schools », Urban Education, vol. 39, no 1, p. 91-107.
- Lott, B. (2001). « Low-income parents and the public schools », Journal of Social Issues, vol. 57, no 2, p. 247-259.
- Mattingly, D.J., R. Prislin, T.L. McKenzie, J.L. Rodriguez et B. Kayzar (2002). « Evaluating evaluations: The case of parent involvement programs », Review of Educational Research, vol. 72, no 4, p. 549-576.
- Moll, L.C., et S. Diaz (1987). « Change as the goal of educational research », Anthropology and Education Quarterly, no 18, p. 300-311.
- Moll, L.C. (1997). « The Creation of Mediating Settings », Mind, Culture, and Activity, vol. 4, no 3, p. 191-199.
- Moles, O.C. (1996). « New national directions in research and policy », in A. Booth et J.F. Dunn (dir.), Family-School Links: How Do They Affect Educational Outcomes?, Mahwah (NJ), Lawrence Erlbaum, p. 247-254.
- Montandon, C. (1996). « Les relations des parents avec l’école », Lien social et Politiques, no 35, p. 63-73.
- Moscovici, S., et G.L. Vignaux (2000). « The Concept of Themata », in S. Moscovici et G. Duveen (dir.), Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology, Londres, Polity Press, p. 156-183
- Nakagawa, K. (2000). « Unthreading the Ties That Bind: Questioning the Discourse of Parent Involvement », Educational Policy, vol. 14, no 4, p. 443-472.
- Ogbu, J.U. (1992). « Adaptation to minority status and impact on school success », Theory into Practice, vol. 31, no 4, p. 287-295.
- Overton, W.F. (1998). « Developmental psychology: philosophy, concepts, and methodology », in W. Damon et R.M. Lerner (dir.), Handbook of Child Psychology, 6e édition, Hoboken (NJ), John Wiley and Sons, p. 107-188
- Price-Mitchell, M. (2009). « Boundary dynamics: Implications for Building Parent-School Partnerships », School Community Journal, vol. 19, no 2, p. 9-26.
- Pushor, D., et B. Murphy (2004). « Parent Marginalization, Marginalized Parents: Creating a Place for Parents on the School Landscape », Alberta Journal of Educational Research, vol. 50, no 3, p. 221-235.
- Rodgers, B.L. (1989). « Concepts, analysis and the development of nursing knowledge: the evolutionary cycle », Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 14, no 4, p. 330-335.
- Samaras, A.P., et J.C. Wilson (1999). « Am I invited? Perspectives of family involvement with technology in inner-city schools », Urban Education, vol. 34, no 4, p. 499-530.
- Sameroff, A. J. (1983). « Systems of development: Contexts and evolution », in W. Kessen (dir.), Handbook of Child Psychology, New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 237–294
- Schnee, E., et E. Bose (2010). « Parents “Don’t” Do Nothing: Reconceptualizing Parental Null Actions as Agency », School Community Journal, vol. 20, no 2, p. 91-114.
- Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). « Explaining the epistemological belief system: Introducing the embedded systemic model and coordinated research approach », Educational Psychologist, vol. 39, no 1, p. 19-29.
- Sheldon, S.B., et F.L. Van Voorhis (2004). « Partnership programs in U.S. schools: Their development and relationship to family involvement outcomes », School Effectiveness and School Improvement, vol. 15, no 2, p. 125-148.
- Sheridan, S. M. (2005). « Commentary on evidence-based parent and family interventions: Will what we know now influence what we do in the future? », School Psychology Quarterly, vol. 20, no 4, p. 518-524.
- Theodorou, E. (2007). « Reading between the lines: exploring the assumptions and implications of parental involvement », International Journal about Parents in Education, vol. 1, no 0, p. 90-96.
- Törrönen, J. (2000). « Mundane social policies in the context of the fragmentation of welfare-oriented alcohol policy in Finland », Contemporary Drug Problems, no 27, p. 137-162.
- Törrönen, J. (2001). « The concept of subject position in empirical social research », Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol. 31, no 3, p. 313-329.
- Vincent, C., et S. Tomlinson (1997). « Home-School Relationships: “The Swarming of Disciplinary Mechanisms?” », British Educational Research Journal, vol. 23, no 3, p. 361-377.
- Valle, J.W. et E. Aponte (2002). « IDEA and Collaboration: A Bakhtinian Perspective on Parent and Professional Discourse », Journal of Learning Disabilities, vol. 35, no 5, p. 469-479.
- Valsiner, J. (1998). « Dualisms displaced: from crusades to analytic distinctions », Human Development, no 41, p. 350-354.
- Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press. (La version originale russe de ce texte est parue en 1935.)