Résumés
Résumé
Le discours pédagogique oppose socioconstructivisme et transmission. Nous examinons l’adhésion des enseignants en formation à cette opposition. Constatant l’absence d’un instrument approprié en français, nous avons trouvé dans les écrits de recherche anglophones et germanophones des outils sommairement validés. Nous en avons extrait 30 items que nous avons traduits et soumis à 228 enseignants en formation. Les analyses factorielles aboutissent à un outil qui obtient de bonnes qualités psychométriques. Nous montrons, d’une part, que les conceptions des enseignants en formation sont moins clivées que le discours pédagogique et, d’autre part, que l’adhésion au socioconstructivisme dépend de la formation suivie. Des implications pour la recherche et la formation sont discutées.
Mots-clés :
- socioconstructivisme,
- enseignement transmissif,
- conceptions des enseignants,
- validation de questionnaire,
- formation des enseignants
Abstract
Current educational literature opposes socioconstructivism and transmission. We examine if pre-service teachers support this position. Given that an appropriate instrument doesn’t exist in French, we found some only basically validated tools in the English- and German language literature. Of these tools, we extracted 30 items which we translated into French and submitted to a sample of 228 pre-service teachers. The factor analysis shows a good model fit. Results show pre-service teachers’ beliefs are less split than suggested by the educational literature and that the support in socioconstructivism depends on the teacher education program the pre-service teachers are following. Implications for research and teacher education are discussed.
Keywords:
- socioconstructivism,
- transmissive teaching,
- teachers’ beliefs,
- scale construct validation,
- teacher education
Resumen
El discurso pedagógico opone socioconstructivismo y transmisión. Este artículo examina la adhesión de los maestros en formación a esta oposición. Constatando la ausencia de un instrumento apropiado en francés, encontramos en la literatura científica anglófona y en alemán algunas herramientas poco validadas. De éstas, extrajimos 30 ítems que hemos traducido y propuesto a 228 maestros en formación. Los análisis factoriales llevan a una herramienta que muestra buenas cualidades psicométricas. Nuestros resultados muestran, por un lado, que las concepciones de los maestros en formación son menos dicotómicas que el discurso pedagógico y, por otro lado, que la adhesión al socioconstructivismo depende de la formación seguida. Se discuten también algunas implicaciones para la investigación y la formación.
Palabras clave:
- Socioconstructivismo,
- enseñanza transmisora,
- concepciones de los maestros,
- validación de cuestionario,
- formación de maestros
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J. and Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning ? Journal of educational psychology, 103(1), 1-18.
- Amossy, R. and Sternberg, M. (2002). Doxa and discourse : how common knowledge works. Poetics today, 23(3), 216.
- Barthes, R. (1957). Mythologies. Paris, France : Seuil.
- Belo, N. A. H., van Driel, J. H., van Veen, K. and Verloop, N. (2014). Beyond the dichotomy of teacher- versus student-focused education : a survey study on physics teachers’ beliefs about the goal and pedagogy of physics education. Teaching and teacher education, (39), 89-101.
- Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction. Critique sociale du jugement. Paris, France : Les Éditions de Minuit.
- Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, New York : Guilford Press.
- Capraro, M. M. (2001). Construct validation and a more parsimonious mathematics beliefs scales. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-south educational research association. Little Rock, Arkansas : Mid-south educational research association.
- Chan, K.-W. and Elliott, R. G. (2004). Relational analysis of personal epistemology and conceptions about teaching and learning. Teaching and teacher education, (20) 8, 817-831.
- Chen, J., Brown, G. T. L., Hattie, J. A. C. and Millward, P. (2012). Teachers’ conceptions of excellent teaching and its relationship to self-reported teaching practices. Teaching and teacher education, (28), 936-947.
- Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B. and Perlwitz, M. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for research in mathematics education, 22(1), 3-29.
- Collins, L. M. and Lanza, S. T. (2010). Latent class and latent transition analysis. Cambridge, United Kingdom : Higher Education Press.
- Cronbach, L. J. and Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods : a handbook for research on interactions. New York, New York : Irvington Publishers.
- Dubberke, T., Kunter, M., McElvany, N., Brunner, M. und Baumert, J. (2008). Lerntheoretische Überzeugungen von Mathematiklehrkräften : Einflüsse auf die Unterrichtsgestaltung und den Lernerfolg von Schülerinnen und Schülern. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 22(3-4), 193-206.
- Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. and Loef, M. (1990). Teacher beliefs scale : cognitively guided instruction project. Madison, Wisconsin : University of Wisconsin.
- Furr, M. (2011). Scale construction and psychometrics for social and personality psychology. London, United Kingdom : SAGE publications.
- Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H. and Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching : a meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 82(3), 300-329.
- Grigutsch, S., Raatz, U. und Törner, G. (1996). Einstellungen gegenüber Mathematik bei Mathematiklehrern. Journal für mathematik-didaktik, 19(1), 3-45.
- Grivel, C. (1980). Esquisse d’une théorie des systèmes doxiques. Degrés, (24-25), 1-23.
- Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning : a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, United Kingdom : Routledge.
- Hattie, J. A. C. (2012). Visible learning for teachers : maximizing impact on learning. London, United Kingdom : Routledge.
- Helmke, A. and Schrader, F.-W. (1987). Interactional effects of instructional quality and teacher judgement accuracy on achievement. Teaching and teacher education, 3(2), 91-98.
- Hermans, R., van Braak, J. and Van Keer, H. (2008). Development of the beliefs about primary education scale : distinguishing a developmental and transmissive dimension. Teaching and teacher education, (24), 127–139.
- Hess, K. (2002). Lehren zwischen Belehrung und Lernbegleitung : Didaktische Hintergründe und empirische Untersuchung zum Lehrverständnis und dessen Umsetzung im mathematischen Erstunterricht. Doctorat à l’Universität Zürich, Zürich. Récupéré de http://edudoc.ch/record/3008/files/zu03052.pdf
- Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G. and Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning : a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
- Hu, L. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling, (6), 1-55.
- Karst, K. (2012). Kompetenzmodellierung des diagnostischen Urteils von Grundschullehrern. Münster, Deutschland : Waxmann.
- Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work : an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
- Könings, K. D., Seidel, T., Brand-Gruwel, S. and van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). Differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of education : profiles to describe congruence and friction. Instructional science, 42(1), 11-30.
- Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction an answer to the right question ? Educational psychologist, 42(2), 109-113.
- Kyriakides, L., Christoforou, C. and Charalambous, C. (2013). What matters for student learning outcomes : a meta-analysis of studies exploring factors of effective teaching. Teaching and teacher education, (36), 143-152.
- Laveault, D. (2012). Soixante ans de bons et mauvais usages du alpha de Cronbach. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 35(2), 1-7.
- Lenglet, R. (1984). Pratiques doxiques. Paris, France : Éditions Anousia.
- Leuchter, M. (2009). Die Rolle der Lehrperson bei der Aufgabenbearbeitung : Unterrichtsbezogene Kognitionen von Lehrpersonen. Münster : Waxmann.
- Leuchter, M., Reusser, K., Pauli, C. und Klieme, E. (2008). Zusammenhänge zwischen unterrichtsbezogenen Kognitionen und Handlungen von Lehrpersonen. In M. Gläser-Zikuda et J. Seifried (eds.), Lehrerexpertise - Analyse un Bedeutung unterrichtlichen Handelns (p. 165-186). Münster, Deutschland : Waxmann.
- Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning ? The case for guided methods of instruction. American psychologist, 59(1), 14-19.
- McCutcheon, A. L. (1987). Latent class analysis (Vol. 64). London, United Kingdom : SAGE publications.
- Muthén, L. K. and Muthén, B. O. (2002). Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables : user’s guide (7th edition). Los Angeles, California : Muthén and Muthén.
- Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T. and Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling : a Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural equation modeling, 14(4), 535-569.
- Peterson, P. L., Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. and Loef, M. (1989). Teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs in mathematics. Cognition and instruction, 6(1), 1-40.
- Rakoczy, K., Buff, A. und Lipowsky, F. (2005). Befragungsinstrumente. In E. Klieme, C. Pauli et K. Reusser (eds.), Dokumentation des Erhebungs- und Auswertungs-instrumente zur schweizerisch-deutschen Videostudie : “Unterrichtsqualität, Lernverhalten und mathematisches Verständnis” (Vol. Teil 1). Frankfurt am Main : DIPF und Universität Zürich. Retrieved from http://www2.dipf.de/gfpf/publikationen/MatBild_Bd15.pdf
- Schmidt, H. G., Loyens, S. M. M., van Gog, T. and Paas, F. (2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture : commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational psychologist, 42(2), 91-97.
- Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.-Y. and Lee, Y.-H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research : effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of research in science teaching, 44(10), 1436-1460.
- Schuh, K. L. (2004). Learner-centered principles in teacher-centered practices ? Teaching and teacher education, (20), 833-846.
- Staub, F. C. and Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs maters for students’ achievement gains : quasi-experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of educational psychology, 94(2), 344-355.
- Sweller, J., Kirschner, P. A. and Clark, R. E. (2007). Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work : a reply to commentaries. Educational psychologist, 42(2), 115-121.
- Tobias, S. (2009). An eclectic appraisal of the success or failure of constructivist instruction. In S. Tobias and T. M. Duffy (eds), Constructivist instruction : success or failure ? (p. 335-350). New York, New York : Routledge.
- Voss, T., Kleickmann, T., Kunter, M. und Hachfeld, A. (2011). Überzeugungen von Mathematiklehrkräften. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss und M. Neubrand (eds.), Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften (p. 235–257). München, Deutschland : Waxmann.
- Voss, T., Kunter, M. and Baumert, J. (2011). Assessing teacher candidates’ general pedagogical/psychological knowledge : test construction and validation. Journal of educational psychology, 103(4), 952-969.
- Wang, J. and Wang, X. (2012). Structural equation modeling : applications using Mplus. Chichester, United Kingdom : Higher Education Press, Wiley.
- Woolley, S. L., Benjamin, W.-J. J. and Williams-Woolley, A. (2004). Construct validity of a self-report measure of teacher beliefs related to constructivist and traditional approaches to teaching and learning. Educational and psychological measurement, 64(2), 319-331.
10.7202/1024716ar