Devolution and Autonomy in Education

Pablo Buznic-Bourgeacq is a researcher at CIRNEF and a trainer at INSPE Normandie Caen, both of which are part of Normandie Université, France. His work is based on an interdisciplinary approach within the humanities and is inspired by the educational sciences; the didactic and clinical fields being particular areas of interest.

• Foreword xiClaire MARGOLINASIntroduction xxviiPablo BUZNIC-BOURGEACQPart 1. Didactics and Devolution: Specificities of Disciplines and Audiences 1Chapter 1. Potential of Peer-to-Peer Research and Proof Situations in Mathematics Classes and Devolutions 3Jean-Philippe GEORGET1.1. Introduction 31.2. Characteristics of PRP situations 61.3. Potential of PRP situations and management of devolution processes 71.4. Two examples of analysis of problems with potentials 111.5. Conclusion 131.6. Appendix: solution to the rectangle problem 141.7. References 14Chapter 2. Some Comparative Analysis of Mathematics and Experimental Science 17Faouzia KALALI2.1. Introduction 172.2. Didactics of mathematics, didactics of science: contrasting epistemological choices 182.2.1. Institutional context and intellectual landscape 182.2.2. Two different scientific projects 182.3. Devolution versus appropriation 202.3.1. On devolution 202.3.2. Origin of appropriation: unifying the approaches to “scientific and technological awakening” in elementary school 212.4. Investigative approach, a devolution process? 222.4.1. Example of Camaret tides 232.4.2. Generalization 242.5. Specificity of scientific learning 252.6. Conclusion: what is the outcome of the redeployment of the subject? 272.7. References 29Chapter 3. Double Devolution of Action in Physical Education 31Benjamin DELATTRE3.1. Introduction 313.2. The current state of the notion of devolution in didactic writings in PE 333.3. The “veiled” presence of a double devolution of action in PE didactics 383.4. An “adaptive” backdrop in the didactic concepts of PE 403.5. An adoptive and organological perspective for the double devolution of action in physical education 423.6. From adaptation to adoption “by the double”; a few examples 443.7. Conclusion 493.8. References 49Chapter 4. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Education: An Issue that is Still Relevant Today 53Hervé DAGUET4.1. Introduction 534.2. Theoretical framework, devolution and digital in schools 544.2.1. Some points of reference on devolution 544.2.2. Digital technology and learning 544.2.3. Problematization, digital technology and devolution 574.3. Research field and methodology 584.3.1. The situation: the D’Col device 584.3.2. Survey methodology 604.4. Analysis of results 624.4.1. Mediatization and devolution within the D’Col LMS 624.4.2. Mediation and devolution within the D’Col system 644.5. Conclusion 654.6. References 66Chapter 5. Reflection on the Devolution of Knowledge in French Kindergarten Teaching: Worksheets 69Sophie BRIQUET-DUHAZÉ5.1. Introduction 695.2. Contextualization and issues 695.3. Theoretical framework of the devolution of knowledge in kindergarten and the use of worksheets 715.4. Theoretical framework of devolution in French teaching 745.5. Analysis and discussion 755.6. Conclusion 785.7. References 78Chapter 6. Between a Willingness to Adapt and Real Devolution, what Material Works for which Form of Learning? A Case Study in a Localized Unit for Inclusive Education (Ulis) 81Laurence LEROYER6.1. Introduction 816.2. Theoretical frameworks 826.2.1. Adaptation and learning supports 826.2.2. Devolution and learning supports 846.2.3. Devolution practices understood on the basis of the learning supports and the adaptations that they have 846.3. Methodology 876.4. Case study: Mathieu, teacher specializing in Ulis 886.4.1. The teacher and the pupils enrolled in the Ulis 886.4.2. The session presented by the teacher 896.4.3. Focusing on one of the learning supports of the session 926.5. Analysis and discussion 946.6. References 95Part 2. Devolution Beyond Disciplinary Didactics 99Chapter 7. Before “Devolution” 101Hubert VINCENT7.1. Introduction 1017.2. Preliminary remarks 1037.3. Michel de Montaigne 1047.3.1. Alternation and school forms 1 and 2 1047.3.2. The work of examples 1097.3.3. Curiosity and creativity 1117.4. Alain 1127.4.1. Modeling learning 1127.4.2. Devolving devices 1157.5. Conclusion 1197.6. References 121Chapter 8. Devolution and Problematization Among Trainee School Teachers: What Kind of Appropriation is There? 123Florian OUITRE8.1. Introduction 1238.2. Theoretical framework 1258.2.1. Making the experience of learners the object of the first overall devolution in the learning process 1258.2.2. Professional problems and problematization of professional practices/activities 1268.2.3. A teaching approach likely to take care of these problems in order to overcome the obstacles 1288.2.4. Problematization and devolution 1308.2.5. Limits of a linear presentation for reporting the problematization process 1348.3. Some results from the appropriation of this approach and these devolutions among new school teachers 1378.3.1. Appropriation of the approach: attempts on the big loop 1378.3.2. Concerning small loops (SLs) 1428.4. Conclusion and discussion 1448.5. References 146Chapter 9. Professional Writing as a Complex Space in Devolution 149Bruno HUBERT9.1. Introduction 1499.2. Devolving a storytelling space–time 1509.2.1. Developing the narrative 1519.2.2. From oral narrative to the devolution of writing 1539.3. Developing fiction writing 1559.3.1. Becoming a character in the text 1559.3.2. A fairy tale character to move beyond reporting 1579.4. Devolving the text as a space for mutual understanding 1609.5. Storytelling as the devolution of a professional teaching space 1619.6. Conclusion 1659.7. References 165Chapter 10. The Subject Area: Devolving One’s Own Trials 169Pablo BUZNIC-BOURGEACQ10.1. Devolving oneself 16910.2. Trials as a subject area 17210.3. Devolving your own trials: the passionate subject and the good teacher 17710.4. Teaching about trials, maintaining the passion 17910.5. References 182Chapter 11. A Game to Play and a Game Played: A Devolution “Under Influences” 187Vanessa DESVAGES-VASSELIN11.1. Introduction 18711.2. Thèque: a game to be played in extracurricular activity periods 18811.2.1. TAP: a little formalized institutional context 18811.2.2. The game to be devolved: thèque 18911.3. A theoretical framework for thinking about the devolution of a game and the associated methodological approach 19111.3.1. A game 19111.3.2. A subject 19211.3.3. Methodological proposals 19311.4. Jules’ influence on devolved games 19411.4.1. From the game to be devolved to the devolved game: gaps identified 19411.4.2. Jules’ influence on devolution 19611.5. Conclusion: towards a theory of game devolution 19811.6. References 199List of Authors 201Index 203