Résumés
Résumé
Cet article analyse la conception de scénarios pédagogiques intégrant le numérique comme activité créative (Glăveanu, 2015, 2020) et agentive (Sannino, 2015), propice à la transformation de l’activité d’enseignement-apprentissage et susceptible de constituer en formation une réponse au défi persistant de l’intégration du numérique en classe (Giraudon et al., 2020). Il s’appuie principalement sur la théorie de l’activité historico-culturelle (CHAT) de troisième génération (Engeström, 2001, 2009) et, s’inscrivant dans le pluralisme épistémologique (Turkle & Papert, 1990), convoque les apports de travaux en didactique et en sciences cognitives pour développer les arguments théoriques qui amènent à proposer un dispositif d’intervention formative (Engeström, 2011) inspiré du Laboratoire du changement (Virkkunen & Newnham, 2013), où les enseignants modélisent un nouveau concept (Engeström & Sannino, 2010) pour l’activité d’enseignement-apprentissage, par la co-conception de scénarios pédagogiques intégrant le numérique. Afin de soutenir ce processus, ils sont assistés par un artefact de conception sous la forme d’un set de cartes. Celles-ci représentent les composants potentiels d’un scénario pédagogique, dont les technologies numériques.
Mots-clés :
- activité de conception,
- créativité,
- agentivité transformatrice,
- intégration du numérique,
- formation des enseignants,
- théorie de l'activité
Abstract
This paper analyses technology-enhanced teaching and learning (TET/TEL) design in the context of in-service teacher training. It is presented as a creative (Glăveanu, 2015, 2020), agentive (Sannino, 2015) activity to help teachers transform teaching and learning and address the challenge of integrating digital technology and education in the classroom (Giraudon et al., 2020). Mainly based on third generation (Engeström, 2001, 2009) of cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) and in line with epistemological pluralism (Turkle & Papert, 1990), this study also draws upon contributions in didactics and cognitive sciences. It develops the theoretical argument leading to a formative intervention (Engeström, 2011) inspired by the Change Laboratory methodology (Virkkunen & Newnham, 2013). The Change Laboratory is aimed at co-designing TET/TEL scenarios for teachers and thus to model a new concept (Engeström & Sannino, 2010) for teaching and learning. To support this process, teachers are assisted by a card deck as a design artefact. The cards represent the potential components of a TET/TEL scenario.
Keywords:
- learning design activity,
- creativity,
- transformative agency,
- digital education,
- teacher education,
- cultural-historical activity theory
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- Albion, P., & Tondeur, J. (2018). Information and Communication Technology and Education : Meaningful Change through Teacher Agency.
- Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context : Update to" the social psychology of creativity.". Westview press.
- Bertelsen, O. W. (2000). Design artefacts : Towards a design-oriented epistemology. 12, 15.
- Bonnardel, N. (2009). Activités de conception et créativité : De l’analyse des facteurs cognitifs à l’assistance aux activités de conception créatives. Le travail humain, 72(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.3917/th.721.0005
- Bonnardel, N., & Bouchard, C. (2017). Creativity in Design. In J. C. Kaufman, V. P. Glăveanu, & J. Baer (Éds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity across Domains (1re éd., p. 403‑427). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316274385.022
- Bonnardel, N., & Lubart, T. (2019). La créativité : Approches et méthodes en psychologie et en ergonomie. RIMHE : Revue Interdisciplinaire Management, Homme Entreprise, 378(4), 79‑98. https://www.cairn.info/revue-rimhe-2019-4-page-79.htm
- Boullier, D. (2019). Sociologie du numérique-2e éd. Armand Colin.
- Brevik, L., Guðmundsdóttir, G., Lund, A., & Strømme, T. (2019). Transformative agency in teacher education : Fostering professional digital competence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.07.005
- Bru, M., & Clanet, J. (2011). La situation d’enseignement-apprentissage : Caractères contextuels et construits. Recherches en éducation, 12, Article 12. https://doi.org/10.4000/ree.5089
- Deng, Y., Antle, A. N., & Neustaedter, C. (2014). Tango cards : A card-based design tool for informing the design of tangible learning games. Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems, 695‑704. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598601
- Dessus, P. (2000). La planification de séquences d’enseignement, objet de description ou de prescription? Revue française de pédagogie, 133(1), 101‑116. https://doi.org/10.3406/rfp.2000.1024
- Engeström. (1999, janvier). Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge Core; Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774
- Engeström, Y. (1994). Teachers as Collaborative Thinkers : Activity-Theoretical Study of an Innovative Teacher Team. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Éds.), Teachers’ minds and actions (p. 43‑61). Falmer Press.
- Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at Work : Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133‑156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
- Engeström, Y. (2009). The Future of Activity Theory : A Rough Draft. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. D. Gutierrez (Éds.), Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory (p. 303‑328). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809989.020
- Engeström, Y. (2011). From design experiments to formative interventions. Theory & Psychology, 21(5), 598‑628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354311419252
- Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding. Cambridge University Press.
- Engeström, Y., & Glăveanu, V. (2012). On Third Generation Activity Theory : Interview With Yrjö Engeström. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.1361
- Engeström, Y., Nuttall, J., & Hopwood, N. (2020). Transformative agency by double stimulation : Advances in theory and methodology. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 0(0), 1‑7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2020.1805499
- Engeström, Y., Pihlaja, J., Helle, M., Virkkunen, J., & Poikela, R. (1996). The change laboratory as a tool for transforming work. Lifelong Learning in Europe, 1(2), 10‑17. https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/the-change-laboratory-as-a-tool-for-transforming-work
- Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning : Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1‑24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002
- Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2013). La volition et l’agentivité transformatrice : Perspective théorique de l’activité. Revue internationale du CRIRES : innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky, 1(1), 4‑19. //ojs.crires.ulaval.ca/index.php/ric/article/view/7
- Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2021). From mediated actions to heterogenous coalitions : Four generations of activity-theoretical studies of work and learning. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 28(1), 4‑23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2020.1806328
- Engeström, Y., Sannino, A., & Virkkunen, J. (2014). On the Methodological Demands of Formative Interventions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(2), 118‑128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2014.891868
- Fiévez, A. (2017). L’intégration des TIC en contexte éducatif : Modèles, réalités et enjeux. PUQ.
- Giraudon, G., Guitton, P., Romero, M., Roy, D., & Viéville, T. (2020). Éducation et numérique, Défis et enjeux. Inria.
- Glăveanu, V. P. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity : Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. 23.
- Glăveanu, V. P. (2015). Creativity as a Sociocultural Act. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(3), 165‑180. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.94
- Glăveanu, V. P. (2020). A Sociocultural Theory of Creativity : Bridging the Social, the Material, and the Psychological. Review of General Psychology, 24(4), 335‑354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268020961763
- Goodyear, P. (2015). Teaching as design. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 2, 27‑50. http://www.herdsa.org.au/system/fles/HERDSARHE2015v02p27.pdf.
- Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1984). Current activity for the future : The Zo-ped. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1984(23), 45‑64. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219842306
- Haapasaari, A., Engeström, Y., & Kerosuo, H. (2016). The emergence of learners’ transformative agency in a Change Laboratory intervention. Journal of Education and Work, 29(2), 232‑262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.900168
- Hyrkkö, S., & Kajamaa, A. (2021). Distributed Creativity and Expansive Learning in a Teacher Training School’s Change Laboratory. In S. Lemmetty, K. Collin, V. P. Glăveanu, & P. Forsman (Éds.), Creativity and Learning : Contexts, Processes and Support (p. 145‑174). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77066-2_7
- Impedovo, M. A., Andreucci, C., & Ginestié, J. (2017). Mediation of artefacts, tools and technical objects : An international and french perspective. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 19‑30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9335-y
- Juutilainen, M., Metsäpelto, R.-L., & Poikkeus, A.-M. (2018). Becoming agentic teachers : Experiences of the home group approach as a resource for supporting teacher students’ agency. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 116‑125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.08.013
- Kambouchner, D., Meirieu, P., & Stiegler, B. (2012). L’école, le numérique et la société qui vient. https://www.fayard.fr/1001-nuits/lecole-le-numerique-et-la-societe-qui-vient-9782755506440
- Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers Learning Technology by Design. 9.
- Komis, V., Romero, M., & Misirli, A. (2017). A Scenario-Based Approach for Designing Educational Robotics Activities for Co-creative Problem Solving.
- Kumpulainen, K., Kajamaa, A., & Rajala, A. (2018). Understanding educational change : Agency-structure dynamics in a novel design and making environment. Digital Education Review, 26‑38. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2018.33.26-38
- Lubart, T., Mouchiroud, C., Tordjman, S., & Zenasni, F. (2015). Psychologie de la créativité-2e édition. Armand Colin.
- Lund, A., & Eriksen, T. M. (2016). Teacher Education as Transformation : Some Lessons Learned from a Center for Excellence in Education. Acta Didactica Norge, 10(2), 53‑72. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.2483
- Lund, A., Furberg, A., Bakken, J., & Engelien, K. L. (2014). Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 9(04), 280‑298. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2014-04-04
- Maina, M., Craft, B., & Mor, Y. (Éds.). (2015). The art & science of learning design. Sense Publishers.
- Miettinen, R., Paavola, S., & Pohjola, P. (2012). From Habituality to Change : Contribution of Activity Theory and Pragmatism to Practice Theories. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 42(3), 345‑360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2012.00495.x
- Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge : A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017.
- Morselli, D., & Sannino, A. (2021). Testing the model of double stimulation in a Change Laboratory. Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, 103224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103224
- Peters, D., Loke, L., & Ahmadpour, N. (2020). Toolkits, cards and games – a review of analogue tools for collaborative ideation. CoDesign, 0(0), 1‑25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1715444
- Priestley, M., Edwards, R., Priestley, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher Agency in Curriculum Making : Agents of Change and Spaces for Manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191‑214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00588.x
- Rantavuori, J., Engeström, Y., & Lipponen, L. (2016). Learning actions, objects and types of interaction : A methodological analysis of expansive learning among pre-service teachers. FRONTLINE LEARNING RESEARCH, 4, 1‑27. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v4i3.174
- Ricoeur, P. (1991). Temps et récit , Paul Ricœur, Points Essais. Éd. du Seuil. https://www.editionspoints.com/ouvrage/temps-et-recit-paul-ric-ur/9782020134538
- Romero, M. (2019). From Individual Creativity to Team-Based Creativity. In Toward Super-Creativity—Improving Creativity in Humans, Machines, and Human—Machine Collaborations. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89126
- Roy, R., & Warren, J. P. (2019). Card-based design tools : A review and analysis of 155 card decks for designers and designing. Design Studies, 63, 125‑154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.04.002
- Sannino, A. (2013). Critical Transitions in the Pursuit of a Professional Object : Simone de Beauvoir’s Expansive Journey to Become a Writer. In Learning and Collective Creativity. Routledge.
- Sannino, A. (2015). The principle of double stimulation : A path to volitional action. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 6, 1‑15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.01.001
- Sannino, A., Daniels, H., & Gutiérrez, K. D. (2009). Activity Theory Between Historical Engagement and Future-Making Practice. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. D. Gutierrez (Éds.), Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory (p. 1‑16). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809989.002
- Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2018). Cultural-historical activity theory : Founding insights and new challenges. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 14(3), 43‑56. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2018140304
- Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M. (2016). Formative Interventions for Expansive Learning and Transformative Agency. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/178032
- Schneuwly, B., & Ronveaux, C. (2021). Une approche instrumentale de la transposition didactique. Pratiques. Linguistique, littérature, didactique, 189‑190, Article 189‑190. https://doi.org/10.4000/pratiques.9515
- Stockless, A., & Villeneuve, S. (2017). Les compétences numériques chez les enseignants : Doit-on devenir un expert? In Usages créatifs du numérique pour l’apprentissage au XXIe siècle.
- Stockless, A., Villeneuve, S., & Gingras, B. (2018). Maitrise d’outils technologiques : Son influence sur la compétence TIC des enseignants et les usages pédagogiques | Mastery of Digital Tools: The Influence on Information and Communication Technologies Competency and Pedagogical Use. 44. https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt27581
- Tao, J., & Gao, X. (2017). Teacher agency and identity commitment in curricular reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 346‑355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.010
- Toom, A., Pyhältö, K., & Rust, F. O. (2015). Teachers’ professional agency in contradictory times. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 615‑623. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044334
- Tricot, A., & Musial, M. (2020). Précis d’ingénierie pédagogique. De Boeck Superieur.
- Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1990). Epistemological pluralism : Styles and voices within the computer culture. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, 16(1), 128‑157.
- van der Heijden, H. R. M. A., Geldens, J. J. M., Beijaard, D., & Popeijus, H. L. (2015). Characteristics of teachers as change agents. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 681‑699. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044328
- Virkkunen, J. (2006). Dilemmes dans la construction d’une capacité d’action partagée de transformation. Activités, 03(3‑1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.4000/activites.1842
- Virkkunen, J., & Newnham, D. S. (2013). A Change Laboratory in the Central Surgical Unit of Oulu University Hospital. In J. Virkkunen & D. S. Newnham (Éds.), The Change Laboratory : A Tool for Collaborative Development of Work and Education (p. 165‑185). SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-326-3_7
- Visser, W. (2006). Designing as Construction of Representations : A Dynamic Viewpoint in Cognitive Design Research. Human–Computer Interaction, 21(1), 103‑152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2101_4
- Voogt, J., Laferriere, T., Breuleux, A., Itow, R., Hickey, D., & Mckenney, S. (2015). Collaborative design as a form of professional development. Instructional Science, 43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9340-7
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in Society : The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky : Problems of the Theory and History of Psychology. Springer Science & Business Media.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and Creativity in Childhood. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 42(1), 7‑97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10610405.2004.11059210
- Wanlin, P. (2009). La pensée des enseignants lors de la planification de leur enseignement. Revue française de pédagogie, 89‑128. https://doi.org/10.2307/41202607
- Wong, C.-C., Kumpulainen, K., & Kajamaa, A. (2021). Collaborative creativity among education professionals in a co-design workshop : A multidimensional analysis | Elsevier Enhanced Reader. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100971
- Yamazumi, K. (2013). Beyond Traditional School Learning : Fostering Agency and Collective Creativity in Hybrid Educational Activities. In Learning and Collective Creativity. Routledge.