Objects to Learn about and Objects for Learning 2 E-Book
139,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Bildung
- Sprache: Englisch
Resulting from a conference that took place in Amiens, France, in June 2019, this book examines the place and role of objects centered in teaching practices from kindergarten to university, both in the context of France and elsewhere. These "objects for learning" are considered in their physicality as productions, work or signs that are used for learning. They become "objects to learn about" when the object itself is the learning objective. This book offers a cross-disciplinary perspective, linking the different disciplinary fields studied and the many reference sources used by the authors. This two-volume work offers an overview of current research on the subject, with this second volume focusing on objects in representations of space and time, then on learners' activities in the making or use of objects, before concluding with different cultural and philosophical perspectives on objects
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 476
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Preface
Part 1 of Volume 1 – Objects and Language(s)
Part 2 of Volume 1 – Objects and Early Learning
Part 1 of Volume 2 – Objects and Representations of Space and Time
Part 2 of Volume 2 – Objects and Traces of the Activity
Part 3 of Volume 2 – Points of View on Objects and Perspectives
Acknowledgements
Scientific committee of this publication
PART 1 Objects and Representations of Space and Time
1 The Map and the Game: Objects for Learning Geographical Points of Reference in Elementary School
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Points of reference: A special place in geography as it is taught
1.3. Points of reference in upper elementary curricula
1.4. Creating a game about geographical points of reference
1.5. Evaluation periods
1.6. Conclusion
1.7. References
2 The Didactic Use of Physical Objects in the Kindergarten School Calendar Ritual: A Case Study
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Theoretical framework
2.3. The official kindergarten school curricula
2.4. Physical context and the technique of the calendar ritual activity
2.5. Research methodology
2.6. Data analysis and discussion
2.7. Conclusion
2.8. References
3 The Map in the Core School, An Object for Learning
3.1. Introduction
3.2. A reference framework in geographical pedagogy for thinking about maps
3.3. Understanding students’ geographic knowledge through map production
3.4. The map object: Between images of daily practices and formal academic products
3.5. Conclusion: Proposals for revitalizing teaching practices for geography
3.6. References
4 Professional Report: Using a Song as a Mediating Object for Learning Temporal Points of Reference
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Conceptual framework
4.3. Methodology
4.4. Results and discussion
4.5. Conclusion
4.6. Appendix
4.7. References
5 Professional Report: From Tangible Objects to Interactive Maps for Moving Around and Learning an Area – Two Examples with People with Visual Impairments
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Two research examples proposing learning objects for learning about space
5.3. Conclusion
5.4. Acknowledgments
5.5. References
PART 2 Objects and Traces of the Activity
6 From the Self-Evaluation Object to the Learning Subject
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Theoretical framework
6.3. First phase: The digital object and its experimental context
6.4. Second phase: The non-digital object and a new experimental context
6.5. Discussion
6.6. Conclusion
6.7. Appendix
6.8. References
7 Creating a Sound Garden: Transforming Recycled Materials into Objects for Learning
7.1. Introduction
7.2. Objects for learning
7.3. Methodology
7.4. Results
7.5. Discussion
7.6. Conclusion
7.7. References
8 The Experimental Protocol Poster in a “Preschool” Class: An Object for Learning or an Object to Learn About?
8.1. Introduction and theoretical framework
8.2. Methodology for data collection and analysis
8.3. Context
8.4. Results
8.5. Discussion
8.6. Conclusion
8.7. References
9 Challenges in First-Years Schools: Early Manifestations of Executive Function
9.1. The first manifestations of executive control at the end of the first year
9.2. The hegemonic status of language in self-regulation and EF
9.3. Self-regulation and EF through action and gestures
9.4. Children’s first challenges in first-years schools
9.5. Discussion
9.6. Conclusion
9.7. References
PART 3 Points of View on Objects and Perspectives
10 A Cultural Viewpoint about Objects: Objects that Narrate Cultures and Emotions
10.1. Speaking objects
10.2. Objects and material culture
10.3. Objects: Narrators of histories
10.4. Museums as generators of emotions
10.5. Didactics of objects in a history course
10.6. References
11 Four Researchers’ Points of View
11.1. Overview
11.2. Anne-Laure Le Guern: Material culture and pragmatic preoccupations in training and research
11.3. Mickaël Le Mentec: Socio-educative uses of digital technologies
11.4. Jean-François Thémines: Objects between location and learning
11.5. Abdelkarim Zaid: Objects in the didactics of technology education
11.6. References
12 The Object Stance: Philosophical Perspectives
12.1. Extension and comprehension of the concept of the object
12.2. The dialectics of subject and object
12.3. Pedagogy of the “shock object” and education for contingency
12.4. References
List of Authors
Index
Summary of Volume 1
End User License Agreement
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1.
The
Repères d’histoire
chronological timelines
Figure 1.2.
Appearance of the game about geographical points of reference
Figure 1.3. Clue sentences. Translation: This leaning tower was built in 1173. I...
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1.
Lena is reading the sentence on the calendar
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1.
Base map provided to students for data collection
Figure 3.2. All of the students assessed considered social requirements (total n...
Figure 3.3. A first form of a door-to-door transportation network (fifth grade, ...
Figure 3.4. The need for “recreation” dominates the space on the map (fourth gra...
Figure 3.5. Transportation networks, a mark of spatial reasoning (total number: ...
Figure 3.6. Absence of transportation routes in a micro-zone (fifth grade (CM2))...
Figure 3.7. Absence of transportation routes in a region (fifth grade (3e)). For...
Figure 3.8.
A network serving the entire city area (fifth grade (CM2))
Figure 3.9. A network serving an entire region (ninth grade (3e)). For a color v...
Figure 3.10. Legend use and knowledge of geography (total number: 1022 maps). Fo...
Figure 3.11. Lou-Ann (fifth grade (CM2)) created her legend before arranging her...
Figure 3.12. Sèrine (fifth grade (CM2)) created her legend after designing her i...
Figure 3.13. The vocabulary used by students in legends or in annotations (total...
Figure 3.14. Types of figures chosen by the students (total number: 1022 maps). ...
Figure 3.15.
A map by a fifth-grade (CM2) student with overhead view
Figure 3.16. Map by a fifth-grade (CM2) student with top-down view. For a color ...
Figure 3.17. Map by a sixth-grade (6e) student produced using a juxtaposition of...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1.
Two students’ scores
Figure 4.2.
Analysis of the song mediating learning:
Snowflakes by Hamelin3. Tra...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1.
Overhead view of a downtown map made of Lego with the Tangible Box
Figure 5.2. Interactive map of France for identifying the cities of France and r...
Figure 5.3.
The central map initially used by the instructor
Figure 5.4. Map and exploration of the room. On the left: the guide explores the...
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1.
Digital tool screen capture
Figure 6.2. Deviation in skills in French CM (fourth/fifth grades) – weeks 1 and...
Figure 6.3. Deviation in skills in math CM (fourth/fifth grades) – weeks 1, 2 an...
Figure 6.4. Deviation in skills in French CM (fourth/fifth grades) – weeks 7 and...
Figure 6.5. Deviation in skills in math CM (fourth/fifth grades) – weeks 7 and 8...
Figure 6.6.
Self-evaluation bar drawn by a student
Figure 6.7.
Oscar’s self-evaluation, first session
Figure 6.8.
Axel’s self-evaluation, first session
Figure 6.9.
Max’s self-evaluation, first session
Figure 6.10.
Self-evaluations for group 1
Figure 6.11. Self-evaluations for group 2. For a color version of this figure, s...
Figure 6.12.
Self-evaluations for group 3
Figure 6.13. Extract of the comparison table for self-evaluation and the teacher...
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1. Sound garden, work by elementary school pupils produced using recycl...
Figure 7.2.
Activities presented in the pupils’ creative process journals
Figure 7.3. Steps in the pupils’ creative process during the sound garden projec...
Figure 7.4. Steps in the pupils’ creative process during the sound garden projec...
Figure 7.5. Multivariate factors involved in the five teaching–learning sequence...
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1.
Methodology of didactic analysis
Figure 8.2.
Two complementary models of topogenesis
Figure 8.3.
The experimental protocol group poster, in process
Figure 8.4.
Changes in the status of objects in the environment
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1. Sequence 1: functional use of the bell (Rodríguez and Moreno-Llanos ...
Figure 9.2. Sequence 2: functional use of the metallophone instrument (Moreno-Ll...
Figure 9.3.
Sequence 3: functional use of a spoon tool (Rodríguez
et al.
2017)
Figure 9.4.
Sequence 4: organization of symbolic scenario
Figure 9.5. Sequence 5: positive self-evaluation with private and teacher-direct...
Figure 9.6. Sequence 6: understanding how the device works (Rodríguez and Moreno...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1.
Harmonica from the trenches (1938)
1
Figure 10.2.
Old doll from Rastro (Madrid)
Figure 10.3. L’objet qui parle
(The Speaking Object) store (Paris)
Figure 10.4.
A fragment of railway ballast from the entrance to Auschwitz
Figure 10.5.
The cigarette butt display
8
Figure 10.6.
“
Banquet of the Officers of the St. George Civic Guard” (1616), 201...
Figure 10.7.
Ticket for the number 8 tram line in Amsterdam
Figure 10.8. Alfredo Di Stéphano’s soccer cleats, River Plate Museum (Buenos Air...
Figure 10.9.
Interview with the
Dama de Elche
, students aged nine to ten (2018)
Figures 10.10 and 10.11.
The real story of the
Dama de Elche. Work by students a...
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1. Points of reference in upper elementary curricula for 2002, 2008 and ...
Table 1.2.
Indefinite places
Table 1.3.
Cities
Table 1.4.
Spatial containers
Table 1.5.
Locatable points of reference
Table 1.6.
The retained points of reference and project relaunches
Table 1.7. Evaluation of points of reference through the six most frequently cor...
Table 1.8. Frequency of occurrence for the most precisely identified points of r...
Chapter 2
Table 2.1.
Interactions between Koula/teacher
Table 2.2.
Changes in the durations of the five sequences of the calendar ritual
Chapter 3
Table 3.1.
Distribution of the corpus of maps by class level and academy
Chapter 4
Table 4.1. Analysis of the sequence and references in the Swiss Francophone curr...
Table 4.2.
Session sequence with analysis of targeted cognitive skills
Table 4.3.
Students’ graphical designs
Chapter 5
Table 5.1.
Description of the participants
Table 5.2. Success rate for the number of clues correctly located, in order and ...
Chapter 8
Table 8.1.
Summary of session 4
Table 8.2.
Proposition by T1 of an experimental protocol: episode 1
Table 8.3.
Manifestation of students’ existing knowledge: episode 2
Table 8.4.
Proposition to pair factors: episode 3
Table 8.5.
Student resistance – episode 4
Table 8.6. Not taking changes in the students’ hypotheses into account: episode ...
Table 8.7. Distribution of students’ and teachers’ topogenetic postures for the ...
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright
Preface
Acknowledgements
Begin Reading
List of Authors
Index
Summary of Volume 1
End User License Agreement
Pages
v
iii
iv
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xxi
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
211
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
279
280
281
Education Set
coordinated byAngela Barthes and Anne-Laure Le Guern
Volume 11
Objects to Learn About and Objects for Learning 2
Which Teaching Practices for Which Issues?
Edited by
Joël Bisault
Roselyne Le Bourgeois
Jean-François Thémines
Mickaël Le Mentec
Céline Chauvet-Chanoine
First published 2022 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd27-37 St George’s RoadLondon SW19 4EUUK
www.iste.co.uk
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.111 River StreetHoboken, NJ 07030USA
www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2022
The rights of Joël Bisault, Roselyne Le Bourgeois, Jean-François Thémines, Mickaël Le Mentec and Céline Chauvet-Chanoine to be identified as the authors of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021949741
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-1-78630-774-3
PrefaceFrom a Conference to a Book on the Role of Objects in the Practices of Teachers
This book is the result of the communications that took place during the conference organized by CAREF (the Amiens Center for Research in Education and Training), part of the University of Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens. This conference, entitled “Objets pour apprendre, objets à apprendre : quelles pratiques enseignantes pour quels enjeux?” (Objects to Learn About and Objects for Learning: Which Practices for Which Issues?), took place on June 11 and 12, 2019, following a study day on the same theme held on December 10, 2014, in Amiens.
The objective of this colloquium was to question the place and role of objects mobilized within classical or innovative pedagogical practices, from kindergarten to university, in France and in other national contexts. It favored a transversal approach that enabled a coming together of various educational fields (disciplines, subjects, fields of activity), comparing the views of practitioners, trainers and researchers, statuses that are sometimes held cumulatively by the same individuals. From this perspective, the work of the conference focused on the objects that teachers and educators use, ask for, call upon, interrogate or create, together with their pupils, in the various educational fields.
We consider an object to be a “learning object” if it is included within a teaching–learning project. The use of one or more objects results from a pedagogical choice made by the teacher or the facilitator; this choice, restricted to a greater or lesser degree by the institution, is more generally an educational decision, or a policy decision. This object must be considered both in its materiality that permits engagement with the senses and under other aspects – the object as a production, as a creation, as a symbol, etc. – enabling it to be engaged in a variety of ways, both material and intellectual. It is generally considered not on its own but within a wider set of objects, functions and uses that form a system within or outside the educational context. Moreover, each object is generally involved in a set of relationships: it can also be considered singular or general, contingent or universal, moving from uniqueness to collection or series, from its singularity to the category that encompasses it, the same term sometimes pointing to these different definitions. These “objects for learning” are also “objects to learn about” when the learning objective for the pupils or for the teachers is the object itself: the term “object” then covers a set of knowledge and skills associated with a specific area of learning.
Choosing these objects, the ways in which one makes use of them and the effects that one expects from them are first and foremost a matter of the point(s) of view: these points of view can be very different according to the field in which these objects are apprehended or according to the educational level. The status and nature of the objects in the classroom are diverse, as Joël Lebeaume analyzes in the introductory text to this book: some exist outside school, others are designed specifically for educational or, more specifically, school uses; some of them remain school objects despite being obsolete in everyday life (the Roberval balance1, the 4.5 V battery2); conversely, others have disappeared from schools (slide rules, spirit duplicators and other now-vintage objects). Certain objects are integrated into the school tradition and are iconic of particular disciplines (geography wall maps, the compass, the set square, the microscope, the chronological timeline and flash cards), areas of learning (temporal and spatial points of reference, learning about the world3, etc.) or even more generally of the school (posters, mascots, etc.). Furthermore, the generalization of information and communication technologies legitimizes the introduction or integration of new objects or systems in the classroom.
This book tackles the question of objects in education and teaching by adopting different points of view without seeking to be exhaustive. Its approach lies in attacking, as it were, this theme by calling upon various stakeholders (researchers, teachers, trainers) who work within different communities and who often have little to do with one another. This aspiration, which the scientific committee adopted and fully supported, is reflected in a wide variety of contributions. The levels of education concerned thus range from pre-school to university and the objects referred to cover a very wide field from the train of the days of the week in kindergarten to the Minkowski diagram in a 12th grade science major, via the geographical map at the end of elementary school and the start of junior high (middle school).
Varied corpora have been constituted: video recordings and transcriptions of sessions, output from pupils or learners more generally (musical scores in pre-school, maps, drawings, printouts, etc.). Depending on the frameworks of analysis and the opportunities for observation or experimentation, they may give rise to case studies or call for various work to identify typologies or enable quantitative analyses. The relationships between researchers and practitioners are multiple too: the researcher can also be the practitioner, the designer of an engineered device, the external observer of a situation or a stakeholder in collaborative research. Professional testimonies (Chapters 5 and 8 of Volume 1 and Chapters 4, 5 and 9 of Volume 2) accompany the research texts in this book: these testimonials, which provide more detail on the pedagogical descriptions and professional issues raised, come from teachers involved in the research or from researchers who have undertaken careful analysis of the research in which they have participated. These different researcher positions invariably shed light on what is being described and investigated: standard practices or more expert practices in collaboration with the researcher(s). Finally, these analyses also make it possible to learn more about professional practices and institutional frameworks specific to various national contexts: mainland France and its overseas territories, and also Spain, Greece and Switzerland.
The book begins with an introductory text by Joël Lebeaume that contextualizes and problematizes the theme of the book by summarizing the inaugural presentation of the conference. This is followed by an Introduction to the Subject (contributed by Sylvain Fabre) that demonstrates, for one type of object and one particular disciplinary context (the plastic arts), how pupil activity can result in the creation of an artistic object from an everyday object (a chair).
The two volumes consist of five parts, drawing together research texts and professional testimonies. Part 1 of Volume 1 examines the links between objects and language. Part 2 of Volume 1 is devoted to the place of objects in early learning in nursery school. Then, Part 1 of Volume 2 explores one specific area of teaching–learning content – space and time. Part 2 of Volume 2 investigates records of activity with objects. The two volumes conclude with Part 3 of Volume 2, comprising three chapters that offer, transversally, contrasting points of view on objects, as well as perspectives for future work.
Part 1 of Volume 1 – Objects and Language(s)
This first part focuses on the relationships between objects in the broad sense and language(s): the learning, for young pupils, of foreign languages or the production of written work in French but also, for 12th grade students, the approach to the role of a “geometric object” in physics. Chapters mentioned in this part are concerned with clarifying, analyzing and investigating the mediation of a variety of objects and its contribution according to the learning objectives.
Progressing to writing short texts is a difficult step for the first grade pupils in a Zone d’éducation prioritaire(ZEP)4. The objects chosen to tell a story materialize the elements and characters of the plot, thus becoming “catalysts” for writing. “The objects, through their materiality and the actions they stimulate, give a real character to situations that the child struggles to represent to him/herself because it calls for such a high level of abstraction” (written by Bruno Hubert in Chapter 2).
Chapters 1, 3 and 4 of Volume 1 examine foreign languages: second languages (Chapters 1 and 4) and additional languages (Chapter 3), respectively.
Chapter 1 (Élise Ouvrard) investigates the contribution of work carried out around children’s English-language picture books and their handling in Modern Foreign Languages (MFLs) sessions in elementary cycle 3, and considers what their instrumentation may involve. It compares approaches of beginners and experts in order to analyze the entries into reading enabled by these approaches, and underlines what is gained through material contact with these picture books: an affective environment and an emotive learning experience. It is an invitation to training so that the introduction of these books can become a real entry into foreign language literacy.
The Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) experience (Zebra Gabillon and Rodica Ailincai in Chapter 3) lies at the intersection of the socio-cultural and the (socio-)interactionist perspectives. The two perspectives allow us to consider the role of mediation in language development, together with the role of linguistic and communicational aspects in the learning process. The joint contribution of the two teacher–researchers is innovative and offers the particularity of reporting on research on the CLIL process implemented in English, at elementary level, in French Polynesia. Chapter 4 (Émilie Magnat and Karima Olechny) offers a reflective study of objects for language in kindergarten and the process which probationary teachers pass through with regard to the use of these objects, with a view to raising English language awareness. The choice of learning objects used (sequential images from a children’s story, a felt mitten, wooden characters) and the preferred approaches underline the importance of training so that objects and processes become instruments for linguistic development.
Finally, in Chapter 5 (Laurent Moutet), the term “language” refers not to French or to another national language, but to a different semiotic system: graphic language. This graphic language, which makes it possible to visualize a mathematical relationship between the quantities of the system being studied, plays a very important role in scientific and technological education, particularly for the content and the school level being considered here (special relativity in a 12th grade science major). The graphic that is constructed with the pupils and then used (Minkowski diagram) takes on the status of a “graphic object” that enables the pupils to reason on concepts that are often counterintuitive. This chapter thus illustrates the fundamental role played by graphic representations in conceptualization.
Part 2 of Volume 1 – Objects and Early Learning
There is one segment of education that cannot manage without objects for learning and to learn about: it is kindergarten, in which the ubiquity of objects of all kinds could be described as an invariant of this first school. In fact, as early as 1886, Pauline Kergomard, founder of this institution devoted to early learning, wrote:
In order to keep occupied, the child must have material objects at his or her disposal. The child who is barely walking pushes a chair in front of him/her for support; an older child turns his/her chair into an improvised horse; then there are the toys, real ones, from the rattle with bells on for the babe-in-arms, to the game of dominoes with which the eldest is learning to count to 12 […]. And it actually is an educational resource, since each of the objects of which it is composed is used for the physical and intellectual development of the child who has it within his/her reach5.
While it is incontestable that objects are plentiful in kindergarten and that they are used in early learning, their role often receives little attention or analysis from educators and researchers. The second part of this work, devoted to objects and early learning, sets out to shed some light on very diverse objects.
Certain objects, such as mascots, have become commonplace in kindergarten; they are supposed to help bring parents and teachers closer together in a collaborative vision of the parent–teacher relationship; it is precisely this supposed rapprochement that is investigated here in terms of social inequalities by Marie-Noëlle Dabestani (Chapter 6). Based on a survey of teachers in mainland France, this author shows a recurrent use of a notebook linked to a mascot and highlights an accentuated, attenuated or neutralized scansion between two spaces of socialization: the family and the school. Thus, the socializing practices of parents and teachers can either be coordinated and reinforced between the two spaces or, conversely, remain separate, the same object being understood differently by each of the stakeholders.
Posters, which are also objects positioned at the interface of materiality and symbolism, are widely used in kindergarten classrooms, generally with no consideration being given to their role in pupil learning and the difficulties they can pose from a didactic point of view. In Chapter 7, Elisabeth Mourot studies the way in which kindergarten pupils from contrasting social backgrounds construct the meaning of didactic posters. Based on interviews in which pupils are confronted with this kind of material, she puts forward configurations of social interpretative subjects, according to the pupils’ ability to symbolize and use language in its evolutionary function.
Conversely, other objects are found less often in kindergarten or elementary school classrooms, such as robots, but are worthy of attention in order to understand the use made of them by the pupils and the skills and knowledge they help to develop. Olivier Grugier and Sandra Nogry show in their testimony (Chapter 8) how elementary school pupils seize upon small robots (BeeBots) and manage to program instructions to generate their movements. Analysis of the sessions observed reveals the essential role of certain artifacts in teachers’ guidance. A comparison of three different class levels (pre-school, first grade and fourth grade) shows a learning progression in computer science and technology.
Part 1 of Volume 2 – Objects and Representations of Space and Time
Space and time, brought together in Part 1 of Volume 2, may suggest a familiar disciplinary split, illustrated by geography and history. This is not the case, however, even if, because of the groupings made during the compilation of the work, objects to learn about/objects for learning in geography are placed together here.
Regarding space, the issue discussed in Chapters 1, 3 and 5 is how objects to learn about make it possible to learn, not so much about geography itself or during geography lessons but, more broadly, about space. Learning about space means articulating through the medium of school objects – wall maps (Xavier Leroux in Chapter 1), “paper” maps and sketches (Sylvie Considerère, Anne Glaudel, Maud Verherve and Mikaël Glaudel in Chapter 3) – or non-school objects – tactile interactive maps (Chapter 5) of images and relevant information in an egocentric spatial frame of reference (oneself, here, at this moment) with relevant images and information in an allocentric spatial frame of reference, for example, a universal system of geographic coordinates. Object systems are thus required to support sensory, emotional, linguistic and cognitive articulations, which are not simple matters, in the standard situation of the geography class (Chapters 1 and 3) or during experiments conducted with visually impaired people (Chapter 5). The common issue in the three propositions is perhaps to describe this change of status imprinted on the proposed objects which, from tools, must become objects – representations – in other words, discourses supported by a materiality that permits the sharing of knowledge.
This part allows us to ask whether it is easier to materialize space rather than time. Thus, Chapter 5 seeks to further improve the multimodality (touching and verbal interactions) of objects that enable visually impaired people to find their bearings in space. Christine Croset, in Chapter 4, focuses on the difficulty of representing musical time: “A problem arises when we want to represent these dimensions: while a visual product (writing, drawing, photo) relies on spatial perception, oral flow (linguistic or musical content) must be reconstituted, which involves memory and attention. The perception of time thus requires more effort than that of space, which is instantaneous.”
This comment is all the more relevant since Chapters 2 and 4, which deal with time, address the preschool teaching of pupils who cannot yet write; a level which takes us away from a strictly subject-related historical approach. The issue is to design the concept of time in young pupils, a specific sub-topic in French syllabuses and associated with space in a wider topic concerned with learning about and exploring the world. While maps or plans are traditional teaching aids in the geographical approach, only chronological timelines or calendars traditionally support these early learnings, time being so difficult to grasp no matter what the age of the learners. The calendar approach in a Greek nursery school (Maria Moumoulidou in Chapter 2) raises the question of the teaching aids used but above all of the objectives pursued, the learning approaches chosen. In a more unusual way, musical time makes it possible to work on another dimension of time as part of the child’s development in the framework of a pedagogy that embraces sensoriality (Chapter 4). In fact, music, by definition, like the speech process, has to do with multiple temporalities (succession, rhythm, simultaneity, etc.). The writing of musical scores by young children, aged between 4 and 6 years old, in a Swiss school, was thus chosen to materialize the appropriation and characterization of segments of a song learned in class.
Part 2 of Volume 2 – Objects and Traces of the Activity
Part 2 of Volume 2 deals with various objects (assessments, technical objects, school objects) and their activation by subjects. The contributions in this part are based on a variety of theoretical and analytical frameworks, which do, however, have the common point of studying the way in which material or symbolic objects become usable objects as soon as they enter into a relationship with the user. The relationship between the subject and the object thus reveals unique experiences and activities, which differ according to the contexts studied, and these traces must be recorded. This part consists of three research reports and a testimony.
With regard to the research aspect, Sylvie Grubert Jost’s contribution (Chapter 6) focuses on the practice of self-assessment of the skills expected in elementary school as a learning object and a shared responsibility between pupil and teacher. The author shows how assessment becomes a communication object as soon as it enters into a relationship with the subject who uses it. Communication between the teacher and the pupil around the practice of self-assessment then becomes a means of making the two parties jointly responsible for learning and for better perceiving each other’s expectations. The contribution of John Didier, Marion Botella, Rachel Attanasio and Marie-Dominique Lambert (Chapter 7) analyzes the process of creation of a technical object by elementary school pupils, paying particular attention to the different stages that lead them to this creation, whether reflective, decisional or linked to action. The objective of this research is to analyze the process of transforming recycled materials to enable the creation of a sound garden and to analyze what the pupils take away from it in terms of learning throughout the process. Chapter 8, by Corinne Marlot, Christine Riat and Patrick Roy, examines the methods of entry into scientific culture for elementary cycle 1 pupils. More specifically, the authors analyze the conditions under which a school discipline object (in this case, a collective poster) can foster the institution of scientific practices in these pupils. The results show that scientific acculturation – as a means of learning about and understanding the world – involves thinking about the nature of the material, symbolic and language objects that can be mobilized, their relationship and also the way in which they should be introduced in order to engage pupils intellectually. This part concludes with the testimony of Irene Guevara, Iván Moreno-Llanos, Lucía Romero, Laura Zapardiel and Cintia Rodríguez (Chapter 9) who examine the self-regulatory practices of children below 3 years of age by analyzing their actions on objects and instruments around them. The authors show that children control their behavior and actions long before they have consolidated verbal language. Their actions on objects arise from understanding the phenomena but also from the solutions and strategies envisaged to understand what must be done and how. They also underline the role of the teacher and the challenges they impose on them to foster the development of the child.
Thus, these four contributions analyze the way in which material or symbolic objects enter into a relationship with subjects, their activation and what the subjects take away from them in terms of learning or development from the moment they think about them, handle them or transform them.
Part 3 of Volume 2 – Points of View on Objects and Perspectives
The last part is not, like the previous parts, composed of research texts and professional testimonies concerning a particular object. On the contrary, it brings together contributions addressing the topic of objects in teaching practices in a more global way. Based on his experience as a teacher and researcher, José Luis de los Reyes Leoz (Chapter 10) presents a resolutely cultural and emotive point of view on objects steeped in history kept in museums. The second point (Chapter 11) from the conference’s round table presents the points of view of four researchers (Mickaël Le Mentec, Anne-Laure Le Guern, Jean-François Thémines and Abdelkarim Zaid) on the place of objects in their journeys as researchers. In Chapter 12, Alain Panero puts forward a philosophical overview of all the texts in the book by considering the positions, often implicit, of the authors while sketching his own point of view, thus feeling an emotive experience that is a preliminary version of writing.
November 2021
Preface written by Joël BISAULT, Roselyne LE BOURGEOIS, Jean-François THÉMINES, Mickaël LE MENTEC and Céline CHAUVET-CHANOINE.
1
Twin pan scales, widely used in France until the 1960s/1970s. These types of scales have for a long time been a typical example of school equipment used in every elementary school.
2
These batteries were widely used in France (in pocket lamps for example) until the 1960s/1970s and are still used in French elementary school for their practical side (metal plates to facilitate electrical contacts).
3
“
Repères temporels et spatiaux, découverte du monde
”: examples of parts of the French syllabuses for pre-school.
4
ZEPs were created in France in 1981 to advance equality of opportunity between pupils, taking into account the social problems of the areas concerned.
5
Kergomard, P. (1886).
L
’
éducation maternelle dans l
’
école
, Librairie Hachette et Compagnie, Paris.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all those who contributed to this collective work: the participants in the June 2019 conference who agreed to re-engage with a view to authoring a chapter, the members of the conference’s scientific committee who undertook an expert review of the articles submitted and provided guidelines for editing when necessary and the colleagues or former colleagues who shared with us their expertise on specific topics.
We would particularly like to thank Sophie Pelissier who facilitated the contributions from our Hispanic colleagues, Catherine Rebiffé and Anne Delbrayelle for their invaluable help on French language issues and Karima Olechny for her advice on this English version.
Scientific committee of this publication
Jacques Audran (INSA Strasbourg), Christine Berzin (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Joël Bisault (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Justine Breton (University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, CEREP), Céline Chauvet-Chanoine (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Cora Cohen-Azria (University of Lille, CIREL), Anne Delbrayelle (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Béatrice Finet (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Joël Lebeaume (University of Paris, EDA), Roselyne Le Bourgeois (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Anne-Laure Le Guern (University of Caen Normandy, CIRNEF), Mickaël Le Mentec (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Corinne Marlot (Haute Ecole Pédagogique du canton de Vaud), Sophie Pelissier (University of Picardie Jules Verne, CAREF), Valérie Tartas (University of Toulouse-Jean Jaurès, CLLE) and Jean-François Thémines (University of Caen Normandy, ESO).
PART 1Objects and Representations of Space and Time
1The Map and the Game: Objects for Learning Geographical Points of Reference in Elementary School
1.1. Introduction
While learning geographical points of reference has always been and remains a component of training in the discipline, the time reserved for learning these locations as well as the procedures for their discovery should be interrogated in the context of a revitalized geography in which nomenclature is no longer the main subject of discussion.
My comments showcase my experience as a practitioner–researcher, as which I designed and produced a game to facilitate the acquisition of a number of spatial points of reference to be placed on wall maps based on features and locations. Just like other classroom posters (like timelines), this system of small cards to be stuck onto larger wall maps (France, Europe, the world) seeks to respond to the infrequent or even complete lack of use of the maps hanging on the wall, sometimes for a long time, which are already filled in and which provide no means for practical work.
This approach provides the opportunity to learn many things about pupils’ academic and personal knowledge, which can be used as points of reference for the game, about the way they categorize and define these points of reference, and about the possibility of connecting them to themes in the lesson plan so that these points of reference are not learned for their own sake or without putting them to use in a real analysis of how spaces are organized.
Does this process of focusing on an object that was designed, produced and appropriated make it possible to effectively acquire knowledge of these points of reference and to make the connection with the potential of a revitalized school geography that is now structured around reasoning, problem solving, dialog with other disciplines and the consideration of representations?
The temporal context of which this work is a part is important because, since 2015, elementary schools in France have benefited from lesson plans in geography that have contributed a strong, paradigm-shifting change (“living”) that remains very open, particularly with regard to points of reference, for which no specific list is provided. However, this does not help schoolteachers, who are rarely trained geographers and who remain, nevertheless, responsible for this learning of points of reference, hence the recourse to the experiment presented here.
After initially framing spatial points of reference in geography as it is taught and, more specifically, in the lesson plans for upper elementary school grades, I then present the protocol for creating the game and for interacting with it throughout the year, before concluding with results and analysis.
1.2. Points of reference: A special place in geography as it is taught
In France, school geography curricula are intended to reserve a specific place for the question of spatial points of reference. Learning about them is a non-negligible part of the process, generally under the label of “geographical points of reference.” What can we read behind this phrase, which seems all-encompassing?
The term “point of reference” is encountered in geographical dictionaries, where it signifies “a mark or a signal indicating a location or a place” (Brunet et al. 2005). The authors specify that this has three uses: the point of reference serves “to (1) situate or locate oneself in space, (2) as a basis for evaluating distance and (3) to indicate a risk or a danger” (Brunet et al. 2005). Other geographers have discussed the topic, adding that “the point of reference” can be understood vaguely as “using the identifiable elements of the landscape” or more precisely as “using a system of reference coordinates (orthonormal reference axes)” (Bavoux and Chapelon 2014). What lies behind this entry is one of the discipline’s biggest problems: that localization is determined both as “a position in space [and as] a point of reference for that position (and a process for moving to a particular location)” (Bavoux and Chapelon 2014).
For a long time, the prerogative of geography in its classic period (first half of the 20th century) entailed that the study of locations in the form of inventories was also central to geography as it was taught, where a dominant weight was accorded to the observable forms, to the learning of a nomenclature, whether a nomenclature of these forms or of proper names…” (Audigier and Tutiaux-Guillon 2004). While teaching in the discipline today has been heavily modernized (with the presence of a dynamic, albeit fragmented, didactics and an introduction of content with a better connection to the epistemology of the science of reference), we note that “these old forms of school geography persist in mainstream geography” (Chevalier 1997), such as the recent publication of work that exhumes old maps1 or Internet games that are among the top results in Internet searches2.
What remains clear, in the framework of a prescribed, revitalized school geography, heretofore focused on reasoning and problem solving, dialoging with other disciplines, and integrating representations and the digital, is that learning points of reference in space remains a strong component of the discipline as it is taught, and that we approach it from the perspective of objectives or competencies (Mérenne-Schoumaker 2012). Sometimes taken to be an “ideal-type of transmission of a self-centered vision of the world”, among other things “by filling the function of common culture destined for disadvantaged pupils” (Thémines 2004), the question of the geographical points of reference to be studied resonates more sharply in the framework of what we were interested in here, elementary school teaching, where teachers, who are generalists, are only suited for the discipline’s “surface elements” (Philippot 2008) because of their “imperfect polyvalence” (Philippot and Baillat 2011) and who consider this mastery of points of reference as an indispensable prerequisite for other forms of teaching, sometimes even beyond what is called for (Leroux and Le Bourgeois 2020).
If this need to present points of reference as an essential foundation sends school teachers back to the geographic education they received as pupils or to mainstream geography, another explanation lies in the fact that the study of locations and points of reference can be easily evaluated, which can lead to it being considered as a “low stress intellectual operation” (Mousseau and Pouettre 1999), which results in “factual errors” (Hugonie 2002). A glance at the forums and blogs of elementary school teachers shows real resource-sharing in terms of teaching resources suggested by teachers that seem legitimate because of their knowledge as “practitioners” and because users indicate satisfaction with them (Baudinault 2017). Assessments on points of reference are included, but the gap between prescribed geography and geography as it is practiced inevitably exists. In a study conducted by the DEPP, in the framework of the CEDRE (Cycle of Disciplinary Evaluations Conducted by Sample) in 2011, almost 75% of the elementary school teachers in the fields of history and geography who responded rejected the assertion that their assessments consisted of “reciting a lesson”, even though 85% of them recommended “memorization of the lesson” (SCEREN CNDP-CRDP 2011)!
1.3. Points of reference in upper elementary curricula
Points of reference thus constitute an unavoidable component of learning geography, but they are specified inconsistently by the various official directives. A comparison of three sets of curricula is necessary for two superimposed reasons: first because the most recent provide no orientation or even list for determining the points of reference that are nevertheless required, and second because the very frequent changes in the curriculum do not aid the “slow infusion of geographical knowledge” (Baudinault 2017). Elementary school teachers do not have the time, the assistance or the perspective to absorb and interpret these changes; they struggle with the current curriculum, particularly with regard to the importance to be accorded to points of reference, and they do not change their habits easily. Table 1.1 shows these three curricula (2002, 2008 and 2015), which merit several comments.
The most general is that, despite paradigm shifts, particularly in the latest concerning “living”, which profoundly revitalizes the way of understanding the world, points of reference are still present, and they even set the boundaries for a strong competency organized around several elements: naming/describing or identifying/locating or situating. These terms are not neutral, and it is their complementarity that allows for the achievement of complete mastery of this vast skill, which is the “construction of geographical points of reference.” The study conducted in 2011 by the DEPP specifies with regard to elementary school that “the attribute or function of a place and the mastery of a specific lexicon results in higher grades than locating it on a map”. However, a 2008 assessment booklet by the same SCEREN network, called the “elementary school booklet” or the “blue booklet”, only includes a single skill for geography in upper elementary school: “Identify the primary features of the geography of France”: quite a vague heading given the lacunae observed in the study.
Another point relates to the degree of precision and imperativeness with which these points of reference are treated. While the 2002 and 2008 texts mention “primary points of reference”, the 2015 text mentions “major points of reference”. A priori, there is not much difference between these terms, as they can be interpreted to refer to the essential points of reference, those that are most important. Where things differ more clearly is in the use of definite or indefinite qualifiers for determining these points of reference. Each of the three texts includes clearly identifiable elements such as “the” oceans, countries, French-speaking regions, etc., with the support of specific lists (2002), but areas of vagueness can be seen in expressions such as “some” large cities (2002) and “some” spaces (2015) or the use of ellipses (list of large global cities in the 2002 text). While the three texts mention the points of reference to “know”, the 2008 curriculum intensifies the word by mentioning “indispensable” points of reference to be mastered, which can be complemented by other elements chosen by the teacher.
Table 1.1.Points of reference in upper elementary curricula for 2002, 2008 and 2015
Another point of analysis can be seen in the “World” table appended to this text: which map of the world is proposed by the legislation? The texts become less precise as time goes on. The 2002 curriculum is very detailed and does not hesitate to name seas, rivers, cities and locations. What we find there are more or less the cities of school culture (Clerc 2002). The role of the European Union appears clearly, with locations shown in a network. The 2008 text, which caused an uproar because of its archaic and Franco-centric nature (Roumégous and Clerc 2008; Leroux 2012), did not achieve its predecessor’s level of precision, but did provide groups of points of reference to be learned. In addition to the preceding physical elements (climate, relief), elements related to administrative divisions (countries of Europe, French departments and regions) were added. The current curriculum gives teachers a wide margin for maneuver by only specifying that these points of reference can be places or areas. It specifies that “geographical points of reference related to the curriculum should be memorized” and, in the introductory chapter, that “contextualization, putting the place being studied into relation with other places and with the world, provides the opportunity to continue work on major geographical points of reference”. If all this seems advantageous for learning the multi-scale method in support of the skill of “understanding the concept of geographical scale” that is also mentioned in the curriculum, the question of knowing which points of reference will actually be presented by teachers in their classrooms remains open.
1.4. Creating a game about geographical points of reference
In order to determine the place and the forms that geographical points of reference can take in the context of disciplinary teaching, I conducted an experiment in a school setting, specifically in a classroom I led one-third of the time (departmental discharge) during the 2018–2019 school year, a CM2 (US equivalent of sixth grade) class with 26 pupils at Jean Jaurès School, which is part of the REP+ network, in Tourcoing. It involved building a game which had the goal of acquiring knowledge about a number of spatial points of reference, with these to be located on maps based on their features.
1.4.1. Launch process
Raising the question of geographical points of reference, even at the CM2 level, is not easy to do. It is not an exaggeration to say that the discipline of geography is barely known there, if at all: it is overshadowed by history even in elementary school (mixed workbooks in which geography is generally located at the end in anticipation of an excess of history) and sometimes is still confused due to its shared prefix with geometry, which is well established in early elementary school and is more present in schedules and general usage. However, the map constitutes a disciplinary marker (Reuter 2007) on which it relies, even if it is not effectively understood by pupils. Whatever the case, a geographical point of reference is locatable on a map.
The problem lies in the fact that maps are present as constitutive elements of learning in the discipline, but they are also very often simply observed without being used. How many classrooms have wall maps, whether it is a traditional map in the style of Vidal de la Blache that has not been updated or a more recent format, which has been hanging on the wall for several years without having been referred to effectively and regularly by the teacher?
However, pupils seem to profess some interest in the knowledge of places from all sorts of perspectives: some are fascinated by flags, others by a mastery of World Cup soccer teams, both of which coincide with their personal schedules, which, just before beginning middle school, become rather important.
It is in the context of these observations that the idea to build a game relating to the theme of points of reference developed: a game that would have an “important but in no sense exclusive place” (Jacob and Servais 2017), a tool to accompany the curriculum and to serve it, even a pretext for diving into the sequence of learning. As Chevalier has shown, the question of memorization has already been addressed from several angles (verbal, iconic, gestural), but it remains despite everything understudied by geographers (Chevalier 2016). Thus, this study intends to add a stone to this edifice by aiming to make of spatial points of reference something more than a component of learning geography, trying in this way to avoid the implementation of “dry nomenclature”.
The creation of a mechanism in the form of a game had the goal of turning this co-designed and co-produced object into a real didactic tool: a tool that would be both defined by its materiality (it would be manipulable) but also by its symbols (it would include a photo of the relevant geographical point of reference as well as clues to help characterize and locate it).
Over time, the goal is to contribute to the systemization of or at least to a relationship between this object and other objects like it, namely other maps that exist elsewhere, either in the classroom (other wall maps, maps in textbooks or handouts distributed by the teacher) or outside (in other reading activities or via other media). How does this co-developed tool make it possible to move toward more abstraction and generalization when encountering non-manipulable maps?
Once again, the 2015 curricula provide complete latitude in the choice of points of reference, which facilitated the creation of such a tool.
To familiarize pupils with the spirit of the game I wanted to play with them, a few introductory sessions were carried out with a similar historical tool, the Repères d’histoire timeline published by Accès. The idea was to place temporal points of reference onto a chronological timeline, which was identified on the front of the small cards by an image and on the back by three clues with decreasing difficulty (Figure 1.1). This tool was developed to counteract a lack of knowledge about historical points of reference and in response to already filled-out wall timelines presented without having been built.
Figure 1.1.The Repères d’histoire chronological timelines
A few weeks after the beginning of the school year and after having introduced the historical points of reference game, the project of creating a tool to contribute points of reference in space in parallel to those in time was proposed to the pupils.
To have a basis for departure, the pupils, individually in writing at home, chose ten points of reference that were important to know in their opinion and that could be located on one or more maps.
After this study, three wall maps with different scales were posted (France, Europe, the world) with regions, States and continents differentiated by colors and divided into squares to receive the small cards of the points of reference (Figure 1.2). The goal was to crisscross the space with a consistent mesh, without following State contours, so that they would not only be recognized by their appearance, with the risks this brings (Charlet 2011).
Figure 1.2.
