Le bulletin Le Tableau est destiné aux
enseignants de niveau supérieur. Il vise à informer les enseignants sur les différentes
approches pédagogiques qui peuvent être utilisées dans le cadre de leur
enseignement. Ici vous est proposé une
réflexion en lien avec la pertinence ou non de varier les approches
pédagogiques suivie de quelques pistes pour y arriver en contexte d'enseignement
supérieur.
I think that this article is a good find Daniel. It reminds educators to incorporate a little variety into their lessons. That being said, I'd like to just add a few tidbits here for reflective purposes.
RépondreSupprimerIn higher education, we don't have the luxury of providing as many classes to our students as the secondary school level does. There is something to be said for the notion of "routine" when it comes to complex tasks. For example, I try to incorporate all five English as a Second Language (ESL) competencies into each of my classes: reading, writing, speaking, listening, and grammar. As you can imagine, this can be a bit of a challenge with such little time. I've managed to devise a system that works quite nicely (for me, at least) but it is a bit complex. After students have done this activity a few times, they know what to expect and exactly how to complete the tasks required of them. I'm not sure that the same could be said if I were varying my activities every week while trying to incorporate the five course competencies at the same time.
Moving specifically to the article that you referenced (Pourquoi varier les approches pédagogiques?), I would just like to note that I've read several studies that criticise and claim to debunk Belleau's (stemming from Gardner's) theory of multiple intelligences. I must admit that, anecdotally at least, I do not see a lot of evidence supporting this theory in the classroom.
On the other hand, the "Sequential and Simultaneous Theory" appears to be very much alive in my classroom (Kamphaus, Lichtenberger). Students actively advise me when my instructions are not making sense to them and, usually, it's because they lean too far toward either the "sequential" or to the "stimulus" side of things.
Interestingly, the "Pourquoi varier les approches pédagogiques?" document does a great job of demonstrating both of these methods on its pages.
Jamie Bridge
---------------
Kamphaus, Randy W., and Randy W. Kamphaus. Clinical Assessment of Child and Adolescent Intelligence. New York, NY: Springer, 2005. Print.
Lichtenberger, Elizabeth O., Debra Y. Broadbooks, and Alan S. Kaufman. Essentials of Cognitive Assessment with KAIT and Other Kaufman Measures. New York: Wiley, 2000. Print.