Content uploaded by Marc Demeuse
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Marc Demeuse on Dec 01, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Building upon Wanlin and Crahay this research aims at identifying
the conceptions of pre-service teachers on transmissive,
socioconstructivist and explicit approaches. While Wanlin and Crahay
designed a questionnaire measuring the extent to which pre-service
teachers embraced the transmissive and/or socioconstructivist
approach, we hypothesise that explicit teaching is a distinct
dimension of the model that needs to be apprehended by specific
items and that may be embraced by some pre-service teachers.
We designed a questionnaire including these new items on explicit
teaching in addition to Wanlin and Crahay’s items and administered
it to 563 pre-service primary and secondary teachers in six training
institutions in French-speaking Belgium. Our results do not support
our starting hypothesis. Further focusing on transmissive and
socioconstructivist conceptions in our respondents, our analyses show
that the socioconstructivist conception is widely shared but do not
systematically oppose a transmissive conception. We found evidence
of effects related to institution, year of study and type of training
on these conceptions.
Keywords:
pedagogical conceptions
explicit teaching
transmissive approach
socioconstructivist approach
pre-service teachers
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions
on Explicit, Socioconstructivist
and Transmissive Approaches to Teaching
and Learning in French-speaking Belgium
DOI: 10.47050/66515314.146–169
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
147
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
Introduction
Finding its origin in the birth of the new pedagogy at the end
of the 19th century and during the 20th century, a debate on pedagogical
approaches has animated the educational scene, both in French and
English-speaking countries. By way of example, the book Constructivist
Instruction: Success or Failure edited by Tobias and Duffy (2009),
which gives the floor to (socio)constructivist and instructionist
authors, gives a good account of this debate. This book was published
following a symposium of the American Educational Research
Association (AERA), itself organised as a follow-up to the controversial
paper by Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006). The latter, supported
by empirical research findings, has been the subject of several
responses from more (socio)constructivist authors (Hmelo-Silver,
Duncan & Chinn, 2007; Kuhn, 2007; Schmidt, Loyens, Gog & Paas,
2007) to which the authors of the original text have again responded
(Sweller, Kirschner & Clark, 2007). In the French-speaking world, we
can cite the example of the text written by Paquay (2007) in response
to that of Gauthier, Bissonnette and Richard (2007), which aimed
at disseminating research results highlighting the effectiveness
of instructional approaches.
Generally speaking, authors of instructionist orientation highlight,
on the basis of experimental research comparing the effectiveness
of various pedagogical approaches on student learning, the greater
effectiveness of instructionist approaches such as explicit teaching
compared to socioconstructivist approaches (see Kirschner, Sweller
& Clark, 2006; Bissonnette et al., 2010). Moreover, these authors also
base their argument on research in cognitive psychology that shows
that instructionist approaches respect the cognitive load of learners,
unlike socioconstructivist approaches (Sweller, Kirschner & Clark,
2007). For their part, other authors question these research findings
and promote socioconstructivist approaches (e.g. Herman & Gomez,
2009; Schwartz, Lindgren, & Lewis, 2009), relying more on rhetoric
than on empirical research (Tobias, 2009).
The aim of this study is to examine the extent to which future
teachers in different training institutions in French-speaking
Belgium adhere to one and/or the other pedagogical approach.
Indeed, a study conducted in Switzerland by Wanlin and Crahay
(2015), based on a questionnaire on the socioconstructivist and
148
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
transmissive approaches administered to 228 future teachers,
showed that the conceptions of future teachers are less divided
than the pedagogical discourse opposing the socioconstructivist
and transmissive approaches. For example, some future teachers
are in favour of the transmissive approach but are not opposed
to the socioconstructivist approach.
Nevertheless, the questionnaire proposed by Wanlin and Crahay
(2015) does not differentiate between the transmissive and the explicit
approach. However, a careful reading of the debate on pedagogical
approaches shows that explicit teaching, an instructionist approach
whose effectiveness has been demonstrated by empirical research,
is frequently confused with the transmissive approach. This article
therefore aims to measure the adherence of future teachers to three
pedagogical approaches: the socioconstructivist approach, the explicit
approach and the transmissive approach.
Literature review
Socioconstructivist, transmissive and explicit approaches
While socioconstructivist and instructionist writers agree on how
the student learns (the learning process), they do not agree on how this
learning (the teaching process) can be promoted: "Constructivism has
long been recognised as a useful theory of learning in which learners
build mental representations by engaging in appropriate kinds of active
cognitive processing during learning. It is tempting to also view
constructivism as a prescription for instruction in which learners must
be behaviourally active during learning. While accepting constructivism
as a theory of learning, this chapter examines what is wrong with this view
of constructivism as a prescription for instruction" (Mayer, 2009, p. 184).
The socioconstructivist teaching approach refers to different
approaches such as problem-based learning, project-based
pedagogy, discovery and inquiry learning (Hmelo-Silver, Duncan
& Chinn, 2007; Tobias & Duffy, 2009; Wise & O’Neill, 2009). Generally
speaking, socioconstructivist approaches are characterised by the use,
at the beginning of learning, of authentic and complex tasks during
which the teacher plays the role of facilitator (Bissonnette et al.,
2010; Gauthier, Bissonnette & Richard, 2009; Stordeur, 2012).
149
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
The socioconstructivist approach focuses on the student’s rhythm
and preferences (Bissonnette et al., 2010).
The definition of the socioconstructivist approach used in this study
is similar to that used by Wanlin and Crahay to construct the items
in their questionnaire: "The items representing socio-constructivism
revolve around the idea that students can find the procedures for
solving many problems alone and without the help of an adult, but
also that this identification of solutions can be group-based and takes
place even before the teacher shows the problem-solving procedures"
(Wanlin & Crahay, 2015, p. 261).
In contrast to the study by Wanlin and Crahay, a difference
is established in this study between the explicit and the transmissive
approach. Wanlin and Crahay’s definition of the transmissive approach
refers, without distinguishing between them, to the transmissive
approach and the explicit approaches as they will be defined in the rest
of the text: "[W]e have items that emphasise the need for teachers
to explain, demonstrate and present content, and to communicate
the steps to follow in order to solve problems. These items, which also
include the need for exercise and application, correspond […] to the ideas
of proponents of transmission" (Wanlin & Crahay, 2015, p. 261).
While this definition by Wanlin and Crahay can be associated with
the explicit and transmissive approaches, this study distinguishes
between these. The explicit approach refers to a systematic teaching
approach proceeding from the simple to the complex and including
three indispensable steps (Gauthier, Bissonnette & Richard, 2013):
(1) the teacher clearly demonstrates the procedures for performing
the proposed tasks (modelling); (2) students practise the task
with other students and with the teacher (guided practice); and
(3) the student performs the task alone (independent practice).
Moreover, during an explicit teaching lesson, the teacher constantly
checks students’ understanding and provides them with a lot
of feedback. The transmissive approach, on the other hand, refers
to an approach in which the teacher exposes the contents to the pupils,
who then apply them alone in exercises. In a transmissive lesson, there
is no guided practice phase or verification of comprehension, and
feedback is usually done at the end of the lesson (Gauthier, Bissonnette
& Richard, 2013).
150
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
Teachers’ conceptions and the influence of teacher training
There are many synonyms for the term "conceptions": opinions,
values, beliefs, etc. (Pajares, 1992). Vause (2009) defines conceptions
as preconceived ideas, theories drawn from various sources,
generalisations from personal experience that enable the teacher to act
and justify their action(s).
Conceptions are not directly observable or measurable and
therefore must be inferred from what people say or do (Pajares, 1992).
This justifies our questionnaire method for identifying future teachers’
conceptions.
Sometimes the conceptions of future teachers are not harmonious
and are even contradictory. Nevertheless, they can coexist because
their use will depend on the situation in which the future teacher
finds him/herself (Mortimer, 1995, cited in: Deaudelin et al., 2005).
One could therefore have future teachers who have socioconstructivist
and transmissive conceptions, although these are often opposed
in the literature (Wanlin & Crahay, 2015).
Although pre-service teacher education is intended to change
future teachers’ conceptions (Cole & Knowles, 1993, cited in: Nettle,
1998), some research has shown that it is ineffective in changing
these conceptions.
For example, Olson (1993, cited in: Boraita & Crahay, 2013) found
a status quo in the teaching conceptions of two future elementary
teachers in Ontario, Canada. Hoy and Rees (1977, cited in: Boraita & Crahay,
2013) found a change in conceptions as a result of the theoretical courses
followed by pre-service American secondary school teachers, but their
first practicum resulted in a return to teacher-centred conceptions.
The same is true of Doudin and his colleagues (2001, cited in: Boraita
& Crahay, 2013) in Quebec, where, after the practicum, future elementary
teachers have less socioconstructivist conceptions.
In fact, for there to be a change in conceptions, the future
teacher must be in a situation of inconsistency (Pajares, 1992), which
is rarely the case during pre-service training since the future teacher
is in a familiar situation. Future teachers are not devoid of conceptions
about teaching when they begin their training, since they have been
in the classroom all their lives.
Yet other research indicates the opposite. In the United States, Bolin
(1990, cited in: Boraita & Crahay, 2013) notes a shift in conceptions
151
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
of transmission to a process in which the student is active with a future
primary school teacher. This is also the case for Markel (1995, cited in:
Boraita & Crahay, 2013) with five future primary school teachers
in Arizona and for Daguzon and Goigoux (2007) with 15 future
French teachers.
What is the situation in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation? In French-
-speaking Belgium, pre-service primary and lower secondary (ISCED
1 and 2) teachers are trained for three years (180 credits) in tertiary
institutions called hautes écoles by specialists of education who can
embrace different approaches to teaching and learning. The idea
of pedagogical freedom is indeed strongly supported: each teacher,
as a "reflective practitioner" (Schon, 1984), is free to embrace his/her
own approach to teaching and learning. Furthermore, teacher education
aims at changing pre-service teachers’ conceptions of teaching and
learning, as it is often said that students arrive there with a transmissive
preconception. Following Nettle (1998), we hypothesise that pre-service
education has an effect on changing pre-service teachers’ conceptions.
We also hypothesise that different hautes écoles may have different
effects, as their teacher trainers may embrace different approaches and
pass them on to their students. Moreover, pre-service upper secondary
(ISCED 3) teachers are trained part-time at the university for one year
(called agrégation) after they have completed their subject training
or while in the completion of it. We hypothesise that these differences
in pre-service teacher training imply differences in the conceptions
of these pre-service teachers.
Measuring teachers’ conceptions
The tool constructed by Wanlin and Crahay (2015) makes it possible
to identify socioconstructivist and transmissive teacher conceptions.
They were interested in the conceptions of 228 future primary
and secondary school teachers in the canton of Geneva and
the factors that influence these conceptions. They also addressed
the question of the antagonistic nature of two conceptions:
does having socioconstructivist conceptions imply the rejection
of transmissive conceptions?
A latent class analysis revealed three profiles with differences between
future primary and secondary school teachers. At the end of their
training, future primary school teachers have more socioconstructivist
152
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
conceptions that are opposed to transmission, whereas the first-year
future primary teachers and the majority of future secondary school
teachers have mixed profiles: pro-transmission without rejecting
socioconstructivism or the rejection of socioconstructivism without
pronouncing themselves in favour of transmission.
Since Wanlin and Crahay’s tool (2015) does not distinguish
between the two teacher-centred approaches defined in this
research (transmission and explicit approach), our study aims to enrich
this instrument.
Hypotheses
Following this literature review, we formulate seven hypotheses:
1.
Respondents can be characterised by three non-independent
dimensions: socioconstructivist, transmissive and explicit
conceptions.
2.
There is a weak negative correlation between socioconstructivist
and transmissive conceptions.
3.
In hautes écoles, students have a more socioconstructivist than
transmissive conception.
4. In hautes écoles, first-year students have a more transmissive
conception than third-year students.
5.
In hautes écoles, third-year students have a more
"socioconstructivist" conception than first-year students.
6.
There is a haute école effect, some being more socioconstructivist
than others.
7.
There is a university effect, ISCED 3 teachers being less
socioconstructivist than their ISCED 1 and 2 counterparts.
Method
Sample
To test these hypotheses, a pen-and-paper questionnaire was
administered to 563 pre-service teachers in French-speaking
Belgium. This sample comes from five hautes écoles and one university
in different school networks within the Wallonia-Brussels Federation.
The distribution of these students according to their course of study
is presented in Table 1. There are 298 pre-service primary school
153
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
teachers and 265 pre-service lower and upper secondary school
teachers. This sample consists of 439 women and 124 men.
Table 1. Description of occasional sample by training taken
PRIMARY LOWER SECONDARY UPPER SECONDARY TOTAL
N298 201 64 563
The 298 pre-service primary school teachers come from five
different hautes écoles with students from the first and third years.
The distribution within these hautes écoles and years is shown in Table
2. Among these future primary school teachers, there are 257 women
and 41 men.
Table 2. Distribution of pre-service primary school teachers in the five hautes écoles
HAUTE ÉCOLE 21HAUTE ÉCOLE 3 HAUTE ÉCOLE 52HAUTE ÉCOLE 6 HAUTE ÉCOLE 7
69 50 15 100 64
1st year 3rd year 1st year 3rd year 1st year 3rd year 1st year 3rd year 1st year 3rd year
40 29 32 18 8 7 83 17 46 18
The 265 pre-service secondary school teachers come from three
different institutions with students from the first and third years
at hautes écoles and students following the agrégation at university.
The distribution within these institutions is shown in Table 3. There are
182 women and 83 men.
Table 3. Distribution of pre-service secondary school teachers in three institutions
UNIVERSITY HAUTE ÉCOLE 3 HAUTE ÉCOLE 5
64 107 94
agrégation 1st year 3rd year 1st Year 3rd year
64 75 32 74 20
1 The numbering of hautes écoles begins at 2 because code "1" has been given to the university.
2 Haute école 4 has been removed from the analyses because only first-year students answered
the questionnaire.
154
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
Pre-service lower secondary education teachers from the first and
third years, as presented in the table above, follow different training
courses depending on the subject they will teach: French/non-
-denominational philosophy, French/French as a Foreign Language
(FLE), education in philosophy and citizenship, Germanic languages,
mathematics, sciences, humanities, home and social economics
or plastic arts. The distribution of pre-service lower secondary teachers
by subject is shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Distribution of future lower secondary school teachers by subject studied
SUBJECTS N
French/non-denominational philosophy 13
French/FLE 30
Education in philosophy and citizenship 9
Germanic languages 26
Mathematics 62
Sciences 19
Humanities 30
Home and social economics 21
Plastic arts 5
These pre-service teachers were interviewed using a pen-and-
-paper questionnaire. All of them took a position on the 65 items
of the questionnaire, adapted from Wanlin and Crahay (2015), on a Likert
scale ranging from "total disagreement" to "total agreement".
Questionnaire
The questionnaire was composed of 65 items, 63 of which are
associated with socioconstructivist (constr), transmissive (trans)
or explicit (expl) approaches. These are presented in Annex 1. There
are 17 socioconstructivist, 12 transmissive and 34 explicit items. This
inequitable distribution is explained by a change made to the structure
of the questionnaire in order to validate it. Thus, some items making
up the explicit scale are in fact subsets made up of common points
between the explicit approach and the other two approaches. These
155
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
subsets have been omitted in order to ensure the internal validity of this
new scale. Two "caricatural" items were added. These are marked with
a C in Annex 1. Of these 65 items, 30 were taken from the Wanlin and
Crahay (2015) questionnaire and 35 were added (these 35 added items
are followed by a * in Annex 1).
The items have been mixed to avoid order of presentation effects.
For each item, respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement
on a six-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly
agree". The even number of categories encourages decision making
on the part of respondents, who are obliged to position themselves
(Berthier, 2011). The few nonresponses (maximum 6 by item) were
coded as 3.5, meaning that the respondent does not agree or disagree
with the statement.
In addition, other information such as the type of training ("Groupe"
variable), level of education ("Bloc" variable), gender, employment
history in teaching, institution attended ("Institution" variable) and
the subject chosen by pre-service lower secondary school teachers
were also collected to enable an analysis of the possible influence
of these variables on the conceptions of future teachers.
Results
Respondents can only be characterised by two non-independent
dimensions (socioconstructivist and transmissive conceptions) and
there is a weak negative correlation between them
Our first hypothesis cannot be confirmed: we cannot show any
evidence of an "explicit" dimension in respondents, whereas
the socioconstructivist and transmissive dimensions are consistent.
On the one hand, Cronbach’s alpha is good for the socioconstructivist (.74)
and transmissive (.78) scales, showing acceptable internal consistency,
but not for the explicit (.54) scale. On the other hand, a factor analysis
(MinRes, Oblimin rotation) shows that although up to seven factors
could be retained, only two factors have eigenvalues greater than 1,
these two factors being the socioconstructivist and the transmissive
conceptions. All the socioconstructivist items load on factor 1 and all
the transmissive items load on factor 2 (except for item 42). Explicit
items load on either the socioconstructivist or transmissive dimension.
The factor analysis also showed that item number 42, "The teacher should
156
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
define the objectives of each lesson before teaching", actually loads
more on the socioconstructivist factor than on the transmissive factor.
It has subsequently been removed from the analyses (Cronbach’s alpha
for the modified transmissive scale is .79). Scores for each of the two
conceptions are calculated by adding the points given to each item (from
1 for "total disagreement" up to 6 for "total agreement"), then dividing
this number by the number of items. Since the consistency of the scale
is too weak, no score has been calculated for the explicit approach.
Our factor analysis shows that there is a weak negative correlation of
r = -.13 between the two principal factors, identified as a transmissive and
a socioconstructivist conception. Plotting the score of the transmissive
conception against the score of the socioconstructivist conception gives
Figure 1, which shows a weak negative correlation (r = -.25) between
the two conceptions. Note that the variance of the residuals is so high
that having a high score in socioconstructivism can be associated with
a low score in "transmission" just as well as a high one.
Figure 1. Transmissive vs socioconstructivist conceptions
trans
2
3
4
5
constr
2 3 4 5 6
157
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
In hautes écoles, students have a more socioconstructivist than
transmissive conception
As Figure 2 shows, the score of the socioconstructivist conception
is always higher than the score of the transmissive conception,
especially in hautes écoles. Our hypothesis is therefore confirmed.
Figure 2. Scores of transmissive and socioconstructivist conceptions by institution
2
3
4
6
5
21 3 5 6 7
établissement
value
VARIABLE constr trans
In hautes écoles, first-year students have a more transmissive
conception than third-year students, who have a more socioconstruc-
tivist conception
As Figure 3 shows, the third years have a markedly lower score than
the first years on the transmissive conception. Our hypothesis is thus
confirmed. Teacher training seems to have an impact on the rejection
of a transmissive approach. The difference between first years and third
years on the socioconstructivist conception is shallower as, from their
158
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
first year, pre-service teachers already embrace a socioconstructivist
conception. This effect could be due to the time of year our survey was
undertaken, i.e. in February and March, when first years had already
spent a full term in their hautes écoles.
Figure 3. Transmissive and socioconstructivist conceptions from the first and third
years in
hautes écoles
2
3
4
6
5
NA1 3
blog
value
VARIABLE constr trans
NA – the university students doing their agrégation.
There are institution, year and training effects explaining variations
in pre-service teachers’ conceptions
In order to test our hypothesis of an institution effect, we ran multilevel
analyses trying to predict the extent to which students embrace
the transmissive conception, then the socioconstructivist conception,
using institution as a level-2 random variable. Multilevel modelling first
starts with a null model where no predictor is inserted. This null model
gives us the proportion of variance explained by the institution. Our
null model is the following:
159
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
score= + +
=
2
0
20+2
score= +1+ +
score= +1+2+ +
whereij is the score (transmissive or socioconstructivist conception)
of student i in the institution, nj, O is the grand mean of students’
scores across hautes écoles, uOj is the effect of institution j on students’
conception and eij is a student-level residual.
Based on this null model, we compute the variance partition
coefficient (VPC), which gives us the proportion of total variance that
is due to differences between institutions:
score= + +
=
2
0
20+2
score= +1+ +
score= +1+2+ +
The proportion of total variance of the transmissive conception
that is due to differences between institutions (hautes écoles
and university) is 10%, whereas this proportion is 13.8% for
the socioconstructivist conception.
Adding the year of study as a fixed effect (only for the hautes écoles,
as there is only one year of study in the agrégation), the equation
is the following:
score= + +
=
2
0
20+2
score= +1+ +
score= +1+2+ +
This analysis gives a coefficient of -0.36 for the transmissive
conception, which means that, controlling for the institution effect,
third years have a score for "transmission" that is on average 0.36
points (on 6) lower than their first-year counterparts. The proportion
of variance explained by the institution level drops to 8% when adding
this fixed effect, which means that the year of study captured some
variation, but not all.
The coefficient for the socioconstructivist conception is 0.12, which
means that, controlling for the institution effect, third years have a score
for socioconstructivism that is on average 0.12 points (on 6) higher
than their first-year counterparts. Here, the proportion of variance
explained by the institution level drops more dramatically to 1.1%,
160
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
which means that the year of study captures most of the variation
between hautes écoles. In other words, there is no hautes écoles effect
on the socioconstructivist conception, but there is a year of study effect
and a university effect (students at the university have a lower score
for socioconstructivism).
These institution and year effects are summarised in Figures 4 and 5.
Figure 4. Institution and year effects on the transmissive conception
2
3
4
5
21 3 5 6 7
établissement
trans
BLOC 1 3 NA
161
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
Figure 5. Institution and year effects on the socioconstructivist conception
3
4
5
6
21 3 5 6 7
établissement
constr
BLOC 1 3 NA
Adding the training taken (primary vs lower secondary) as a fixed
effect (only for the hautes écoles, as there is only one training – upper
secondary – at university), the equation is the following:
score= + +
=
2
0
20+2
score= +1+ +
score= +1+2+ +
This analysis reveals an effect of the training taken on both
transmissive and socioconstructivist conceptions, controlling for
the institution and year. Pre-service lower secondary teachers have
a more transmissive (β
2
= 0.10) and less socioconstructivist conception
(β2 = -0.13) than pre-service primary teachers.
162
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
Discussion
First of all, our results do not support the existence of a consistent
explicit conception in our respondents. However, our analyses
show some interesting results regarding the transmissive and
socioconstructivist approaches.
Future teachers generally have socioconstructivist conceptions
without rejecting transmissive conceptions, the correlation
between the two scales being only slightly negative. This is in line
with the conclusions of Wanlin and Crahay (2015), who invalidated
the systematic antagonism between these two conceptions.
It is also consistent with the findings of Chan and Elliott (2004), who
argue that future teachers in Hong Kong do not only believe in one
pedagogical design.
Nevertheless, the profiles are different depending on the training
followed. For example, pre-service primary school teachers are
the most critical of transmissive conceptions. Pre-service upper
secondary teachers are more critical of socioconstructivist conceptions.
There is also a year of study effect, with future teachers becoming
more socioconstructivist and less transmissive as they progress through
their training.
These findings are similar to those of Daguzon and Goigoux (2007)
and Su (1992, cited in: Nettle, 1998), for whom pre-service teacher
education influences teacher conceptions. Indeed, current training
in French-speaking Belgium advocates a competency-based approach
that is assimilated into socioconstructivist approaches (Maroy, 2002).
These results are also in line with those of Wanlin and Crahay (2015),
who showed that in Switzerland, as they advance in their training,
pre-service primary school teachers become more and more in favour
of socioconstructivism and opposed to transmissive teaching.
In addition to differences between years of study, differences
between the training institutions for pre-service primary school teachers
were also revealed. This institution effect suggests that the training
provided there does indeed play a role in the development/change
in the pedagogical concepts of future primary school teachers.
This result allows us to moderate the positions of Larochelle and
Bednarz (1994) and Chin and Benne (1969, cited in: Boraita & Crahay,
2013), for whom training rarely allows conceptual change.
163
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
Interviews with education specialists and future teachers would
make it possible to qualify the statements of pre-service teachers and
compare them with those of their teachers in the manner of Nettle
(1998) and Zanting and his colleagues (2001). In this way, it would also
be possible to identify the source of variation in conceptions, as Vause
(2009) has done, for whom theoretical courses develop beliefs about
teaching strategies and practicums develop beliefs about students
and learning. The study of the impact of practicums could also
be an extension of this study. We would suggest interviewing future
teachers before and after the practicums, in order to find out whether
they provoke a backtracking of beliefs (Leavy, McSorley & Boté, 2007,
cited in: Boraita & Crahay, 2013) or an evolution (Boraita & Crahay, 2013).
It would also be interesting to compare the conceptions identified
through the questionnaire with classroom practices in order to identify
whether there are differences between what is said and what is done
(Deaudelin et al., 2005). Moreover, following the example of Könings and
his colleagues (2014), one could question the congruence of students’
and teachers’ conceptions of the act of teaching and the act of learning.
References
q
Bissonnette, S., Richard, M., Gauthier, C. and Bouchard, C. (2010). Quelles
sont les stratégies d’enseignement efficaces favorisant les apprentissages
fondamentaux auprès des élèves en difficulté de niveau élémentaire? Résultats
d’une méga-analys, Revue de recherche appliquée sur l’apprentissage, 3(1),
1–35.
qBoraita, F. and Crahay, M. (2013). Les croyances des futurs enseignants: est-il
possible de les faire évoluer en cours de formation initiale et, si oui, comment?,
Revue française de pédagogie, 183, 99–158.
q
Chan, K.-W. and Elliott, R.G. (2004). Relational analysis of personal epistemology
and conceptions about teaching and learning, Te ac hi ng a nd Te ac h er E du ca ti on ,
20, 817–831.
q
Daguzon, M. and Goigoux, R. (2007). L’influence de la prescription adressée
aux professeurs des écoles en formation initiale: construction d’un idéal
pédagogique. Les Actes du Congrès International d’Actualité de la Recherche
en Éducation et en Formation, www.congresintaref.org/actes_pdf/AREF2007_
Marc_DAGUZON_254.pdf
q
Deaudelin, C., Lefebvre, S., Brodeur, M., Mercier, J., Dussault, M. and Richer, J. (2005).
Évolution des pratiques et des conceptions de l’enseignement,
164
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
de l’apprentissage et des TIC chez des enseignants du primaire en contexte de
développement professionnel, Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 31(1), 79–110.
q
Gauthier, C., Bissonnette, S. and Richard, M. (2007). Quelle pédagogie au
service de la réussite de tous les élèves. In: M. Frenay, X. Dumay (eds.),
Un enseignement démocratique de masse. Une réalité qui reste à inventer
(pp. 363–384). Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
q
Gauthier, C., Bissonnette, S. and Richard, M. (2009). Passer du paradigme
de l’enseignement au paradigme de l’apprentissage. Les effets néfastes d’un
slogan, Les Actes de la recherche, 7(13), 239–271.
q
Gauthier, C., Bissonnette, S. and Richard, M. (2013). Enseignement explicite
et réussite des élèves. La gestion des apprentissages. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
q
Herman, P. and Gomez, L.M. (2009). Taking Guided Learning Theory to School.
Reconciling the Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Contexts of Instruction.
In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy (eds.), Constructivist Instruction. Success or Failure?
(pp. 62–81). New York: Routledge.
q
Hmelo-Silver, C., 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, 99–108.
q
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.
q
Könings, K., Seidel, T., Brand-Gruwel, S. and Merrienboer, J.J.G. van (2014).
Differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of education: Profiles
to describe congruence and friction, Instructional Science, 42, 11–30.
q
Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction the answer to the right question?,
Educational Psychologist, 42, 109–114.
q
Larochelle, M. and Bednarz, N. (1994). À propos du constructivisme et de
l’éducation, Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 20(1), 5–19.
q
Maroy, C. (2002). Quelle autonomie professionnelle pour les enseignants? Le cas
de la Communauté française de Belgique, Revue internationale d’éducation
de Sèvres, 30, 41–50.
q
Mayer, R.E. (2009). Constructivism as a Theory of Learning Versus Constructivism
as a Prescription for Instruction. In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy (eds.), Constructivist
Instruction. Success or Failure? (pp. 184–200). New York: Routledge.
q
Nettle, E.B. (1998). Stability and change in the beliefs of student teachers
during practice teaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(2), 193–204.
165
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
q
Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up
a messy construct, Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
q
Paquay, L. (2007). Quelle pédagogie au service de la réussite de tous les élèves?
Mise en question(s) de l’intervention de C. Gauthier. In: M. Frenay, X. Dumay,
Un enseignement démocratique de masse. Une réalité qui reste à inventer
(pp. 385–397). Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
qSchmidt, H.G., Loyens, S.M.M., Gog, T. van 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.
q
Schwartz, D.L., Lindgren, R and Lewis, S. (2009), Constructivism in an Age of Non-
-Constructivist Assessments. In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy (eds.), Constructivist
Instruction. Success or Failure? (pp. 34–61). New York: Routledge.
q
Stordeur, J. (2012). Enseigner et/ou apprendre: Pour choisir nos pratiques.
Bruxelles: De Boeck.
q
Sweller, J., Kirschner, P.A., Clark, R.E. (2007). Why Minimally Guided Teaching
Tec hn iq ue s Do N ot Wo rk : A Rep ly to Co mm en ta ri es , Educational Psychologist,
42(2), 115–121.
q
Tobias, S. (2009). An Eclectic Appraisal of the Success or Failure of Constructivist
Instruction. In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy, Constructivist Instruction. Success
or Failure? (pp. 335–350). New York: Routledge.
q
Tobias, S. and Duffy, T.M. (2009). The Success or Failure of Constructivist
Instruction. In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy (eds.), Constructivist Instruction. Success
or Failure? (pp. 3–10). New York: Routledge.
q
Vause, A. (2009). Les croyances et connaissances des enseignants à propos
de l’acte d’enseigner. Vers un cadre d’analyse, Les cahiers de Recherche
en Éducation et Formation, 66, 98–115.
q
Wanlin, P. and Crahay, M. (2015). Les enseignants en formation face aux approches
pédagogiques: une analyse en classes latentes, Revue des sciences de l’éducation,
41(2), 251–276.
q
Wise, A.F. and O’Neill, K. (2009). Beyond More Versus Less. A Reframing
of the Debate on Instructional Guidance. In: S. Tobias, T.M. Duffy (eds.),
Constructivist Instruction. Success or Failure? (pp. 82–105). New York:
Routledge.
q
Zanting, A., Verloop, N. and Vermunt, J.D. (2001). Student teachers eliciting
mentors’practical knowledge and comparing it to their own beliefs, Teaching
and Teacher Education, 17(6), 725–740.
166
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
Annex 1
Of these 65 items, 30 were taken from the Wanlin and Crahay (2015)
questionnaire and 35 were added (these 35 added items are followed
by a *).
NUMBER ITEM
1The teacher should enable students to make connections
between new knowledge and prior knowledge.* expl
2The main task of the teacher is to transmit knowledge
and know-how to the students. trans
3Learning is enabled by students’ research in solving problem tasks.* constr
4Good teaching always draws on the students’ personal experiences. constr
5The student must work in a group before working alone.* expl
6Students are required to solve problems as often as possible
as they have been taught in the classroom. expl
7The teacher must clearly define and communicate
the objectives of the course to the students.* expl
8The teaching of academic knowledge and the teaching
of social skills must be carried out at the same time.* expl
9Students can find procedures for solving many problems
on their own and without the help of an adult. constr
10 Students learn most when the teacher continually
checks their understanding.* expl
11
After the teacher has shown them how to do the exercises,
the students move on to the exercises that they have
to do independently, without the help of the teacher.*
trans
12 To be effective, the teacher must plan his or her lesson in a precise
and non-rigid manner, based on the official curriculum.* expl
13 The only evaluation that counts is the final evaluation.* trans
14 Teachers need to motivate students to find their own
ways of solving problems even if they are not very effective. constr
15 Learners should have the opportunity to build their knowledge
in collaboration with their classmates or with the teacher. constr
16 The teacher should allow students to assess themselves.* expl
17 The most effective teachers demonstrate the right way
to solve problems to their students. expl
18 Pupils should only be given problematic tasks when
they have mastered the contents and procedures. expl
167
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
19 When homework is given, it is to allow the student
to discover new knowledge on his or her own.* constr
20 As a general rule, students are not able to discover the
relationships between the different contents on their own. expl
21 It is important, to monitor the learning process, that all students
do the same work at the same time and in the same way.* trans
22 Before spending time on problem-solving, students
must be given time to learn and retain the underlying procedures. expl
23 The student must work alone before working in a group.* constr
24 Students learn more when the teacher explains, demonstrates
and exposes the content. expl
25 At school, knowledge must be learnt like naturally
acquired knowledge such as walking.* constr
26 Previous knowledge is mastered by the students
and does not need to be recalled.* trans
27 The teacher should often give students the opportunity
to solve problems in pairs or small groups. constr
28 The teacher should never explain to students
the procedures for completing a task.* constr
29
For sustainable learning, it is imperative that students are brought
to practise procedures and knowledge before solving complex
problems or tasks.
expl
30 Students learn best when they follow their teachers’ explanations. trans
31 To be effective, the teacher must plan his or her lesson in a precise
and non-rigid manner, based on the students’ learning mechanisms.* expl
32 Most students can find solutions to the problem tasks on their own. constr
33 Learning is enabled by the teacher’s questions and the students’
answers.* expl
34 In order for learning to take place, it is necessary to start
from the students’ initial representations.* expl
35 Teaching must give priority to the acquisition of academic
knowledge among students before social skills. trans
36
Before the teacher demonstrates problem-solving procedures
to students, the teacher should give them the opportunity
to identify personal solutions to the problems.
constr
37 During the lesson, the teacher must first use elements that come from
the students before introducing those from the official programmes. constr
38 Students need a clear demonstration from the teacher
on how to solve problems by applying the content. expl
168
Chloé Gravé, Marie Bocquillon, Nathanaël Friant, Marc Demeuse
39
When homework is given, it is to allow the student to exercise knowledge
and skills that have already been practised in class with the help
of the teacher and students.*
expl
40 Learning should be based on the knowledge and skills
that students already master and not on complex new tasks. expl
41 After demonstrating the procedures to the students,
the teacher should encourage work in pairs or small groups.* expl
42 The teacher should define the objectives of each lesson before teaching. trans
(removed)
43 Allowing students to discuss their own resolution ideas
helps them to understand the learning content. constr
44 The teacher must assess the student as he or she learns.* expl
45 A good teacher encourages students to verbalize their strategies.* expl
46
The exercises should be organised in two stages: a first stage during
which the students receive help and a second stage during which
they are autonomous.*
expl
47 At school, knowledge must be learnt in a different way
than natural knowledge such as walking.* expl
48 Teachers need to communicate detailed problem-solving
procedures that apply learning. expl
49 The student must always work alone. trans
50 It is important to focus on elements that are common
to several contents/subjects if students are to learn. expl
51
The teacher should interview all students, preferably in an equitable
manner by making a random selection to determine who should answer
each question.*
expl
52 During the exercises, students are autonomous, just like
at the beginning of the learning process. constr
53 Students should often be given the opportunity to reproduce
the model resolutions demonstrated or explained by their teacher. expl
54
At school, the learning context should be organised in such a way
that students can identify the relationships between learning
content on their own.
constr
55 Students learn best when they rephrase the teacher’s explanations
in their own words.* expl
56 The homework assignment is the real moment when the pupil
appropriates the new knowledge communicated in class by the teacher.* trans
57 To be effective, the teacher must not deviate from the lesson plan that
he or she has constructed using the official curriculum. trans
169
Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions...
58
During the lesson, the teacher can start with material from the official
curriculum if he or she explains to the students why they are learning
this.*
expl
59 Learning is made possible by the clearest possible presentation
by the teacher.* trans
60 The teacher should provide regular feedback to students.* expl
61 Learning activities must always be rooted in the needs of the students. constr
62 Students learn best when they have the opportunity to discover
the solution to problems on their own. constr
63 Mastery of the material is not essential; it is the way it is passed on that
counts.* constr
64 The student is always actively building his or her knowledge.* expl
65 Students must first understand the contents and procedures before they
are asked to practise them. expl
