Abstracts
Résumé
Le présent article relate la transformation d’un dispositif destiné à un public adulte en formation à l’enseignement dans le contexte de pandémie de COVID‑19. Il se présente sous la forme de modules asynchrones composés d’activités variées et mis à disposition des étudiants selon un calendrier défini. Près de 90 % des étudiants ont suivi le cours jusqu’à son terme. L’analyse proposée interroge les facteurs de soutien à l’engagement à la lumière du modèle PETTaL (Mukherjee, 2013) et semble indiquer que l’articulation entre les spécificités du public et les aspects technologiques dans une perspective d’apprentissage différencié a contribué à l’engagement des étudiants.
Mots-clés :
- Enseignement à distance,
- asynchrone,
- COVID-19,
- différenciation pédagogique,
- engagement étudiant,
- vidéocapture d’écran,
- PETTaL
Abstract
This article relates the experience of transforming a learning device intended for an adult audience involved in teaching training in the context of pandemic COVID‑19. The device is presented in the form of asynchronous modules composed of various activities. They are available to students according to a defined schedule. Almost 90% of students have completed the course. It’s why a critical perspective questions the factors supporting student engagement in light of the PETTaL model (Mukherjee, 2013). After analysis, it appears that the articulation between audience specificities and technological aspects in a perspective of supporting differentiated learning contributed to student engagement.
Keywords:
- Distance learning,
- COVID-19,
- pedagogical differentiation,
- student engagement,
- screencast,
- PETTaL
Appendices
Références
- Eccles, J. S et Dweck, C. S. (2005). Handbook of competence and motivation. Guilford.
- Feyfant, A. (2016). La différenciation pédagogique en classe [dossier de veille no 113]. Institut français de l’éducation. http://ife.ens-lyon.fr/...
- Hattie, J. et Yates, G. (2013). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. Routledge.
- Henri, F. et Pudelko, B. (2003). Understanding and analysing activity and learning in virtual communities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(4), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00051.x
- Higgins, S., Xiao, Z. et Katsipataki, M. (2012). The impact of digital technology on learning: A summary for the Education Endowment Foundation – Full report. Durham University et Education Endowment Foundation.
- Kirschner, P. A. et De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135‑142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
- Martin, F. et Betrus, A. K. (2019). Digital media for learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33120-7
- Mayer, R. et Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
- Mishra, P. et Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
- Morris, C. et Chikwa, G. (2014). Screencasts: How effective are they and how do students engage with them? Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(1), 25‑37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787413514654
- Mukherjee, M. M. (2013). Technological tools for science classrooms: Choosing and using for productive and sustainable teaching and learning experiences [thèse de doctorat, Queensland University of Technology, Australie]. QUT ePrints. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/...
- Ng, W. (2015). New digital technology in education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‑3‑319‑05822-1
- Passey, D., Rogers, C., Machell, J. et McHugh, G. (2004). The motivational effect of ICT on pupils: A Department for Education and Skills research project (rapport de recherche RR523). Lancaster University, Department of Educational Research. http://researchgate.net/...
- Perrenoud, P. (2012). L’organisation du travail, clé de toute pédagogie différenciée. ESF.
- Poyet, F. et Drechsler, M. (2009). Impact des TIC dans l’enseignement : une alternative pour l’individualisation? Dossier de veille de l’IFÉ, (41). http://veille‑et‑analyses.ens‑lyon.fr/...
- Santhanam, R., Sasidharan, S. et Webster, J. (2008). Using self-regulatory learning to enhance e-learning-based information technology training. Information Systems Research, 19(1), 26‑47. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0141
- Spante, M., Hashemi, S. S., Lundin, M. et Algers, A. (2018). Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Education, 5(1), article 1519143. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143
- Viau, R. (2009). La motivation en contexte scolaire (2e éd.). De Boeck.