Enseignant Activateur et Facilitateur: Etude de Cas en Iran Journal Article

On admet bien qu’une des nouvelles conceptions dans le domaine de l’enseignement des langues, est le fait que l’enseignement centré sur l’enseignant a été remplacé par l’enseignement centré sur l’apprenant. Le déplacement d’une pédagogie par objectifs à une pédagogie active, centrée sur l’apprenant, entraîne une modification du rôle de l’enseignant. L’enseignant n’est plus celui qui se contente de transmettre les savoirs aux apprenants. Dans les méthodes actives, l’enseignant doit faciliter l’engagement des élèves. Il doit leur proposer de suivre une démarche active d’apprentissage à l’égard d’une situation complexe. Mais, la pédagogie par objectif n’a-t-elle pas toujours privilégiée par les enseignants du FLE ? L’objectif principal de cet article est de connaître le modèle d’enseignement le plus fréquent entre les deux modèles explicite et par découverte chez les enseignants du FLE en Iran. Cette recherche consiste en une comparaison des deux modèles basés sur les théories différentes, l’une centrée sur l’enseignant et l’autre centrée sur l’apprenant. Tout d’abord, nous allons comparer les deux modèles d’enseignement, puis nous aurons recours à un questionnaire portant sur 35 enquêtés qui ont de 2 à 17 ans d’expérience dans le domaine de l’enseignement du FLE en Iran. Les résultats de cette enquête montrent que les enseignants du FLE, suivent pratiquement la démarche explicite dans leur enseignement. Plus qu’ils ne le prétendent, ils prennent cette démarche comme modèle d’enseignement.

یکی از مفاهیم جدید در زمینه اموزش زبان، جایگزین شدن تدریس متمرکز بر معلم با اموزش مبتنی بر یادگیرنده است . بنابراین، یادگیرنده مرکز پروژه اموزشی محسوب میشود. تغییر شیوهی تفکر عینی به مدل پویا یا یادگیرنده محور، باعث تغییر نقش معلم میشود. معل م، دیگر به انتقال دانش به زبان اموزان بسنده نمیکند. در روشهای اموزشی فعال، معل م باید تعامل دانش اموز را تسهیل نماید. او به انها پیشنهاد میکند که رویکرد فعالی را در مواجهه با موقعیت پیچیده اموزشی پیش گیرند. اما ایا اموزش به روش عینی همچنان در بین معلمها رایج نیست؟ هدف اصلی این مقاله، شناخت رایج ترین مدل اموزشی از بین دو مدل صریح و مساله محور در بین معلمهای زبان فرانسه در ایران است. این تحقیق شامل مقایسه دو مدل مبتنی بر تيوریهای متفاوت، یکی متمرکز بر معلم و دیگری متمرکز بر یادگیرنده، می شود. در ابتدا دو مدل اموزشی را مقایسه کرده سپس، از پرسشنامهایی که توسط 53 مدرس، با تجربه کاری بین 2 تا 17 سال در زمینه اموزش زبان فرانسه، پاسخ داده شده، استفاده میکنیم. این نظرسنجی نشان میدهد که معلمان زبان فرانسه، به صورت عملی روش صریح را در شیوه تدریس خود قرار میدهند. انها از این روش بیشتر از انچه ادعا میکنند، به عنوان روش تدریس استفاده میکنند .

There is a great deal of research carried out on teaching methodologies throughout the history of foreign language teaching. Based on some experiences, different teaching methodologies correspond to different models of interactions in the French classroom. Obviously, behind every teaching model, there is a special methodology, but what encourages us to study in this research is the model of interactions in French courses, rather than the methodology itself. The focus on each of the two elements (teacher and learner) of the pedagogical triangle would lead to a different model of the treatment of the intermediate pole, that is to say the transmission of knowledge in French courses. The problematic of this research is to find out which of these two models (the learner-centered model or the teacher-centered model) is used most frequently in teaching French in Iran and what logic leads to this choice. The present research is therefore based mainly on this hypothesis that teachers tend towards the teacher-centered model because it allows them to control everything while transmitting knowledge to the learners. Consequently, there is not enough space left for the discovery of knowledge by learners in French lessons. The two notions, activator and facilitator are pioneered by John Hattie (2014), professor at the University of Melbourne in Australia, in his study called "visible teaching". According to Hattie (2009, 2014), “all the characteristics of the “activator” mode refer to the properties of explicit teaching, grouping together attitudes intended to make the teaching content clearly “visible” or perceptible to students, to guide their learning, to obtain the active participation of the pupil and to inform him about what he has learned and what remains for him to learn. The "facilitator" mode, on the contrary, highlights the pedagogical attitudes leaving the pupils to extract the concepts to be learned from the rather complex pedagogical situations that are offered to them. This mode responds to the constructivist conceptions of teaching currently dominant in educational circles."(Bianco 24) In this study, we have chosen two teaching models namely explicit teaching and discovery teaching (problem-based). These two teaching models represent respectively teacher-centered teaching and learner-centered (learner or learning-centered teaching). Both student-centered and teacher-centered teaching models have long been in use. Each of the two models has advantages and disadvantages. In explicit teaching, you assess what has actually been learned by students against what has actually been taught by teachers. The teacher's responsibility in the teaching / learning process makes him more active in this approach. That's where does the qualifier "the activator" come from. It is about making explicit any reasoning that is implicit in teaching; what to do, how, when, where and why to do it. The teacher develops a model of the procedures of the tasks to be performed in front of the students. Activator and Facilitator Teacher * 160 According to Daniel Amedro (2009), the operation of explicit teaching consists of 3 stages: simulation, experience and learning/objectification. These three stages constitute the course of explicit teaching. Explicit teaching is an approach that is easily applied in a classroom setting. These three stages are distinct, but complementary. It opposes the pedagogies of discovery only, which are student-centered. In active pedagogies resulting from constructivism, the emphasis is on group work and the effectiveness of this fact is recognized by various research. According to the constructivist concept of learning, the learner assimilates information from the environment, then the cognitive structure of the individual is modified by the process of accommodation and therefore he adapts to it through mental activity. This is called the construction of knowledge or skills, in connection with prior knowledge. Learning is therefore simply a process of adjusting our mental models to adapt to new experiences. Discovery teaching is an inductive method through which the student, guided by a teacher, can identify and discover the concepts and key elements of a theme, understand and establish relationships between them, according to his own learning path. For Bruner, if the student is properly guided, he can learn by discovering the structure of the content. This approach encourages the learner to seek information on their own. The learner uses the prior knowledge and the resources at his disposal to arrive at his own conclusions, instead of following the teacher's model in solving the problem. According to Batchlod (2012) the discovery teaching consists of 5 stages: orientation, conceptualization, investigation, conclusions and reflection/argumentation. Teachers must organize and facilitate learning, so they have the role of facilitators, while creating educational resources that provide students with a basic structure. The steps introduced of the two teaching/ learning models were used as a basis to designate the questionnaire. In order to achieve our objective, we have approached two questionnaires for the development of which some of the theoretical elements developed in the article have been taken into account. In the first questionnaire, each question corresponds to a standard stage of a teaching session of each of the teaching models (explicit and by discovery), but what is notable is that the stages are not introduced in order and the questions of the two paths are not divided. It is with the intention of increasing the sincerity of the participants' responses in this project and to touch their subconscious as much as possible. The second questionnaire concerns the respondents' justifications for their choice of the teaching model. This survey was sent to 35 French teachers who work with children, adults or both at the same time. By comparing the results of questionnaires 1 and 2, we can conclude that, French teachers in Iran follow the teacher-centered model more than they think. In other words, the analysis of the results, made by the SPSS software, shows that the teachers try to approach the model of teaching by discovery in the choice of the pedagogical term, but practically they apply a more explicit way of what they chose as an approach in teaching. This perhaps comes from the unconscious of the respondents, the education system and the society in which they grew up. The cultural challenge seems to have its effects on the reflexive system of the French teachers in Iran.