چکیده:
Composante d’une compétence linguistique, la grammaire, a longtemps été une constante de la classe de langue, mais aujourd’hui, elle négocie sa place dans les nouvelles approches didactiques connues par leur préférence pour le sens au détriment de la structure. Dans cet article, nous avons tenté d’interroger cette place dans la pratique enseignante et dans les directives officielles du Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale. Notre travail se base sur l’analyse de deux documents (le document d’accompagnement des programmes du cycle primaire et le manuel de 5ème année primaire) et sur les récits de vie de futurs enseignants -stagiaires. De cette analyse, émerge un certain nombre de constats : un éclectisme dans les méthodologies adoptées, une évolution d’une démarche qui devient essentiellement inductive, mais en même temps, une fossilisation des pratiques des enseignants qui suivent une démarche identique, et enfin une mise en œuvre parfois « maladroite » des principes méthodologiques revendiqués par la tutelle.
گرامر به عنوان یکی از مولفههای مهارت زبانی، مدتها بطور مستمر در کلاسهای زبان تدریس میشده است، اما امروزه در
رویکردهای اموزشی جدید، در جایگاهی متفاوت و با ترجیح معنا بر ساختار شناخته میشود. در این مقاله سعی شده است، این جایگاه گرامر،
در تدریس و در بخشنامههای رسمی وزارت اموزش و پرورش کشور مورد بررسی قرار گیرد. کار ما بر اساس تجزیه و تحلیل دو سند )سند
همراه برنامههای دوره ابتدایی و کتابچه راهنمای سال پنجم ابتدایی( و داستان زندگی معلمان-کاراموزان اینده است. از این تحلیل، تعداد
معینی از مشاهدات پدیدار می شود: التقاط گرایی در روش شناسیهای اتخاذ شده، تکامل رویکردی که اساسا استقرایی می شود، اما در عین
اصول روش شناختی ادعا شده. » ناشیگرانه « حال، تحجر عملکرد معلمانی که از رویکردی مشابه تبعیت میکنند، و در نهایت، اجرای گاهی
The Algerian school has undergone many reforms that have put the teaching
methodologies of FLE in the programs of the three school cycles (primary, middle, and secondary) on
the agenda. The class of FLE has indeed seen the main methodologies that have marked the teaching of
languages: from traditional methodologies to SGAV methodologies, to communicative approaches to
the actional perspective. The official documents of the French Ministry of Education (MEN) and the
new textbooks published since the 2003 reform are inspired by the results of research putting forward
the socio-constructivist paradigm (Z. Hassani, 2013). Even if the actional perspective is not explicitly
mentioned in these documents, we nevertheless find the major principles underlying it (socioconstructivism,
project-based pedagogy, task-based learning, socialization of classroom products, the
learner as a social actor, etc.).
Classroom practice is supposed to have evolved through the methodological paradigms that the
school has experienced, and it is this evolution that we intend to investigate in this work. The practice
we are interested in is the teaching of what is called, in the official documents of the MEN, "the facts of
language" and which concern everything that has a link with linguistic learning, namely grammar,
conjugation, spelling, and vocabulary. We have chosen to work on the teaching of grammar in the
primary cycle as an example of this knowledge and know-how contributing to the development of
linguistic competence. In this article, we attempt to read the MEN directives concerning the teaching of
grammar and to question the practices of a group of student teachers when teaching this skill. The
objective of this investigation is to see if the teaching practices of these trainees are congruent with the
MEN guidelines and if they respect the principles of the claimed approaches.
To do this, we began with a theoretical review of the teaching of grammar in the language classroom
and then analyzed the MEN's directives on language learning, particularly grammar, based on two
documents: the document accompanying the primary school program and the 5th year primary school
textbook (now 5th AP). We also present an analysis of the life stories of future student teachers of French
about their experience of teaching grammar during their internship in elementary school.
We carried out this investigation with students enrolled in the 3rd year of the French degree program
at the Ecole Normale Superieure de Bouzareah (ENSB). During this last year of their university
curriculum, these students are required to carry out an internship in elementary school and we asked
them to write life stories in which they had to relate the course of the sessions presented during the
internship.
We were able to obtain 69 life stories accompanied by the pedagogical sheets used to produce the lessons. We retained the accounts concerning the grammar sessions, of which there were 13, but we also used the other language learning sessions to check whether the same approach was adopted for the teaching of all the knowledge and skills that make up language competence. Our analysis of the life stories focused on three areas: the materials used in the grammar sessions, the types of activities offered to the students, and the approach taken to teach the targeted grammatical point.
What emerges from the analysis of the MEN documents (the accompanying document and the textbook) is that the teaching of grammar seems to have relatively followed the methodological developments adopted by the Algerian school, even if there are shortcomings in the adoption of certain principles of these methodologies.
Thus, we have noticed that these documents suggest an inductive approach that encourages the learner to construct his knowledge with the help of the teacher's support. There is a desire to place the learner at the center of his or her learning, and to allow him or her to reflect on the language fact studied. The conceptualization phase is indeed present in the MEN guidelines and all the grammar sessions in the manual through the phases "I observe and analyze" and "I construct my rule". Nevertheless, we found insufficient support in the instructions in the manual and among the trainees. This phase seems to be problematic because the questions that are supposed to lead to the deduction of the rule are not always sufficient.
We also noted that the instructions in the textbook in the analysis phase did not make it possible to highlight the role of the grammatical point in a communication situation, especially since the latter was generally absent in the observation phase because of the use of decontextualized sentences as support. The life stories, on the other hand, showed the predominance of using texts to approach the teaching of grammar. This choice of the medium among student teachers maybe since they receive guidelines in their initial training, or to the fact that they are more respectful of the guidelines contained in the accompanying document which is their first reference in the realization of the programs at the different levels. However, we noted the absence of authentic documents in the grammar sessions in the manual and those presented by the student trainees.
The activities in the textbook and those presented in the life stories are of the same type: identification in the observation phase, analysis, and manipulation, and finally production. These activities generally correspond to the guidelines in the accompanying document, with a few exceptions. For example, the evaluation phase, mentioned in the accompanying document, does not exist in the manual or the life stories. Nevertheless, the trainees seem to consider the manipulation and production activities as being evaluation activities, which suggests that for them the learning activities end after the construction of the rule.
We can perceive, as far as the MEN documents are concerned, a desire to align with the new methodologies and we quickly spot the borrowing of the directives of the tutelage in the trainees' practice. However, it is important to emphasize that the implementation of these methodologies in the manual and the trainees' practice reveals anomalies that run counter to the claimed methodological principles: absence of work on the link between the communication situation and the fact of the language studied, absence of spontaneous production that proves the appropriation of the fact of language, and fossilization of the practices that show an identical approach for all language learning sessions.
Classroom practice has certainly evolved and followed the instructions of the MEN, themselves inspired by new didactic approaches, but it resists certain methodological principles that remain difficult to apply in a language classroom with centuries-old teaching traditions. It seems to us that the teaching of grammar is dressed up with new concepts but it keeps a more or less fixed structure which curiously reminds the one known in the traditional methodologies. Apart from the analysis and conceptualization phase, which comes before the construction of the rule, the following stages have the air of rule application activities, which, moreover, end with the formulation of sentences containing the grammatical point studied without any contextualization. The communicative situations do not play a
Belgheddouche A. — Extended abstract: Competence Linguistique et Pratique de Classe … | 53
very big role in this process and it remains difficult to establish the link between the fact of language and its realization in the communication or its utility for the project.
(
, 
, 
)
