Sur le site du Teaching and Learning centre de son université (Université du Wisconsin-James Madison), le professeur de psychologie Bryan K. Saville a publié un article sur les données probantes en recherche et pratique de l’éducation. L’article commence par expliquer les fondements du courant de recherche et pratique appuyées sur des données probantes (déjà expliqués dans un billet précédent). Ce qui est nouveau, c’est que le professeur Saville y ajoute les résultats de sa propre pratique et de sa propre recherche rigoureuse sur le domaine pour suggérer une stratégie pédagogique efficace avec une méthode qu’il nomme interteaching. Je le cite pour expliquer la méthode :
The instructor first prepares a preparation (prep) guide, consisting of questions designed to guide students through a particular reading assignment. Students then have several days to complete the prep guide before class. In class, students work in pairs and discuss the prep-guide items. During the discussions, the teacher traverses the classroom, answering questions and guiding discussion. After students finish the discussions, they complete a record sheet on which they list how their discussions went and which prep-guide items were difficult. The instructor then uses the record sheets to prepare a brief clarifying lecture that begins the next class period; the lecture lasts approximately one-third of the class period and focuses on those items that students listed most often on their record sheets. Following the clarifying lecture, students spend approximately two-thirds of the class period discussing the next prep guide.
Over the past few years, my colleagues and I have conducted a number of studies comparing interteaching to more traditional teaching methods. In our first study (Saville et al., 2005), a lab-based study in which we compared interteaching to lecture, reading, and control, we found that students in the interteaching condition performed significantly better on a multiple-choice quiz given 1 week later than students in other conditions. Moreover, students in the lecture and reading conditions did no better on the quiz than students in the control condition, who had no exposure to the material before taking the quiz. [Mon emphase]
Saville poursuit en mentionnant des études subséquentes qui ont approfondi les facteurs qui influencent le succès de l’interteaching. Pour des enseignants habitués à l’exposé magistral comme principale formule pédagogique, l’interteaching offre une alternative facile à implanter dont l’efficacité supérieure est démontrée.
MISE À JOUR novembre 2012
Saville n’est pas l’inventeur de l’interteaching, mais il est le premier à l’avoir testé dans des devis expérimentaux. L’article original est le suivant :
Boyce, Thomas E., & Hineline, Philip N. (2002). Interteaching: A Strategy for Enhancing the User-Friendliness of Behavioral Arrangements in the College Classroom. The Behavior Analyst, 25(2), 215-226.
Deux articles de Saville :
Saville, Bryan K., & Zinn, Tracy E. (2006). A Comparison of Interteaching and Lecture in the College Classroom. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 39(1), 49-61. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2006.42-05
Saville, Bryan K.; Lambert, Tonya; and Robertson, Stephen (2011) “Interteaching: Bringing Behavioral Education Into the 21st Century,” The Psychological Record: Vol. 61: Iss. 1, Article 10. Disponible à : http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/tpr/vol61/iss1/10
