Advertisement

Evidencing Missing Resources of the Documentational Approach to Didactics. Toward Ten Programs of Research/Development for Enriching This Approach

  • Luc TroucheEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)

Abstract

This chapter proposes a view from inside the documentational approach to didactics (DAD), starting from determining some essential resources missing of DAD, to proposing ten programs of research/development for developing it. It could be considered as a follow-up of Chap.  1, where Ghislaine Gueudet situates the current state of DAD in looking back to its origin: This chapter proposes a possible future of this approach in analyzing its current state. It determines the missing resources of DAD in questioning current and past PhD students who have anchored their research in DAD. What did/do they learn in using DAD as a main theoretical resource; to which extent did/do they estimate that they have enriched DAD by their own work? Which are, according to them, the still missing resources of DAD? Which of these resources should be developed by DAD from itself and/or in co-working with other theoretical frameworks? From this inquiry, this chapter proposes ten perspectives of research, aiming to develop theoretical blind points of DAD, or to develop methodological tools, or to deepen the cultural/social aspects of DAD in questioning the naming systems used by teachers when interacting with resources. This chapter echoes actually different perspectives of research already present, as promising germs, in previous chapters of the book.

Keywords

Documentational approach to didactics Missing resources Research program Resource system Theoretical networking 

Notes

Acknowledgements

To the PhD, post-doc students, and young researchers having, via their answers, given the essential matter to this chapter: Gilles Aldon, Mohammad Alturkmani, Cibelle Assis, Franck Bellemain, Sylvaine Besnier, Fernando Bifano, Elisangela Espindola, Nataly Essonnier, Verônica Gitirana, Rim Hammoud, Sonia Igliori, Rogerio Igniacio, Carole Le Henaff, Rosilangela Lucena, Anita Messaoui, Katiane Rocha, Jose Orozco, Michèle Prieur, Nolwenn Quéré, Hussein Sabra, Ana Isabel Sacristian, Ulises Salinas, Marisol Santacruz, Karima Sayah, Moustapha Sokhna, Chantal Tuffery, Michael Umameh, Chongyang Wang, Luxizi Zhang, and Mingyu Shao.

To the reviewers of this chapter, for their inspiring comments, Ghislaine Gueudet, John Monaghan, Birgit Pepin, and Janine Remillard.

References

  1. Adler, J. (2012). Knowledge resources in and for school mathematics teaching. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 3–22). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Alturkmani, M., Daubias, P., Loisy, C., Messaoui, A., & Trouche, L. (2019). Instrumenter les recherches sur le travail enseignant: le projet AnA.doc. Education & didactique, 13(2).Google Scholar
  3. Alturkmani, M. D., Trouche, L., & Morge, L. (2018). Étude des liens entre affinités disciplinaire et didactique, et travail de l’enseignant: le cas d’un enseignant de physique-chimie en France. Recherches en didactique des sciences et des technologies, 17, 129–157.Google Scholar
  4. Béguin, P. (2004). Monde, version des mondes et monde commun. Bulletin de Psychologie., 469(57), 45–48.Google Scholar
  5. Bellemain, F., & Trouche, L. (2016). Comprendre le travail des professeurs avec les ressources de leur enseignement, un questionnement didactique et informatique, invited lecture, I Simpósio Latinoamericano de Didática da Matemática, 01 a 06 de novembro de 2016, Bonito – Mato Grosso do Sul – Brasil. Retrieved at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6OphkgfrkD3ZFRtTDJ2anRfSWM/view
  6. Bernstein, N. A. (1996). On dexterity and its development. In M. L. Latash & M. T. Turvey (Eds.), Dexterity and its development (pp. 3–245). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, M. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Caraës, M.-H., & Marchand-Zanartu, N. (2011). Images de pensées. Paris: Editions de la Réunion des musées nationaux.Google Scholar
  9. Chevallard, Y. (1999). L’analyse des pratiques enseignantes en théorie anthropologique du didactique. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 19(2), 221–266.Google Scholar
  10. Chevallard, Y., & Cirade, G. (2010). Les ressources manquantes comme problem professionnel. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 41–55). Lyon: Paideia, PUR et INRP.Google Scholar
  11. Choppin, J., Roth McDuffie, A., Drake, C., & Davis, J. (2018). Curriculum ergonomics: Conceptualizing the interactions between curriculum design and use. International Journal of Educational Research 92, 75–85. Retreived February 21, at  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke, D., Mesiti, C., Cao, Y., & Novotna, J. (2017). The lexicon project: Examining the consequences for international comparative research of pedagogical naming systems from different cultures. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth congress of the European society for research in mathematics education (CERME10, February 1–5, 2017) (pp. 1610–1617). Dublin: DCU Institute of Education and ERME.Google Scholar
  13. Cossette, P. (1994). Les cartes cognitives au service de l’étude des organisations. In P. Cossette (dir.), Cartes cognitives et organisations (pp. 3–12). Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval et Paris: Editions Eska.Google Scholar
  14. Cossette, P. (2003). Méthode systématique d’aide à la formulation de la vision stratégique: Lllustration auprès d’un propriétaire-dirigeant. Revue de l’Entreprenariat, 2(1), 17.Google Scholar
  15. Drijvers, P., & Trouche, L. (2008). From artifacts to instruments: A theoretical framework behind the orchestra metaphor. In K. Heid & G. Blume (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of mathematics, Vol.2, cases and perspectives (pp. 363–392). Charlotte: Information Age.Google Scholar
  16. Engeström, Y. (2014). Learning by expanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Essonnier, N., Kynigos, C., Trgalová, J., & Daskolia, M. (2018). Role of the context in social creativity for the design of digital resources. In L. Fan, L. Trouche, S. Rezat, C. Qi, & J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: Advances and issues (ICME-13 monograph) (pp. 215–234). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferguson, R., Bracher, A., Clow, D., Cooper, A., Hillaire, G., Mittelmeier, J., Rienties, B., Ullmann, T., Vuorikari, R., & Castano Munoz, J. (2016). Research evidence on the use of learning analytics: Implications for education policy. Bruxelles: Publications Office of the European Union.  https://doi.org/10.2791/955210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fleck, L. (1981). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (original edition, 1934).Google Scholar
  20. Gitirana, V., Miyakawa, T., Rafalska, M., Soury-Lavergne, S., & Trouche, L. (Eds.) (2018). Proceedings of the Re(s)sources 2018 International Conference. ENS de Lyon, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01764563v3/document
  21. Gourlet, P. (2018). Montrer le faire, construire l’agir. Une approche développementale de la conception mise en œuvre à l’école primaire. PhD, Paris: Université Paris 8.Google Scholar
  22. Gueudet, G., Pepin, B., & Trouche, L. (Eds.). (2012). From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Gueudet, G., Pepin, B., & Trouche, L. (2013). Collective work with resources: An essential dimension for teacher documentation. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 45(7), 1003–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2008). Du travail documentaire des enseignants : genèses, collectifs, communautés. Le cas des mathématiques. Education et didactique, 2(3), 7–33.Google Scholar
  25. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009). Towards new documentation systems for mathematics teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2010). Des ressources aux documents, travail du professeur et genèses documentaires. In G. Gueudet, & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. La documentation des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 7–74). INRP et PUR.Google Scholar
  27. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2012a). Teachers’ work with resources: documentation geneses and professional geneses. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 23–41). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2012b). Communities, documents and professional geneses: Interrelated stories. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 305–322). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Guin, D., Ruthven, K., & Trouche, L. (Eds.). (2005). The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators: Turning a computational device into a mathematical instrument. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Guin, D., & Trouche, L. (1998). The complex process of converting tools into mathematical instruments. The case of calculators. The International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3(3), 195–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hammoud, R. (2012). Le travail collectif des professeurs en chimie comme levier pour la mise en oeuvre de démarches d’investigation et le développement des connaissances professionnelles. Contribution au développement de l’approche documentaire du didactique. PhD, Lyon: Université Lyon 1. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00762964/document
  32. Jansen, P. (2018). Pourquoi la société ne se laisse-t-elle pas mettre en equations? Paris: Le Seuil, Coll. Science ouverte.Google Scholar
  33. Jullien, F. (2015). De l’être au vivre. Lexique euro-chinois de la pensée. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  34. Karsenti, T. (2016). The interactive whiteboard (IWB): Uses, benefits, and challenges. A survey of 11683 students and 1131 teachers. Montreal: CRIFPE.Google Scholar
  35. Lucena, R., & Assis, C. (2015). Webdoc Sistema de Recursos e o Trabalho Coletivo do Professor: Uma Via de Mão Dupla. Recife (Brazil): LEMATEC (UFPE). Retrieved at http://lematec.net.br/webdocs/webdoc2/. Access codes to be asked to the authors.
  36. Lucena, R., Gitirana, V., & Trouche, L. (2016). Teoria da orquestração instrumenta: um olhar para formação docente. I Simpósio Latinoamericano de Didática da Matemática, 01 a 06 de novembro de 2016, Bonito – Mato Grosso do Sul – Brasil.Google Scholar
  37. Messaoui, A. (2018). Concevoir des ressources pour enseigner, un levier pour le développement des compétences informationnelles des professeurs? In Objets, supports, instruments : regards croisés sur la diversité des ressources mobilisées en interaction. SHS Web of Conferences, 52, 02003. Retreived at  https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20185202003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Monaghan, J., Trouche, L., & Borwein, J. (2016). Tools and mathematics: Instruments for learning. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Monteil, L., & Romerio, A. (2017). Des disciplines aux studies. Savoirs, trajectoires, politiques. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, 11(3), 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oddone, I., Re, A., & Briante, G. (1981). Redécouvrir l’expérience ouvrière: vers une autre psychologie du travail? Paris: Editions sociales.Google Scholar
  41. Pastré, P. (2005). Genèse et identité. In P. Rabardel, & P. Pastré (Dir.), Modèles du sujet pour la conception (pp. 231–260). Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  42. Pédauque, R. T.. coll.(2006). Le document à la lumière du numérique. Caen: C & F éditions.Google Scholar
  43. Pepin, B. (2009). The role of textbooks in the ‘figured world’ of English, French and German classrooms – A comparative perspective. In L. Black, H. Mendick, & Y. Solomon (Eds.), Mathematical relationships: Identities and participation (pp. 107–118). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013a). Re-sourcing teachers’ work and interactions: A collective perspective on resources, their use and transformation. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 45(7), 929–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013b). Investigating textbooks as crucial interfaces between culture, policy and teacher curricular practice: Two contrasted case studies in France and Norway. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 45(5), 685–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2015). Comfortable or lost in paradise? – Affordances and constraints of mathematics e-textbooks in/for curriculum enactment, communication to the symposium Mathematics curriculum contingencies: From authoring to enactment via curriculum resources, chaired by D. Clarke, K. Ruthven and M.K. Stein, in the frame of the AERA 2015 meeting, Chicago, 16–20 April.Google Scholar
  47. Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2017). Refining teacher design capacity: Mathematics teachers’ interactions with digital curriculum resources. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 49(5), 799–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pepin, B., Xu, B., Trouche, L., & Wang, C. (2016). Developing a deeper understanding of mathematics teaching expertise: Chinese mathematics teachers’ resource systems as windows into their work and expertise. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 94(3), 257–274. http://rdcu.be/koXk.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Piaget, J. (1964). Six études de psychologie. Genève: Edition Gonthier.Google Scholar
  50. Prieto, L. P., Sharma, K., Dillenbourg, P., & Jesús, M. (2016). Teaching analytics: Towards automatic extraction of orchestration graphs using wearable sensors. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (LAK ‘16) (pp. 148–157). New York: ACM.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rabardel, P. (2002). People and technology: A cognitive approach to contemporary instruments. Paris: Université Paris 8. Retreived at https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01020705
  52. Radford, L. (2008). The ethics of being and knowing: Towards a cultural theory of learning. In L. Radford, G. Schubring, & F. Seeger (Eds.), Semiotics in mathematics education: Epistemology, history, classroom, and culture (pp. 215–234). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Revue of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Remillard, J.T., Van Steenbrugge, H., & Bergqvist, T. (2014). A cross-cultural analysis of the voice of curriculum materials. In K. Jones, C. Bokhove, G. Howson, & L. Fan (Eds.), Proceedings of the first International Conference on Mathematics Textbook Research and Development (ICMT-2014) (pp. 395–400). Southampton: University of Southampton.Google Scholar
  55. Remillard, J. T., Van Steenbrugge, H., & Trouche, L. (2017). Teacher-resource use around the world. In G. Schubring, L. Fan, & V. Giraldo (Eds.), Proceeding of the second international conference on mathematics textbooks, research and development (pp. 129–132). Rio de Janeiro: Instituto de Matemática, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. http://www.sbembrasil.org.br/files/ICMT2017.pdf.Google Scholar
  56. Rocha, K. (2018a). Uses of online resources and documentational Trajectories: The case of Sésamath. In L. Fan, L. Trouche, S. Rezat, C. Qi, & J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: Advances and issues (ICME-13 monograph) (pp. 235–259). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  57. Rocha, K. (2018b). Les trajectoires documentaires, une proposition de modèle pour analyser les interactions des enseignants avec les ressources au fil du temps: la plateforme AnA.doc, un outil d’instrumentation de cette analyse. In Objets, supports, instruments : regards croisés sur la diversité des ressources mobilisées en interaction. SHS Web of Conferences, 52, 02004. Retreived at  https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20185202004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rousseau, D., & Morvan, M. (2000). La dénomination. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  59. Sabra, H. (2011). Contribution à l’étude du travail documentaire des enseignants de mathématiques: les incidents comme révélateurs des rapports entre documentations individuelle et communautaire. PhD, Lyon: Université Lyon 1. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00768508/document
  60. Sabra, H. (2016). L’étude des rapports entre documentations individuelle et collective: Incidents, connaissances et ressources mathématiques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 36(1), 49–95.Google Scholar
  61. Salaün, J.-M. (2012). Vu, lu, su. Les architectes de l’information face à l’oligopole du Web. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  62. Salaün, J.-M. (2016). Quelques leçons du MOOC Archinfo sur la collaboration et l’évaluation par les pairs. Séminaire du projet MORCEF. ENS de Lyon.Google Scholar
  63. Salinas, U., & Trouche, L. (2018). Uso de gestos –como recurso-mediador– por un profesor de bachillerato para enfrentar un desafío didáctico no previsto por él. Unión. Revista ibero-americana de educación matemática, 54, 6–24. http://asenmacformacion.com/ojs/index.php/union/article/view/369.Google Scholar
  64. Santacruz, M., & Sacristan, A.-I. (2018). Reflecting on the paths for selecting digital resources for (geometry) teaching: The case of a first grade teacher. In V. Gitirana, T. Miyakawa, M. Rafalska, S. Soury-Lavergne, & L. Trouche (Eds.) Proceedings of the Re(s)sources conference (pp. 92–95). Lyon: ENS de Lyon. Retrieved November 8, 2018, at https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01764563
  65. Sayah, K. (2018). L’intégration des ressources de Sésamath au collège: un moteur pour le développement du travail collectif des enseignants de mathématiques en Algérie. PhD, Université Lyon 1.Google Scholar
  66. Sokhna, M. (2006). Formation à distance des professeurs de mathématiques au Sénégal, genèse instrumentale de ressources pédagogiques. PhD, Université Lyon 1. Retreived at https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00917620
  67. Sokhna, M. (2018). Systèmes de ressources et intégration des TICE: quels critères de sélection ? In V. Gitirana, T. Miyakawa, M. Rafalska, S. Soury-Lavergne, & L. Trouche (Eds.), Proceedings of the Re(s)sources conference (pp. 109–112). Lyon: ENS de Lyon. Retrieved November 8, 2018, at https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01764563
  68. Sokhna, M., & Trouche, L. (2016). Repenser la formation des enseignants en France et au Sénégal: une source d’interactions fécondes. In M. Artigue (coord.), La tradition didactique française au delà des frontières. Exemples de collaborations avec l’Afrique, l’Amérique latine et l’Asie (pp. 27–38). Présentation de la communauté didactique française à ICME 13, Hambourg. http://www.cfem.asso.fr/cfem/Collaborationsdidactiquesfrancaises.pdf
  69. Trouche, L. (2005a). Les IREM: des raisons des réseaux. Plot 11, 2–7, consulté le 17 mai 2016 à. http://www.apmep.fr/IMG/pdf/IREM.pdf
  70. Trouche, L. (2005b). An instrumental approach to mathematics learning in symbolic calculators environments. In D. Guin, K. Ruthven, & L. Trouche (Eds.), The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators: Turning a computational device into a mathematical instrument (pp. 137–162). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Trouche, L. (2009). Penser la gestion didactique des artefacts pour faire et faire faire des mathématiques: histoire d’un cheminement intellectuel. L’Educateur, 3, 35–38.Google Scholar
  72. Trouche, L. (dir.) (2014). EducMap, pour une cartographie dynamique des recherches en éducation. Research report CNRS-Université de Lyon. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01546661
  73. Trouche, L. (2016). Prendre en compte les métamorphoses du Numérique. Union, 45, 7–23.Google Scholar
  74. Trouche, L. (2017). L’enseignement des mathématiques, un point de vue international centré sur les ressources des professeurs. La lettre de Grema, 17, 2–6.Google Scholar
  75. Trouche, L., et al. (1998). Expérimenter et prouver. Faire des mathématiques au lycée avec des calculatrices symboliques. 38 variations sur un thème imposé. Montpellier: IREM, Université Montpellier 2.Google Scholar
  76. Trouche, L., Gitirana, V., Miyakawa, T., Pepin, B., & Wang, C. (2019). Studying mathematics teachers interactions with curriculum materials through different lenses: Towards a deeper understanding of the processes at stake. International Journal of Educational Research 93, 53–67. Retreived February 21, at  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Trouche, L., Gueudet, G., & Pepin, B. (2018a, Online First). The documentational approach to didactics. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  78. Trouche, L., Trgalová, J., Loisy, C., & Alturkmani, M. (2018b). Ressources vivantes pour l’enseignement et l’apprentissage. Contribution des composantes IFÉ et S2HEP de l’ANR ReVEA. ENS de Lyon. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01743212
  79. Vergnaud, G. (2009). The theory of conceptual fields. Human Development, 52, 83–94.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000202727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Vermersch, P. (2012). Explicitation et phénoménologie. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  81. Wang, C. (2018). Mathematics teachers’ expertise in resources work and its development in collectives: A French and a Chinese cases. In L. Fan, L. Trouche, S. Rezat, C. Qi, & J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: Advances and issues (ICME-13 monograph) (pp. 193–213). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wang, C., Salinas, U., & Trouche, L. (2019). From teachers’ naming systems of resources to teachers’ resource systems: Contrasting a Chinese and a Mexican case. In U. T. Jankvist, M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the eleventh congress of the European society for research in mathematics education (pp. xxxx–yyyy). Utrecht: Freudenthal Group & Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University and ERME.Google Scholar
  83. Wang, C., Trouche, L., & Pepin, B. (2018). An investigation of Chinese mathematics teachers’ resources work and their professional development in collectives. In G. Schubring, L. Fan, & V. Giraldo (Eds.), Proceeding of the second international conference on mathematics textbooks, research and development (pp. 144–157). Rio de Janeiro: Instituto de Matemática, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. http://www.sbembrasil.org.br/files/ICMT2017.pdf.Google Scholar
  84. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wohlleben, P. (2017). La vie secrete des arbres. Ce qu’ils ressentent. Comment ils communiquent. Un monde inconnu s’ouvre à nous. Paris: Editions des Arènes.Google Scholar
  86. Xu, B., & Recker, M. (2012). Teaching analytics: A clustering and triangulation study of digital library user data. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 103–115.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.French Institute of EducationENS de LyonFrance

Personalised recommendations