Advertisement

Reflecting on a Theoretical Approach from a Networking Perspective: The Case of the Documentational Approach to Didactics

  • Michèle Artigue
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)

Abstract

This chapter analyses the emergence and development of the documentational approach to didactics (DAD), paying specific attention to the theoretical sources and connections having inspired its progressive elaboration. After introducing the two main conceptual tools used for this analysis, the scale of networking strategies between theories (Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Prediger, S. (2008). Networking of theories – An approach for exploiting the diversity of theoretical approaches. In B. Sriraman & L. English (Eds.), Theories in mathematics education (pp. 483–506). New York: Springer) and the idea of research praxeology (Artigue M, Bosch M, Gascón J, Bosch M et al. Centre de Recerca Matemàtica, Barcelona, 2011), the chapter proposes a chronological analysis with two main sections, respectively, devoted to the emergence and development of this approach. This analysis, based on the main publications associated with DAD, shows the respective roles played in the dynamics of this approach by the rapid emergence and stabilization of a full research praxeology and, at the same time, the impressive number of connections established with a diversity of theories in no more than one decade. These characteristics give DAD a specific identity. The chapter ends by establishing a connection with the international Lexicon project.

Keywords

Documentational approach to didactics Networking of theories Scale of networking Research praxeology Anthropological theory of the didactic Lexicon project 

References

  1. Abboud-Blanchard, M., & Vandebrouck, F. (2014). Geneses of technology uses: a theoretical model to study the development of teachers’ practices in technology environments. In B. Ubuz, Ç. Haser, & M. A. Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 2504–2514). Ankara: Middle East Technical University and ERME.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, J. (2000). Conceptualising resources as a theme for teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3, 205–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Artigue, M. (Ed.). (2009). Connecting approaches to technology enhanced learning in mathematics: The TELMA experience. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14(3).Google Scholar
  4. Artigue, M., & Bosch, M. (2014). Reflection on networking through the praxeological lens. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs & S. Prediger (Eds.), Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education (pp. 249–266). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Artigue, M., Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2011). La TAD face au problème de l’interaction entre cadres théoriques en didactique des mathématiques. In M. Bosch et al. (Eds.), Un panorama de la TAD. Actes du troisième congrès de la TAD (pp. 33–56). Barcelona: Centre de Recerca Matemàtica.Google Scholar
  6. Artigue, M., Novotná, J., Grugeon-Allys, B., Horoks, J., Hospesová, A., Moraová, H., Pilet, J., & Žlábková, I. (2017). Comparing the professional lexicons of Czech and French mathematics teachers. In B. Kaur, W. K. Ho, T. L. Toh, & B. H. Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of PME 41 (Vol. 2, pp. 113–120). Singapore: PME.Google Scholar
  7. Balacheff, N. (1995). Conception, Connaissance et Concept. Didactique et technologies cognitives en mathématiques. Séminaires 1994–95 (pp. 219–244). Grenoble: Université Joseph Fourier.Google Scholar
  8. Balacheff, N., & Margolinas, C. (2005). cK¢ Modèle de connaissances pour le calcul de situations didactiques. In A. Mercier & C. Margolinas (Eds.), Balises en Didactique des Mathématiques (pp. 75–106). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  9. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8, 14.Google Scholar
  10. Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching. Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide? American Educator, 30(3), 14–46.Google Scholar
  11. Bartolini Bussi, M., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: Artefacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. English et al. (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 750–787). New York: LEA.Google Scholar
  12. Besnier, S., & Gueudet, G. (2016). Usages de ressources numériques pour l’enseignement des mathématiques en maternelle: orchestrations et documents. Perspectivas em Educação Matemática, 9(21), 978–1003. http://seer.ufms.br/index.php/pedmat/article/view/2215/2279.Google Scholar
  13. Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Prediger, S. (2008). Networking of theories – An approach for exploiting the diversity of theoretical approaches. In B. Sriraman & L. English (Eds.), Theories in mathematics education (pp. 483–506). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Prediger, S. (Eds.). (2014). Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Chevallard, Y. (1985). La transposition didactique. Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  17. Chevallard, Y. (2002). Organiser l’étude. In J.-L. Dorier, M. Artaud, M. Artigue, R. Berthelot, & R. Floris (Eds.), Actes de la Xème Ecole d'été de didactique des mathématiques (pp. 3–22, 41–56). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  18. Clarke, D. J. (2017). Using cross-cultural comparison to interrogate the logic of classroom research in mathematics education. In B. Kaur, W. K. Ho, T. L. Toh, & B. H. Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of PME 41 (Vol. 1, pp. 1–13). Singapore: PME.Google Scholar
  19. 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
  20. Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., Rezat, S., & Vinovska, J. (2017). Topic study group no. 38. Research on resources (textbooks, learning materials, etc.). In G. Kaiser (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th international congress on mathematical education (pp. 561–564). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., Rezat, S., & Vinovska, J. (Eds.). (2018). Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources. Advances and issues. ICME-13 Monograph. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Fleck, L. (2005). Genèse et développement d’un fait scientifique. In Les Belles-lettres. Paris.Google Scholar
  23. Goujon, C. (2016). Didactisation de pratiques de savoir scientifiques, transactions avec des publics scolaires et non scolaires. Des scientifiques, de leur laboratoire à la Fête de la science. PhD. Rennes, France: Université de Bretagne Occidentale. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01692314/document
  24. Gueudet, G. (2008). Learning mathematics in class with online resources. In C. Hoyles, J.-B. Lagrange, L. Hung Son, & N. Sinclair (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th ICMI Study Conference “Technology revisited” (pp. 205–212). Hanoi: Hanoi University of Technology.Google Scholar
  25. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2008). Du travail documentaire des enseignants: genèses, collectifs, communautés. Le cas des mathématiques. Education & Didactique, 2(3), 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009a). Vers de nouveaux systèmes documentaires des professeurs de mathématiques ? In I. Bloch & F. Connes (Eds.), Nouvelles perspectives en didactique des mathématiques. Cours de la XIVe école d’été de didactique des mathématiques (pp. 109–133). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  27. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009b). Towards new documentation systems for mathematics teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (Eds.). (2010a). Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques. Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  29. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2010b). Des ressources aux documents, travail du professeur et genèses documentaires. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 57–74). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  30. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2010c). Genèses communautaires, genèses documentaires: histoires en miroir. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 129–145). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  31. Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2012). Teachers’ work with resources. Documentational 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
  32. Gueudet, G., & Vandebrouck, F. (2011). Technologie et evolution des pratiques enseignantes: études de cas et éclairages théoriques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 31(3), 271–314.Google Scholar
  33. Gueudet, G., Pepin, B., & Trouche, L. (Eds.). (2012). From text to ‘Lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Gueudet, G., Buteau, C., Mesa, V., & Misfeldt, M. (2014). Instrumental and documentational approaches: From technology use to documentation systems in university mathematics education. Research in Mathematics Education, 16(2), 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gueudet, G., Pepin, B., Sabra, H., & Trouche, L. (2016). Collective design of an e-textbook: teachers’ collective documentation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Guin, D., & Trouche, L. (Eds.). (2002). L’instrumentation de calculatrices symboliques: un problème didactique. Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  37. Guin, D., & Trouche L. (2005). Distance training, a key mode to support teachers in the integration of ICT ? Towards collaborative conception of living pedagogical resources. In M. Bosch (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Research on Mathematics Education (pp. 1020–1029), FUNDEMI IQS—Universitat Ramon Llull.Google Scholar
  38. 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, France: Université Lyon 1, https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00762964/document
  39. Haspekian, M. (2008). Une genèse des pratiques enseignantes en environnement instrumenté. In Vandebrouck (Ed.), La classe de mathématiques: activités des élèves et pratiques des enseignants (pp. 293–318). Toulouse: Octares.Google Scholar
  40. Isoda, M., Stephens, M., Ohara, Y., & Miyakawa, T. (2007). Japanese lesson study in mathematics. Its impact, diversity and potential for educational improvement. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kidron, I., Bosch, M., Monaghan, J., & Palmér, H. (2018). Theoretical perspectives and approaches in mathematics education research. In T. Dreyfus, M. Artigue, D. Potari, S. Prediger, & K. Ruthven (Eds.), Developing research in mathematics education. Twenty years of communication, cooperation and collaboration in Europe (pp. 254–275). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kynigos, C., & Kolovou, A. (2018). Teachers as designers of digital educational resources for creative mathematical thinking. In L. Fan, L. Trouche, C. Qi, S. Rezat, & J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: Advances and issues. ICME-13 monograph (pp. 145–164). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kynigos, C., & Lagrange, J.-B. (Eds.) (2014). Special issue: Representing mathematics with digital media: Working across theoretical and contextual boundaries. Educational Studies in Mathematics 85(3).Google Scholar
  44. Lagrange, J.-B. (Ed.). (2013). Les technologies numériques pour l’enseignement: usages, dispositifs et genèses. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  45. Lima, I. (2006). De la modélisation des connaissances des élèves aux décisions didactiques des professeurs: étude didactique dans le cas de la symétrie orthogonale. Doctoral thesis. Université J. Fourier, Grenoble.Google Scholar
  46. Margolinas, C. (2002). Situations, milieu, connaissances: analyse de l’activité du professeur. In J.-L. Dorier, M. Artaud, M. Artigue, R. Berthelot, & R. Floris (Eds.), Actes de la XIe Ecole d’été de didactique des mathématiques (pp. 141–156). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage éditions.Google Scholar
  47. Mariotti, M. A., & Maracci, M. (2010). Un artefact comme instrument de médiation sémiotique: une ressource pour le professeur. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 91–107). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  48. Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013). 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
  49. Prieur, M. (2016). La conception codisciplinaire de méta ressources comme appui à l’évolution des connaissances des professeurs de sciences. Les connaissances qui guident un travail de préparation pour engager les élèves dans l’élaboration d’hypothèses ou de conjectures. PhD. Lyon, France: Université de Lyon, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01364778v2/document
  50. Rabardel, P., & Bourmaud, G. (2005). Instruments et systèmes d’instruments. In P. Rabardel & P. Pastré (Eds.), Modèles du sujet pour la conception. Dialectiques activités développement (pp. 211–229). Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  51. Remillard, J. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Robert, A., & Rogalski, J. (2002). Le système complexe et cohérent des pratiques des enseignants de mathématiques: une double approche. Revue Canadienne de l’Enseignement des Sciences, des Mathématiques et des Technologies, 2(4), 505–528.Google Scholar
  53. Rocha, K. (2018). Uses of online resources and documentational trajectories: The case of Sésamath. In L. Fan, L. Trouche, C. Qi, S. Rezat, & J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and −13 teachers’ resources: Advances and issues. ICME-13 monograph (pp. 235–258). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruthven, K. (2007). Teachers, technologies and the structures of schooling. In D. Pitta-Pantazi & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth congress of the european society for research in mathematics education (pp. 52–67). Larnaca: University of Cyprus and ERME.Google Scholar
  55. Sabra, H. (2016). L’étude des rapports entre documentation individuelle et collective: incidents, connaissances et ressources mathématiques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 36(1), 49–96.Google Scholar
  56. Sensevy, G. (2010). Formes de l’intention didactique, collectifs, et travail documentaire. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 147–161). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  57. Shaaban, E., Khalil, I., & Trouche, L. (2015). Interactions between digital resources and biology teachers’ conceptions about genetic determinism: A case study of two Lebanese teachers. International Journal of Science and Research, 4(10), 1190–1200.Google Scholar
  58. Trgalová, J. (2010). Documentation et décisions didactiques des professeurs. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 271–291). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  59. Trouche, L. (2003). Construction et conduite des instruments dans les apprentissages mathématiques: nécessité des orchestrations. HDR. Paris: Université Paris Diderot-Paris 7. https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/190091/filename/Trouche_2003.pdf
  60. Trouche, L., & Pepin, B. (2014). From instrumental to documentational approach: Towards a holistic perspective of teachers' resource systems in higher education. Research in Mathematics Education, 16(2), 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tuffery-Rochdi, C. (2016). Les ressources au cœur des pratiques des enseignants de mathématiques. Le cas de l'enseignement d'exploration MPS en seconde. PhD. St Denis, France: Université de La Réunion, https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01391464/document.
  62. Vandebrouck, F. (2010). Ressources et documents, le cas de la démarche expérimentale en mathématiques. In G. Gueudet & L. Trouche (Eds.), Ressources vives. Le travail documentaire des professeurs en mathématiques (pp. 253–269). Rennes/Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Rennes et INRP.Google Scholar
  63. Vandebrouck, F. (Ed.). (2013). Mathematics classrooms: Students' activities and Teachers' practices. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  64. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michèle Artigue
    • 1
  1. 1.LDAR (EA4434), Université Paris-Diderot, UA, UCP, UPEC, URNParisFrance

Personalised recommendations