Advertisement

Conceptualising and Connecting Francophone Perspectives on Learning Through and for Work

Chapter
Part of the Professional and Practice-based Learning book series (PPBL, volume 12)

Abstract

This chapter offers an overview of the field of Francophone research on learning through work and is intended as a platform for presenting a delineation of this field. More specifically, the chapter presents a range of research traditions that have secured important places within the French-speaking research community, as illustrated in the chapters collected in the book. This overview aims at explaining the disciplinary background underlying these traditions and identifying key premises and concepts and specific research and training methods that have emerged in that particular context. The chapter also attempts to illuminate the specific conceptions of learning these traditions are built on and have contributed to promote. To achieve that outcome, three research traditions are described, in relation to their historical and cultural backgrounds, key ideas and methodological focuses. The first of these three traditions comprises what is referred to as Francophone ergonomics and the epistemology of the so-called work analysis. The historical and disciplinary origins of emergence of the Francophone tradition of ergonomics are presented, along with its central concepts, contributions to methods and applications in the field of vocational and professional training. Second, a focus is placed on the tradition of language use in relation to work, training and learning. These issues have acquired considerable visibility within Francophone research and have developed into a specific research tradition. An overview of the main research topics that have emerged within this tradition and key contributions to vocational and professional training issues is presented below. The third tradition is that referring to learning in connection with specific organisational contexts. Here, the social dimensions of learning are foregrounded and contributions from Francophone researchers are illustrated, and their alignment with other research traditions, and particularly those widely disseminated in the Anglophone world. The final section of the chapter draws together a range of ideas which have emerged beyond and across these specific research traditions, and that can be seen as having played an influencing role on the ways questions related with learning through and for work have been addressed in the Francophone world.

Keywords

Vocational Training Work Activity Professional Practice Work Analysis Research Tradition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Amalberti, R., de Montmollin, M., & Theureau, J. (Eds.). (1991). Modèles en analyse du travail. Bruxelles: Mardaga.Google Scholar
  2. Antonacopoulou, E., & Chiva, R. (2007). The social complexity of organizational learning: The dynamics of learning and organizing. Management Learning, 38(3), 277–295.Google Scholar
  3. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bailly, M.-C., Durand, M., Goudeaux, A., Horcik, Z., & Poizat, G. (2014). Analyse du travail et formation: une technologie innovante. Education Permanente, n°HS-6, 20–27.Google Scholar
  5. Billett, S. (2006). Constituting the workplace curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 31–48.Google Scholar
  6. Billett, S. (2014). Mediating learning at work: Personal mediations of social and brute facts. In C. Harteis, A. Rausch, & J. Seifried (Eds.), Discourses on professional learning: On the boundary between learning and working (pp. 75–93). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Bion, W. R. (1979). Aux sources de l’expérience. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  8. Bisel, R. S., Messersmith, A. S., & Kelley, K. M. (2012). Supervisor-subordinate communication hierarchical mum effect meets organizational learning. Journal of Business Communication, 49(2), 128–147.Google Scholar
  9. Borzeix, A., & Fraenkel, B. (Eds.). (2001). Langage et Travail, communication, cognition, action. Paris: CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar
  10. Bourgeois, E., Allegra, J., & Mornata, C. (2015). Transmission and individuation in the workplace. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Boutet, J. (Ed.). (1995). Paroles au travail. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  12. Boutet, J. (2001). La part langagière du travail: bilan et évolution. Langage et Societe, 98, 17–42.Google Scholar
  13. Boutet, J. (2008). La vie verbale au travail: des manufactures aux centres d’appel. Toulouse: Editions Octarès.Google Scholar
  14. Bronckart, J.-P., Bulea, E., & Fristalon, I. (2004). Les conditions d’émergence de l’agir dans le langage. Cahiers de linguistique française, 26, 345–369.Google Scholar
  15. Brougère, G. (2015). Learning by participating: A theoretical configuration applied to French cooperative day care centres. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Brummans, B. H. J. M., Cooren, F., Robichaud, D., & Taylor, J. R. (2014). Approaches in research on the communicative constitution of organizations. In L. L. Putnam & D. K. Mumby (Eds.), Sage Handbook of organizational communication. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Burnay, N. (Ed.). (2011). Transmission, mémoire et reconnaissance. Fribourg: Presses Universitaires de Fribourg.Google Scholar
  18. Burnay, N., & Klein, A. (Eds.). (2009). Figures contemporaines de la transmission. Namur: Presses Universitaires de Namur.Google Scholar
  19. Bruner, J. S. (1983). Child’s talk: Learning to use language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cameron, D., et al. (1994). The Relationship between researcher and researched: Ethics, advocacy and empowerment. In D. Graddol, J. Maybin, & B. Steirer (Eds.), Researching language and literacy in social context (pp. 18–25). London: Open University.Google Scholar
  21. Chaliès, S., Ria, L., Trohel, J., & Durand, M. (2004). Knowledge construction and articulation of courses of action by preservice teachers and cooperating teachers during post-lesson interviews. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 765–781.Google Scholar
  22. Chaliès, S., Bertone, S., Flavier, E., & Durand, M. (2008). Effects of collaborative mentoring on the articulation of training and classroom situations: A case study in the French school system. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 550–563.Google Scholar
  23. Chevallier, D. (Ed.). (1991). Savoir faire et pouvoir transmettre. Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme.Google Scholar
  24. Clark, K., & Holquist, M. (1984). Mikhail Bakhtin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Clegg, S. R., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2005). Learning/becoming/organizing. Organization Science, 12(2), 147–167.Google Scholar
  26. Clot, Y. (1999). La fonction psychologique du travail. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  27. Clot, Y. (2005). L’autoconfrontation croisée en analyse du travail: l’apport de la théorie bakhtinienne du dialogue. In L. Filliettaz & J.-P. Bronckart (Eds.), L’analyse des actions et des discours en situation de travail. Concepts, méthodes et applications (pp. 37–55). Louvain-la-neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
  28. Clot, Y. (2009). Clinic of activity: The dialogue as instrument. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. D. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 286–302). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Clot, Y., & Faïta, D. (2000). Genres et styles en analyse du travail: Concepts et méthodes. Travailler, 4, 7–42.Google Scholar
  30. Clot, Y., & Kostulski, K. (2011). Intervening for transforming: The horizon of action in the clinic of activity. Theory & Psychology, 21, 681–696.Google Scholar
  31. Clot, Y., Faïta, D., Fernandez, D., & Scheller, L. (2001). Entretiens en autoconfrontation croisée: une méthode en clinique de l’activité. Education Permanente, 146, 17–25.Google Scholar
  32. Daniellou, F. (Ed.). (1996). L’Ergonomie en quête de ses principes. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  33. Daniellou, F. (2005). The French-speaking ergonomists’ approach to work activity: Cross influences of field intervention and conceptual models. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 6, 409–427.Google Scholar
  34. De Keyser, V. (1991). Work analysis in French language ergonomics: Origins and current research trends. Ergonomics, 34, 653–669.Google Scholar
  35. De Keyser, V. (1992). Why field studies. In M. Helander & M. Nagamachi (Eds.), Design for manufacturability: A systems approach to concurrent engineering and ergonomics (pp. 305–316). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  36. De Montmollin, M. (1967). Les systèmes Hommes-Machines: Introduction à l’ergonomie. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  37. De Montmollin, M. (1974). L’analyse du travail : préalable à la formation. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  38. De Montmollin, M. (1981). Le taylorisme à visage humain. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  39. De Montmollin, M. (1984). Actualité du taylorisme. In M. de Montmollin & O. Pastré (Eds.), Le taylorisme (pp. 13–32). Paris: La découverte.Google Scholar
  40. De Montmollin, M. (1991). Analysis and models of operators’ activities in complex natural life environments. In J. Rasmussen, H. B. Andersen, & N. O. Bernsen (Eds.), Human-computer interaction (pp. 95–112). London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Dejours, C. (2010). Le facteur humain. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  42. Delannoy, C. (1997). La motivation. Désir de savoir, désir d’apprendre. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
  43. Delbos, G., & Jorion, P. (1984). La transmission des savoirs. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
  44. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic. The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
  45. Dolbeau, M. (2012). La mémoire du métier. Maréchal-ferrant : un passé retrouvé. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  46. Durand, M. (2008). Un programme de recherche technologique en formation des adultes. Education & Didactique, 2, 69–93.Google Scholar
  47. Durand, M. (2011). Self-constructed activity, work analysis, and occupational training: An approach to learning objects for adults. In P. Jarvis & M. Watts (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook on learning (pp. 37–45). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Durand, M. (2013). Human activity, social practice and lifelong education: An introduction. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32, 1–13.Google Scholar
  49. Durand, M., & Poizat, G. (2015). An activity-centred approach to work analysis and the design of vocational training situations. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  50. Elkjaer, B. (2004). Organizational learning the ‘third way’. Management Learning, 35(4), 419–434.Google Scholar
  51. Erickson, F. (2004). Origins: A brief intellectual and technological history of the emergence of multimodal discourse analysis. In P. Levine & R. Scollon (Eds.), Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis (pp. 196–207). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Falzon, P. (Ed.). (2013). Ergonomie constructive. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  53. Faverge, J.-M. (1954). Méthodes statistiques en psychologie appliquée. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  54. Filliettaz, L. (2006). Asymétrie et prises de rôles. Le cas des réclamations dans les interactions de service. In M. Laforest & D. Vincent (Eds.), Les interactions asymétriques (pp. 89–112). Québec: Editions Nota bene.Google Scholar
  55. Filliettaz, L. (2008). Compétences professionnelles et compétences langagières en situation de risque : La régulation langagière d’un « événement » en milieu industriel. Langage et Societe, 125, 11–34.Google Scholar
  56. Filliettaz, L. (2012). Affording learning environments in workplace contexts: An interactional and multimodal perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32, 107–122.Google Scholar
  57. Filliettaz, L., Durand, I., & Trébert, D. (2015). Learning through verbal interactions in the workplace: The role and place of guidance in vocational education and training. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  58. Fraenkel, B. (2001). La résistible ascension de l’écrit au travail. In A. Borzeix & B. Fraenkel (Eds.), Langage et travail. Communication, cognition, action (pp. 113–142). Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
  59. Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., & Odella, F. (1998). Toward a social understanding of How people learn in organizations: The notion of situated curriculum. Management Learning, 29(3), 273–297.Google Scholar
  60. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  61. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine Publishers.Google Scholar
  62. Grosjean, M., & Lacoste, M. (1999). Communication et intelligence collective: le travail à l’hôpital. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  63. Grosjean, M., & Mondada, L. (Eds.). (2004). La négociation au travail. Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar
  64. Grusenmeyer, C., & Trognon, A. (1997). Les mécanismes coopératifs en jeu dans les communications de travail: un cadre méthodologique. Le Travail humain, 60(1), 5–31.Google Scholar
  65. Guérin, F., Laville, A., Daniellou, F., Duraffourg, J., & Kerguelen, A. (2007). Understanding and transforming work. The practice of ergonomics. Lyon: Anact Network Edition.Google Scholar
  66. Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, C. (2010). Video in qualitative research. Analysing social interaction in everyday life. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  68. Horcik, Z., & Durand, M. (2011). L’ergonomie de la formation par simulation: une démarche pilote de conception en formation d’infirmiers anesthésistes. Activités, 8, 173–188.Google Scholar
  69. Horcik, Z., Savoldelli, G., Poizat, G., & Durand, M. (2014). A phenomenological approach to novice nurse anesthetists’ experience during simulation-based training sessions. Simulation in Healthcare, 9, 94–101.Google Scholar
  70. Hymes, D. (1984). Vers la compétence de communication. Paris: Hatier-Credif.Google Scholar
  71. Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. Style in language, 350, 377.Google Scholar
  72. Kaës, R. (2011). Désir de former, formation par le groupe et transmission des savoirs. In R. Kaës & C. Desvignes (Eds.), Le travail psychique de la formation (pp. 1–35). Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  73. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C., & Traverso, V. (Eds.). (2008). Les interactions en site commercial. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar
  74. Kloetzer, L., Clot, Y., & Quillerou-Grivot, E. (2015). Stimulating dialogue at work: The activity clinic approach to learning and development. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  75. Kostulski, K. (2011). Development of activity through reflection: The case of the public prosecutor’s lapsus linguae. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24, 191–210.Google Scholar
  76. Kunégel, P. (2011). Les maîtres d’apprentissage. Analyse des pratiques tutorales en situation de travail. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  77. Lacoste, M. (2001). Peut-on travailler sans communiquer ? In A. Borzeix & B. Fraenkel (Eds.), Langage et travail (pp. 21–53). Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
  78. Laforest, M., & Vincent, D. (Eds.). (2006). Les interactions asymétriques. Québec: Editions Nota bene.Google Scholar
  79. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Laville A., Teiger C., & Duraffourg J. (1972). Conséquences du travail répétitif sous cadence sur la santé des travailleurs et les accidents. Rapport final, no 29, Collection du Laboratoire de Physiologie du Travail et d’Ergonomie du Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Paris.Google Scholar
  81. Leplat, J., & Hoc, J.-M. (1983). Tâche et activité dans l’analyse psychologique des situations. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 3, 49–63.Google Scholar
  82. Lorino, P. (2015). Learning as transforming collective activity through dialogical inquiries. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  83. Lorino, P., Tricard, B., & Clot, Y. (2011). Research methods for non-representational approaches to organizational complexity: The dialogical mediated inquiry. Organization Studies, 32, 769–801.Google Scholar
  84. Matte, F., & Cooren, F. (2015). Learning as dialogue: An ‘on-the-go’ approach to dealing with organizational tensions. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  85. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1987). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston: Shambhala Publications.Google Scholar
  86. Mayen, P. (2000). Interactions tutorales au travail et négociations formatives: Formes et dispositifs de la professionnalisation. Recherche et formation, 35, 59–73.Google Scholar
  87. Mayen, P. (2002). Le rôle des autres dans le développement de l’expérience. Education permanente, 151, 87–107.Google Scholar
  88. Mayen, P. (2012). Les situations professionnelles: un point de vue de didactique professionnelle. Phronesis, 1, 59–67.Google Scholar
  89. Mayen, P. (2015). Vocational didactics: Work, learning and conceptualization. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Metz, B. (1960). Adaptation du travail à l’homme. Rapport général sur la Conférence internationale de Zurich (2–6 mars 1959), projet no 6/07 E. Paris: O.E.C.E.-Organisation Européenne de Coopération Économique.Google Scholar
  91. Mollo, V., & Falzon, P. (2004). Auto- and allo-confrontation as tools for reflective activities. Applied Ergonomics, 35, 531–540.Google Scholar
  92. Mondada, L. (2005). L’ordre interactionnel et l’ordre institutionnel comme des accomplissements pratiques des membres dans le temps. Médias et culture, 2, 85–119.Google Scholar
  93. Mondada, L. (2006). La compétence comme dimension située et contingente, localement évaluée par les participants. Swiss Journal of Applied Linguistics, 84, 83–119.Google Scholar
  94. Mourlhon-Dallies, F. (2008). Enseigner une langue à des fins professionnelles. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
  95. Murrell, K. F. H. (Ed.). (1959). Adaptation du travail à l’homme. Recherches américaines et européennes sur les conditions du travail dans l’industrie. Paris: Organisation Européenne de Coopération Economique.Google Scholar
  96. Nizet, J., Van Dam, D., & Dejardin, M. (2009). Les limites de la transmission familiales chez les viticulteurs bio alsaciens. In N. Burnay & A. Klein (Eds.), Figures contemporaines de la transmission (pp. 347–358). Namur: Presses Universitaires de Namur.Google Scholar
  97. Oddone, I., Re, A., & Briante, G. (2008). Esperienza operaia, coscienza di classe e psicologia del lavoro. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
  98. Ombredane, A., & Faverge, J.-M. (1955). L’analyse du travail. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  99. Ouellet, S., & Vézina, N. (2015). Activity analysis and workplace training: An ergonomic perspective. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  100. Pastré, P. (2007). La didactique professionnelle: origines, fondements, perspectives. Travail et Apprentissages, 1, 9–21.Google Scholar
  101. Pastré, P. (2011). La didactique professionnelle. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  102. Pastré, P., Mayen, P., & Vergnaud, G. (2006). La didactique professionnelle. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 154, 145–198.Google Scholar
  103. Pavard, B. (1994). Systèmes coopératifs: de la modélisation à la conception. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  104. Pène, S., Borzeix, A., & Fraenkel, B. (Eds.). (2001). Le langage dans les organisations. Une nouvelle donne. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  105. Pinsky, L. (1992). Concevoir pour l’action et la coopération. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  106. Pinsky, L., & Theureau, J. (1987). L’étude du cours d’action: Analyse du travail et conception ergonomique. Paris: CNAM.Google Scholar
  107. Poizat, G. (2015). Learning through interaction with technological objects: From the individuality of the technical object to human individuation. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  108. Poizat, G., & Durand, M. (2014). Un programme de recherche en ergonomie de formation: Illustration par le cas des techniciens en radiologie médicale. Actes du 49ème congrès international de la Société d’Ergonomie de Langue Française, La Rochelle, France.Google Scholar
  109. Poizat, G., Salini, D., & Durand, M. (2013). Approche énactive de l’activité humaine, simplexité, et conception de formations professionnelles. Education Sciences & Society, 4, 97–112.Google Scholar
  110. Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies: une approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  111. Rabardel, P. (2005). Instrument, activité et développement du pouvoir d’agir. In P. Lorino & R. Teulier (Eds.), Entre connaissance et organisation : l’activité collective (pp. 251–265). Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  112. Rabardel, P., & Béguin, P. (2005). Instrument mediated activity: From subject development to anthropocentric design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 6, 429–461.Google Scholar
  113. Rabardel, P., & Pastré, P. (Eds.). (2005). Modèles du sujet pour la conception: dialectiques, activités, développement. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  114. Richard, F., & Wainrib, S. (2006). La subjectivation. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  115. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Samurçay, R., & Pastré, P. (1995). La conceptualisation des situations de travail dans la formation des compétences. Éducation Permanente, 123, 13–31.Google Scholar
  117. Samurçay, R., & Pastré, P. (Eds.). (2004). Recherches en didactique professionnelle. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  118. Savoyant, A. (1995). Guidage de l’activité et développement des compétences dans une entreprise d’insertion. Education permanente, 123, 91–99.Google Scholar
  119. Schwartz, Y. (Ed.). (1998). Reconnaissances du travail. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  120. Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated discourse: The nexus of practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  121. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Simon, H. A. (1965). Administrative behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  123. Taylor, F. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  124. Teiger, C., & Lacomblez, M. (2013). (Se) former pour transformer le travail. Laval: Presses de l’Université de Laval.Google Scholar
  125. Theureau, J. (2004a). Le cours d’action: Méthode élémentaire. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  126. Theureau, J. (2004b). L’hypothèse de la cognition (ou action) située et la tradition d’analyse du travail de l’ergonomie de langue française. Activités, 1, 11–25.Google Scholar
  127. Theureau, J. (2010). Les entretiens d’autoconfrontation et de remise en situation par les traces matérielles et le programme de recherche « cours d’action ». Revue d’Anthropologie des Connaissances, 4, 287–322.Google Scholar
  128. Todorov, T. (1984). Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle (Theory & history of literature). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  129. Veillard, L. (2015). University-corporate partnerships for designing workplace curriculum: Alternance training course in tertiary education. In L. Filliettaz & S. Billett (Eds.), Francophone perspectives of learning through work: Conceptions, traditions and practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  130. Vidal-Gomel, C., & Samurçay, R. (2002). Qualitative analyses of accidents and incidents to identify competencies. The electrical systems maintenance case. Safety Science, 40, 479–500.Google Scholar
  131. Von Cranach, M., Kalbermatten, U., Indermühle, K., & Gugler, B. (1982). Goal directed action. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  132. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  133. Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  134. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  135. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  136. Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and reality. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  137. Wisner, A. (1983). Ergonomic or anthropotechnology: a limited or wide approach to working conditions in technology transfer. In Communication at the first international conference on ergonomics in developing countries, Lulea, Sweden.Google Scholar
  138. Wisner, A. (1985). Quand voyagent les usines. Essai d’anthropologie. Paris: Syros.Google Scholar
  139. Wisner, A. (1995a). Situated cognition and action: Implication for ergonomics work analysis and anthropotechnology. Ergonomics, 38, 1542–1583.Google Scholar
  140. Wisner, A. (1995b). The irruption of new technologies: a new challenge for ergonomics and anthropotechnology. Journal of Human Ergology, 24, 45–55.Google Scholar
  141. Wisner, A. (1997). Anthropotechnologie. Vers un monde industriel polycentrique. Toulouse: Octarès.Google Scholar
  142. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.Google Scholar
  143. Zarifian, P. (2001). Objectif compétence. Paris: Editions Liaisons.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Adult Education, Faculty of Psychology and Educational SciencesUniversity of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations