Thus, we are in a frame of reference is that such modules of professional skills lead to construct the social competence as well as professional skills in an individual, which consequently leads to fruitful results for the organization. This framework is too broad to be determined.
Initially, we turned to the teaching professional in order, perhaps, to understand our empirical question – our field experience. Indeed, work in professional learning and in particular those of Amade-Escot (1998) demonstrate clearly the relationship to knowledge between the teacher and his students. Reports that are expressed in educational interactions and are defined as “the evolutionary relationships (not always controlled) that organize, develop and / or are closed between teachers and students.” This approach is interesting in that it provides an intrinsic analysis of these reports.
However, it seemed necessary to supplement this approach to remain relevant to our discussion started. We then turn to the idea of “professionalization” of the teaching profession, and with the work of Altet (1994) in particular that we were able to demonstrate the existence of a true “professional global” refers to education as a true professional is defined as “a person with skills specific expertise based on a sound knowledge base, recognized from science or from practices and from practices when contextualized, this knowledge is professed and empowered.”
From that moment, our problem is taking shape around the professional skills may work up to develop in the same interaction between teacher and students.
However, our framework is still incomplete in terms of our empirical question. This time we look to “the analysis of education” that allows us to sharpen our focus and to highlight what will be our research program or paradigm: that of “situated action”. We explain how this paradigm to Durand (1998), incorporating the work of Suchman (1990): “This is to consider the action of the teacher as taking place in a context, an environment that achieves constraints which it faces.” This paradigm of situated action involves itself (Varela, 1988) the existence of a self-organizing system, i.e., whose properties are not given at first, but are built into the action. The action is located and cannot be understood outside of the situation in which it takes shape.
Thus, our theoretical framework seems consistent especially since it leads us to emphasize the concept we are interested in the interaction defined as “the relationship by which the behavior of individuals are subject to mutual influence. Each individual modifies its behavior according to the reactions of the others.