因此,我们处于一个参考的框架是这样的专业技能模块导致构造社交能力以及专业技能在一个个体,而因此导致组织的丰硕成果。这个框架太广泛的待定。
最初,我们转向教学专业,也许理解实证问题——我们的现场经验。事实上,在专业学习和工作尤其是Amade-Escot(1998)证明显然老师和他的学生之间的关系的知识。报告中表达教育交互和定义为“进化关系(不总是控制),组织、开发和/或关闭在教师和学生之间。”这种方法很有趣,因为它提供了一种内在的对这些报告的分析。
然而,似乎有必要补充这种方法保持与我们的讨论开始。然后我们向“职业化”的教学工作,和工作的Altet特别(1994),我们能够证明存在一个真正的全球“专业”是指教育作为一个真正专业的定义是“人以技能具体专业基于良好的知识基础,承认从科学和实践和实践情景时,这种知识表示和授权”。
从那一刻起,我们的问题正在成型的专业技能可能工作在同一个老师和学生之间的互动发展。
然而,我们的框架仍然是不完整的实证问题。这一次我们把“教育”的分析,使我们能够提高我们的重点和突出什么将是我们研究项目或范式:“位于行动”。我们解释这个范式杜兰德(1998),合并的工作Suchman(1990):“这是要考虑老师的行动发生在一个上下文,它面临的环境中达到约束。“这范式坐落行动涉及本身(万利拉,1988)的存在一个自组织系统,即。的属性不是给定的,而是行动。行动所在地,不能了解外面的情况需要的形状。
因此,我们的理论框架是一致的特别是因为它让我们强调这个概念我们感兴趣的互动关系定义为“个人的行为受到相互影响。每个单独的修改其行为根据别人的反应。
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.
