American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/education Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Educational Research. 2015, 3(1), 54-61
DOI: 10.12691/education-3-1-11
Open AccessArticle

The Dual Consequence of Discursive Practices on both the Learning and the Education in University’s Evaluation Practices

Michel DISPAGNE1,

1Humanities Department, University of the French West Indies and Guiana, Schœlcher, 97232, Martinique

Pub. Date: January 19, 2015

Cite this paper:
Michel DISPAGNE. The Dual Consequence of Discursive Practices on both the Learning and the Education in University’s Evaluation Practices. American Journal of Educational Research. 2015; 3(1):54-61. doi: 10.12691/education-3-1-11

Abstract

This article is about the observation of a French institute of high education, the one of University of the French West Indies and Guiana. This institute is based in the American-Caribbean area and composed of three universities, based on three different French territories: Guiana, Guadeloupe and Martinique. The reflection concerns a discourses’ corpus within training in Master’s degree (MA, MS/MSc), that is also specific to the European higher education system. The discursive exploitation refers to the analysis of both the results of assessments that students obtained during the period 2009-2013 and the discourses of students and academics that intervene in the Master. The reflection enables to apprehend the uneasiness resulting of the gap between the ideal expected profile and the actual profile of the student in postgraduate training. Face this fact, we hypothesize that failures and even the lack of certain knowledge that appears at the necessary prerequisites to the two years of Master undertaken. The fact remains that in terms of results, various verbal reactions proceeding of the students’ language practice from one year to another, between 2009 and 2012, converge towards a same discourse namely that the operated investments, then the efforts realized have a low and even an absence of impact on the respective learning paths but also on the results obtained at the end of the assessments. Moreover, this discourse is not specific to the students that obtained the more disappointing results and therefore are referred. Actually, it is also the discourse of the students that are admitted. This can be explained by the fact that, indeed, notes given are beyond 10/20, the average note; however they are closed to it. This implies a success that appears very modest compared to the excellence expected.

Keywords:
learning profile assessment knowledge language practice discourse failure success

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]  The document of the university is composed of registered statistical tables of admitted and referred students coming from twelve courses (English, Spanish, French Literature, Creole, History, Geography, Infocom, Educational Sciences, FFL, ESL, plastics and Translation Studies Arts) representing two levels of training: L and M and providing figures on four academic years. The table does not provide data for all students enrolled in the Master 2 in the 2012-2013 academic year. This lack of data is due to the fact that most of students have not supported their memory and therefore had no note, which has prevent from knowing the exact statistics about the admitted students and the referred students of M2.
 
[2]  Document belonging to the administration of the Department of Humanities and published in December 2012.
 
[3]  This small corpus of words is a copy of what is constantly heard in many educational meetings of academics in the field and / or during deliberations about students’ assessments conducted at the end of the semester by the academics team itself.
 
[4]  Engineering of Integration Actions and Local Development
 
[5]  C. Michaut, «L’efficacité des dispositifs d’aide aux étudiants dans les universités”, Recherche et Formation»; N° 43, 2003.
 
[6]  Dossier d’actualité veille et analyse, n°64, septembre 2011.
 
[7]  «La didactique professionnelle”.
 
[8]  Les savoirs tacites: «si les salariés savaient tout ce qu’ils savent !”.
 
[9]  L’entretien d’explicitation en formation continue et initiale.
 
[10]  Course offered at UQAM (Université du Qubébec à Montréal) in a vocational and technical training.
 
[11]  «La didactique professionnelle et le travail de l’enseignant”
 
[12]  «Regards sur l’activité en situation”.
 
[13]  «Construire les compétences individuelles et collectives”.
 
[14]  PARI: Plateforme d’Accompagnement Pour la Réussite et l’Insertion. It is a service of the Bureau of Assistance to Professional Insertion (BAIP) of the UAG. BAIP is itself part of SUIO (University Department of Information and Orientation). Available: [accessed 17.10.2013]
 
[15]  M.Danner, «À qui profite le tutorat mis en place dans le premier cycle universitaire?”, Les sciences de l’éducation pour l’ère nouvelle, 33, 1, p. 25-41.
 
[16]  L. Endrizzi, «Savoir Enseigner dans le supérieur: un enjeu d’excellence pédagogique”, Dossier d’actualité veille et analyses, N° 64, septembre 2011.
 
[17]  État des savoirs sur les relations sur les relations entre les étudiants, les enseignants et les IATOSS dans les établissements d’enseignements supérieurs, Paris: Observatoire de la Vie Étudiante (OVE).
 
[18]  Laure Endrizzi, citant Knight et al. «C‘est la formation informelle qui prédomine dans les pratiques du développement professionnel: c’est en enseignant qu’on apprend à enseigner”, Studies in Higher Education, 2006, vol. 31, N°3, p. 319-339.
 
[19]  Jean-Marie De Ketele, Revue Française de pédagogie, N° 172, p. 5-13.
 
[20]  Ouvrage collectif, Bruxelles, De Boeck.
 
[21]  L’efficacité des dispositifs d’aide aux étudiants dans les universités, n° 43.
 
[22]  Coulon Alain & Paivandi Saeed, État des savoirs sur les relations entre les étudiants, les enseignants et les IATOSS dans les établissements d’enseignements supérieurs, Paris, 2008, Observatoire de la Vie Étudiante (OVE).
 
[23]  Danner Magali, À qui profite le tutorat mis en place dans le premier cycle universitaire?, Les Sciences de l’éducation pour l’ère nouvelle, vol. 33, 1, p. 25-41. 2000.
 
[24]  Endrizzi Laure, «Savoir enseigner dans le supérieur: un enjeu d’excellence pédagogique”, Dossier d’actualité: veille et analyse, n°64. 2011.
 
[25]  Ketele (De) Jean-Marie, La pédagogie universitaire: un courant en plein développement, Revue française en pédagogie, n° 172, p. 5-13. 2010.
 
[26]  Knight Peter T., Tait Jo & Yorke Mantz, The professional learning of teachers in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 31, n°3, p. 319-339. 2006.
 
[27]  Michaut Christophe (2003), «L’efficacité des dispositifs d’aide aux étudiants dans les universités”, Recherche et Formation, n°43.
 
[28]  Le Boterf Guy, Construire les compétences individuelles et collectives, Paris, 2000, Editions d’Organisation.
 
[29]  Leplat Jacques, Regards sur l’activité en situation, Paris, 1997, Armand Colin.
 
[30]  Pastré Pierre, La didactique professionnelle: approche anthropologique du développement chez l’adulte, 2011, Paris, PUF.
 
[31]  Romainville Marc & Rege Colet Nicole, La pratique enseignante en mutation à l’université, 2006, Bruxelles, De Boeck.
 
[32]  Vermersch Pierre, L’entretien d’explicitation en formation continue et initiale, 1994, Paris, ESF.
 
[33]  Vinatier Isabelle & Altet Marguerite, Analyser et comprendre la pratique enseignante, 2008, Rennes, PUR.
 
[34]  Vinatier Isabelle, La didactique professionnelle et le travail de l’enseignant, 2013, Paris, de Boeck.