Here are some remarks in response to your call for papers and the reaction of Francis Grèzes-Rueff. My aim is realistic: it seems impossible to frontally counter the ongoing process but still possible to influence, particularly if a moratorium could be obtained.
1. On written tests, I'm not shocked the reference is secondary programs. Moreover, none will he not, already, CAPES for other disciplines as history and geography? It must, however, that three conditions are met:
- The level of knowledge required of candidates CAPES is not what the students are asked to.
- Therefore, You must not ask applicants to address any part of all programs, but they offer a reasonable selection of these. This would include selection of various periods and themes that could be renewed periodically. We could consider some fixed points: for example, in history, one could always offer the entire program of a second advantage to embrace all periods canonical.
- Suggested topics ask their candidates, in addition to knowledge of "facts" to demonstrate their ability to problematize, to conceptualize, to give some references to evoke such historiographical debate.
-
2. On oral tests:
- I have nothing against the test on knowledge of the education system under the conditions under the guidance note, with one exception: the jury should have only professionals belonging to Education.
- The point of minimum acceptable project is the lesson of making spoken as if the candidate was a lesson to a class. Even after completing a training outreach facility (see point 3) it is impossible to construct a proposed teaching sequence and, even more absurd to mimic it before a jury. For what
replace that part of the oral? I do not think you can keep the test on record as it now operates in History and geography. It should probably look towards what is practiced in other disciplines. The model chosen by the departmental project is strongly influenced by the practice of ESD in Philosophy (show how you would act in such a way) or in science (how we would do such a course). Would it be better to look to the letters and in languages that offer ESD, not to present an educational project, but think about the programs, instruction, textbooks, examination papers. In history and geography, ESD also addresses these issues but is largely dominated historiographical and epistemological questions. A place may be too broad in a contest that aims to recruit high school teachers.
skills - indispensable - in these theoretical areas must be evaluated before, in undergraduate and graduate.
3. On internships:
- It is essential that during the Masters, the candidates have done one (or several) job shadowing and practical support in classrooms and they have realized. This experience is needed to clarify the career path they intend to enhance their performance and written and oral CAPES, without the issues they may have arisen From these courses (do not return to the errors of 1992-1993). Should we make this training compulsory to enter the contest (as was the case once, for "qualifying Aggregation")? I think so.
- It is equally essential to maintain the internship year after the contest and before tenure. It should probably accept the increased service time of the trainee: 2 / 3 Internship responsibility 1 / 3 combinations of training and supervised practical placement in another cycle. With full pay, of course. And ability to perform a second year internship if the first is not enough.
contest winners who have already at least one year of teaching practice would be entitled to discharge more modest (two hours?) To participate in certain courses.
1. On written tests, I'm not shocked the reference is secondary programs. Moreover, none will he not, already, CAPES for other disciplines as history and geography? It must, however, that three conditions are met:
- The level of knowledge required of candidates CAPES is not what the students are asked to.
- Therefore, You must not ask applicants to address any part of all programs, but they offer a reasonable selection of these. This would include selection of various periods and themes that could be renewed periodically. We could consider some fixed points: for example, in history, one could always offer the entire program of a second advantage to embrace all periods canonical.
- Suggested topics ask their candidates, in addition to knowledge of "facts" to demonstrate their ability to problematize, to conceptualize, to give some references to evoke such historiographical debate.
-
2. On oral tests:
- I have nothing against the test on knowledge of the education system under the conditions under the guidance note, with one exception: the jury should have only professionals belonging to Education.
- The point of minimum acceptable project is the lesson of making spoken as if the candidate was a lesson to a class. Even after completing a training outreach facility (see point 3) it is impossible to construct a proposed teaching sequence and, even more absurd to mimic it before a jury. For what
replace that part of the oral? I do not think you can keep the test on record as it now operates in History and geography. It should probably look towards what is practiced in other disciplines. The model chosen by the departmental project is strongly influenced by the practice of ESD in Philosophy (show how you would act in such a way) or in science (how we would do such a course). Would it be better to look to the letters and in languages that offer ESD, not to present an educational project, but think about the programs, instruction, textbooks, examination papers. In history and geography, ESD also addresses these issues but is largely dominated historiographical and epistemological questions. A place may be too broad in a contest that aims to recruit high school teachers.
skills - indispensable - in these theoretical areas must be evaluated before, in undergraduate and graduate.
3. On internships:
- It is essential that during the Masters, the candidates have done one (or several) job shadowing and practical support in classrooms and they have realized. This experience is needed to clarify the career path they intend to enhance their performance and written and oral CAPES, without the issues they may have arisen From these courses (do not return to the errors of 1992-1993). Should we make this training compulsory to enter the contest (as was the case once, for "qualifying Aggregation")? I think so.
- It is equally essential to maintain the internship year after the contest and before tenure. It should probably accept the increased service time of the trainee: 2 / 3 Internship responsibility 1 / 3 combinations of training and supervised practical placement in another cycle. With full pay, of course. And ability to perform a second year internship if the first is not enough.
contest winners who have already at least one year of teaching practice would be entitled to discharge more modest (two hours?) To participate in certain courses.
0 comments:
Post a Comment