Je vous suis entirely on the following points and add a few remarks:
- I greatly regret the abolition of a real year of internship in liability (not a substitute for job shadowing or practical support)
- melting disciplinary requirements through the number and type of tests. A high scientific level is necessary for ease of future teachers who must dominate what they teach and learn effectively prepare a specific theme it will not necessarily be seen during the course of L or M1. - Some issues programs CAPES history and geography were sometimes too far from what a teacher would to teach the 6th at the Terminal. But do not give as good a knowledge requirement, level L, the content of college and high school programs, in many cases returned to the general culture. Specific questions, drawn from programs in colleges and high schools in the 4 periods in history, would know how to prepare and work a question in depth (see above).
- I am for myself, and others with me, shocked by the introduction of "civil society representatives on juries." That recruitment panels to contest EN incorporating actors of the education system, not only teachers, seems desirable for certain tests (eg knowledge of the education system) but would it be conceivable to suggest that lawyers, professors of 1st and 2d degree, business leaders and others sit on the jury of thesis that medicine or contests hospital medicine? That would shock the general public to propose equivalences ... Juries must remain composed by professionals of the education system.
- the national nature of assistance must be maintained, yet the text never says if the contest (it deals successively with the assistance of PE, now academic, and the CAPES / PLP / Aggregation, current national) if these contests will be national or academic. - Finally, the alignment of the number of events in support of the 1st degree and second degree (which is consistent with the melting of the disciplinary requirement) seems unsuited to the job of the future teacher ...
For all these reasons, I think only confirm without debate, without reaction, this text will soon prepare for the models of M (to December 2008 according to the circular) is precipitated, risky, carrying heavy negative consequences for students and the French educational system.
- I greatly regret the abolition of a real year of internship in liability (not a substitute for job shadowing or practical support)
- melting disciplinary requirements through the number and type of tests. A high scientific level is necessary for ease of future teachers who must dominate what they teach and learn effectively prepare a specific theme it will not necessarily be seen during the course of L or M1. - Some issues programs CAPES history and geography were sometimes too far from what a teacher would to teach the 6th at the Terminal. But do not give as good a knowledge requirement, level L, the content of college and high school programs, in many cases returned to the general culture. Specific questions, drawn from programs in colleges and high schools in the 4 periods in history, would know how to prepare and work a question in depth (see above).
- I am for myself, and others with me, shocked by the introduction of "civil society representatives on juries." That recruitment panels to contest EN incorporating actors of the education system, not only teachers, seems desirable for certain tests (eg knowledge of the education system) but would it be conceivable to suggest that lawyers, professors of 1st and 2d degree, business leaders and others sit on the jury of thesis that medicine or contests hospital medicine? That would shock the general public to propose equivalences ... Juries must remain composed by professionals of the education system.
- the national nature of assistance must be maintained, yet the text never says if the contest (it deals successively with the assistance of PE, now academic, and the CAPES / PLP / Aggregation, current national) if these contests will be national or academic. - Finally, the alignment of the number of events in support of the 1st degree and second degree (which is consistent with the melting of the disciplinary requirement) seems unsuited to the job of the future teacher ...
For all these reasons, I think only confirm without debate, without reaction, this text will soon prepare for the models of M (to December 2008 according to the circular) is precipitated, risky, carrying heavy negative consequences for students and the French educational system.
0 comments:
Post a Comment