Meeting of January 16 Hagnerelle with Michel and Laurent Wirth, inspectors general of national education - history and geography.
The purpose of this interview was to ascertain what is the current thinking of the Inspector General about the reform of the Capes. Generally no definitive indication has been supplied or the reform agenda or the terms of the tests, the final decision in these two areas not covered by the GI. On the other hand the general framework of the Capes, as defined by the department is obviously one in which the integrated reflection of the GI.
Program:
It seems certain, contrary to what had been the first department of doctrine - and as Mark had suggested Sherringham - that questions will be selected within the program for secondary schools - those post-baccalaureate classes no longer used for reference. However
order not to complicate the idea of preparation would not hold an annual question period in history (and therefore also because of the principle of parity 4 questions in geography) but to make a roll (2 questions of history / 2 questions about geography?). The project to strengthen the hand of the ancient and medieval history in high school would not be confined to the issues currently addressed in college.
The program thus defined serve as a reference to the written and spoken. The concrete modalities of such rotation has not been discussed but the matter would likely renew the president of the jury.
Comment : One can only welcome the abandonment of the will to take all the curricula of secondary reference. However, the solution of "rolling" implies that some periods in history and geography in some areas will not be considered during the preparation of the competition, which in practice may lead to a marked weakening of the disciplinary content of the competition. At the same time prepare 8 issues in 5 months is mission impossible, especially if those questions lead to exercises similar to those we know today.
At this stage - but it takes time - reflection on the nature of the tests, defining expectations seems a track priority to find a balanced solution to the question of the competition program.
-Written tests:
The writing always has two compositions in one story, one in geography. Clearly the will of the IG is to not tie the hands of the jury and its president. The wording is therefore probably indicative ... So one of two topics would include at least the documents, the other may have only read "Dry". Furthermore the subject may include (or not) an epistemological component. The track of a specific issue was raised at the meeting. But no doctrine still seems set on the matter.
Comment: If we remain within the framework of questioning s IG, afterwards and in the absence of precise framing of these events and topics zero, the formula outlined by the IG seems unclear, particularly as regards the presence of an epistemological questions (provided in the context map of the DGES) and how it will surgery. Proceeding to a draw (or choice assumed) and to induce one of two events (that is to say, history or geography) the epistemological questioning by the presence of a document inviting would probably be more explicit. It can be seen how badly this epistemological dimension can be present outside of documentary support, its inclusion in a label "dry" Essay belonging to a type of exercise that is not part of normal learning methodology of both disciplines. As for the idea that it be a specific issue is a great risk to make a marginal exercise.
Oral tests:
-Lesson:
Consistent shown to recruit teachers - "State employer" makes its hiring - the oral lesson should follow some rules of the examination competitions - while bearing in mind that candidates have the same experience. While completing an internship is not mandatory to take the examination but have performed better participate preparation. Furthermore the master courses are designed as a continuation of those of the EU pre-professional whose discount GI development.
The referral program is that of writing (and not the entire program of high schools and colleges). Presumably, only the practice of juries truly determine the extent actually granted to the educational component.
Comment: We can only reiterate our concern over this latest flap raises sharply the question of criteria of objectification of ratings and reiterate a few hours or weeks in internship observation in practice even in shared responsibility are not sufficient experience to enter a genuine pedagogical questions and reflect on their teaching practices. The oral exams must remain tests of reflection and organization of subject content on a specific theme.
-Knowledge of the education system: The definition
this event completely outside the GI history and geography. A particular group is working. One point seems clear: the jury of this event will be part of jury of the contest. It will be composed of historians and geographers - aggregated or certified - headteachers, IA DSEN ... Again evolution of the race will likely depend on the doctrine that will give the jury and the practice of interviewing early years ...
Comment: We can not, for our part, recall that our opposition to the event at the blurred edges in its current definition and regret the excessive importance of the coefficient which would be vested.
Update:
Since that meeting further information was communicated to us that Ahmuf has partly been made public.
1 / The number of questions of the contest is not determined by the statutory instrument (the formula that would seem to be retained would be "questions"). However the link with the curriculum would be reiterated that imply the disjunction Caps / aggregation.
2 / Any reference to grade level in the general framework of the disciplinary oral (lesson) should disappear. It should be noted that the educational or pedagogical choices can be a Part of the interview with the jury.
In both cases it is therefore the jury and its president who, largely, would establish the doctrine and practice of juries that influence it one way or another, however, if the reform comes into force.
3 / Finally, the coefficient of the test of knowledge of the education system would be more than 2 (cons 3 in the original project)
3 + 3 is written, oral disciplinary 4, Knowledge of the education system 2.
The exact nature of the tests and program of oral (or that of writing all the programs in schools and colleges) remain unclear and should not be resolved at this point.
3 / Finally, the coefficient of the test of knowledge of the education system would be more than 2 (cons 3 in the original project)
3 + 3 is written, oral disciplinary 4, Knowledge of the education system 2.
The exact nature of the tests and program of oral (or that of writing all the programs in schools and colleges) remain unclear and should not be resolved at this point.
