Keeping Track of Frictions in Reading Comprehension Instruction : A Case for Interactions Studies

Submitted by: Fiona Moreno
Abstract: We know for an indisputable fact that somehow, something gets taught through “literary” reading instruction. Yet, from curricular prescriptions to lesson planning, from teaching practices to actual learning, the aforementioned “something” appears rhizomatic in its evolutions and implications. The apparently nebulous entity is likely to encompass the what, why and how of a particular teaching situation as well as teacher and student expectations, projections, (inter)actions.
From a didactic point of view, classroom interactions certainly are not to be taken as the transparent reflection of teaching or learning processes; neither can they be limited to teacher-student relationships. Instead, they are built on and of sedimented teaching practices, specific communicational stakes, specifically functioning objects of knowledge, all of which compose a relatively stable yet ever-evolving instrument (Wirthner, 2017).
Close reading didactic interactions (Schneuwly & Thévenaz-Christen, 2006) would allow to accurately understand and conceptualize this equally elusive and effective teaching instrument. Such is the ambition underlying much recent research in the field of Francophone didactics, which – importantly – tend to focus on teacher work rather than acquisitional modes, thus shifting the stake of interactional processes from the latter to the former (Flilliettaz & Schubauer-Leoni, 2008).
Tracking didactic interactions within French language and literature education across primary and secondary school has been a major concern of the GRAFE research team (University of Geneva) for years. In this contribution, we propose to focus on a particularly revealing parcel of a research project dedicated to better describing and comprehending teaching instrument transformation dynamics as they can be captured in collective reading and discussion sessions.
Six 3rd-grade class groups were recorded over several weeks, as they separately went through the same textbook teaching unit and a particularly resistant textual artefact (Tauveron, 1999), characterized by heterogeneous enunciation, text-image disjunction, problematic stereotypy.
We will discuss cross-group (absence of?) variations as observed in the first two days of the teaching sequence, namely the contextualization stage.
These observations will be related to Francophone theoretical work conducted on literature instruction and progression throughout the reading instruction curriculum, in an effort to make part of this untranslated body of knowledge more readily accessible to our international audience.
If the 3rd grade is known to be an emblematically transitional year as far as reading instruction is concerned, cultural-historical characteristics of the French discipline result in this transition presenting particular asperities in the Swiss-French context. The need for more nuanced tracking of specialized professional action in contexts of French language and literature instruction will be posited, using the “contextualisation stage” research snapshot as a case study.
We will conclude by briefly presenting two ongoing follow-up studies, inviting the audience to reflect on updated research questions. We believe these questions to be of relevance far beyond Francophone / primary school settings, as they propose to dig deeper into our conceptions of teacher work, textuality, and literature.
Throughout the talk, we will highlight key aspects of research design, dwelling on the particular methodological stance developed in the course of the GRAFE research and adopted in the studies presented. Most importantly, we will seek the audience’s feedback on our provisional terminology, approach, and follow-up study planning.

References:
Cèbe, S., & Goigoux, R. (2007). Concevoir un instrument didactique pour améliorer l’enseignement de la compréhension de textes. Repères, n°35, 185-208.
Class, B. & Schneider, D. (2013). La recherche Design en éducation: vers une nouvelle approche ? frantice.net, 7, 5-16. Retrieved from http://frantice.net/index.php?id=762
Filliettaz, L., & Schubauer-Leoni (Eds.) (2008). Processus interactionnels et situations éducatives. Brussels : De Boeck.
Hofstetter, R. & Schneuwly, B. (2014). Disciplinarisation et disciplination consubstantiellement liées: deux exemples prototypiques sous la loupe: les sciences de l'éducation et les didactiques des disciplines. In B. Engler (Ed.), Disziplin - discipline (pp. 27-46). Freiburg (CH): Academic Press.
Nonnon, E. (2010). La notion de progression au coeur des tensions de l’activité d’enseignement. Repères, 41. 5-33.
Ronveaux, Chr. & Soussi, A. (2013). Lire des histoires ou comprendre des textes ? Le(s) récit(s) enseigné(s) au fil des cycles. Recherches, 59, 45-58.
Ronveaux, Chr. & Schneuwly, B. (Ed.) (2017). Lire des textes littéraires au fil des niveaux scolaires. Bern : Peter Lang.
Schneuwly, B. & Dolz, J. (Éd.) (2009). Des objets enseignés en classe de français: le travail de l’enseignant sur la rédaction de textes argumentatifs et sur la subordonnée relative (Païdeïa). Rennes : PUR.
Schneuwly, B. & Thévenaz-Christen, Th. (2006). Analyses des objets enseignés. Le cas du français. Brussels : De Boeck.
Tauveron, Catherine (1999). Comprendre et interpréter le littéraire à l’école: du texte réticent au texte proliférant. Repères, 19, 9-38.
Thévenaz-Christen, Th. (Ed.) (2014). La lecture enseignée au fil de l’école obligatoire. L’exemple genevois. Namur: Presses Universitaires de Namur.
Wirthner, M. (2017). Outils d’enseignement : au-delà de la baguette magique. Outils transformateurs, outils transformés dans des séquences d’enseignement en production écrite. Bern : Peter Lang.