ABSTRACTS |
|
ÉCRIRE ET RÉVISER UN TEXTE AU 1ER CYCLE DU PRIMAIRE EN MILIEU ALLOPHONE. Isabelle Montésinos-Gelet Abstract |
|
APPROCHER L’ECRITURE EN DEBUT DE SCOLARISATION : APPRENTISSAGES DES ELEVES ET ACTIONS DE L’ENSEIGNANT. Marie-France Morin, Jacques David, Pascale Nootens Abstract: Based on a set of empirical data, the goal of this theoretical contribution is 1) to specify the pedagogical action necessary to offer adapted accompanying measures to support the first acquisitions in writing and 2) to broaden the portrait of the knowledge children construct about the written language. Thus, in reference to a corpus collected amongst young writers interacting about their productions, this paper examines the way in which children take up the written language from the perspective of the invented spelling. This perspective conceives the pupil as an active learner who, in interaction with the written language, gradually acquires the characteristics of the system. In this context, the teacher gives rise to situations in which pupils are in contact with this complex written system and ensures pedagogical interventions adapted to their level of development by analyzing the written productions which are more or less conventional according to the norm. Some implications of this conception of the teaching-learning of writing for teacher training are discussed.
|
|
YOUNG STUDENTS’ COMPREHENSION OF DATA REPRESENTED IN GRAPHS: THE INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY AND REALISTIC PROBLEM SOLVING. Athanasios Gagatsis, Theodora Christodoulou and Iliada Elia Abstract The present study investigates young students’ abilities in graph comprehension, including graph recognition, interpretation and construction. Furthermore, it examines whether the use of technology and realistic problem solving in teaching help students to develop their mathematical thinking in recognition, interpretation and construction of bar graphs. The sample of the study consisted of 58 first grade students, divided into three groups: experimental group 1, experimental group 2 and control group. Initially, all the students completed a pretest and then the students of the two experimental groups received an intervention program with different didactical approaches (technology, realistic problem solving), while the students of the control group received regular teaching in statistics. Finally, all the students completed a posttest. The findings of the research demonstrated that students’ performance improved in both experimental groups, while the use of technology was found to have a greater contribution than the use of realistic problems in developing students’ competence in interpretation of bar charts. Furthermore, the students who received intervention based on technology exhibited greater flexibility in graph comprehension after the implementation of the intervention program than before. |