Two major related and？complementary functions within the competence of the teacher in his daily practice. A didactic function of structuring and regulating the content taught and a pedagogical function of management, relational and communicative regulation of events in the classroom (Gal-PetitFaux？& Vors, 2008). In this study, we seek to clarify the influence of the gender of physical education (PE) teachers, on the one hand, on the representations that are made of the lesson dynamic, on the other hand, on teaching practice in the field. We worked with 30 PE teachers, divided into 15 men and 15 women. We filmed gymnastics sessions and did two types of interviews with the participants. Our results show that the PE teacher’s gender modulates their representations of lesson dynamics, but does not influence their teaching practice in the field. In terms of beliefs, women teachers report being more concerned with the organization and its relationships in the classroom. On the other hand, men say they are more technical. In practice, teachers use intervention strategies, during practical sessions, marked by regularity and typicality. They build a work environment that carries educational potential. They differentiate the learning content according to the individual skills of the students.
References
[1]
Altet, M. (2002). A Research Approach on Teaching Practice/Plural Analysis. French Review of Pedagogy, 138, 85-93. https://doi.org/10.3406/rfp.2002.2866
[2]
Boizumault, M. B., & Cogérino, G. (2012). The Bodily Staging of PE Teaching: Non-Verbal Communications at the Service of Teacher Effectiveness. STAPS, 98, 67-79.
[3]
Bordes, P. (2005). Influence of the Methods of Grouping Pupils on Their Motor Progress. Quasi-Experimental Study in a Teaching Situation. Education Hubs, 20, 3-11.
[4]
Brun, M., & Gal-Petitfaux, N. (2006). A Particular Educational Format According to the Theoretical Light of the Action Situated. PSE Review, 317, 40-44.
[5]
Chouinard, R. (1999). Beginning Teachers and Classroom Management Practices. Journal of Educational Sciences, 25, 497-514.
[6]
Couchot-Schiex, S. (2005). Contributions to the Gender Effects of the Teacher in EPS: Descriptive Study in three APSAs: Gymnastics, Badminton, Handball. Lyon II University.
[7]
Couchot-Schiex, S. (2007a). Observation of the Practices of PE Teachers with Regard to Gender. Research and Training, 54, 151-164.
[8]
Couchot-Schiex, S. (2007b). Is the Teacher’s Universe Gendered? eJournal de la Recherche sur l’Intervention en Education Physique et en Sport, 11, 39-55.
[9]
Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom Organization and Management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 392-431). Macmillan.
[10]
Durny, A. (2008). Analysis of the Activity of PE Teachers as Part of the End-of-Cycle Evaluation: An Illustration in Sports Gymnastics. The International Symposium Efficiency and Equity in Education.
[11]
Gal-PetitFaux, N., & Vors, O. (2008). Socialization and Transmission of Knowledge in Physical Education Class: A Possible Synergy at the Cost of a Conciliatory Educational Authority. Education and Francophonie, 36, 118-139. https://doi.org/10.7202/029483ar
[12]
Lacourse, F. (2012). From Routine Analysis to Classroom Management and Professionalization. Phoresis Review, 1, 19-32. https://doi.org/10.7202/1012561ar
[13]
Legoult, F. (1999). Classroom Management during an Introductory Teaching Internship and the Emergence of a Virtual Community Focused on Problem Solving. Journal of Educational Sciences, 25, 593-613.
[14]
Leinhardt, G. (1990). Capturing Craft Knowledge in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 19, 18-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X019002018
[15]
Lenoir, Y. (2009). Educational Intervention, a Theoretical Construct for Analyzing Teaching Practices. New Education Research Notebook, 12, 9-29.
[16]
Lenoir, Y., Larose, F., Deaudelin, C., Kalubi, J. C., & Roy, G. R. (2002). Educational Intervention: Conceptual Clarifications and Social Issues for a Reconceptualization of Intervention Practices in Teaching and Teacher Training. Critical Spirit Journal, 4, 1-32.
https://www.espritcritique.org/
[17]
Lessard, A., & Schmidt, S. (2011). Literature Review on Classroom Management. University of Sherbrooke Quebec.
[18]
Léveillé, C. J., & Dufour, F. (1999). The Challenges of Classroom Management in High School. Journal of Educational Sciences, 253, 515-532.
[19]
Martineau, S., Gauthier, C., & Desbiens, J. F. (1999). Classroom Management at the Heart of the Teacher Effect. Journal of Educational Sciences, 25, 467-496.
https://doi.org/10.7202/032010ar
[20]
Nault, T., & Fijalkow, J. (1999). Introduction. Classroom Management: From Yesterday to Tomorrow. Journal of Educational Sciences, 25, 451-466.
https://doi.org/10.7202/032009ar
[21]
Parlebas, P. (1981). Contribution to a Commented Lexicon in the Science of Motor Action. Paris INSEP Publications.
[22]
Piot, T. (1997). The Representations of New Teachers on Their Practices: A Key to Understanding the Construction of Teaching Professionalism. The Teaching Identity between Training and Professional Activity. Research & Training, 25, 113-123.
[23]
Roux-Perez, T. (2004). The Professional Identity of PE Teachers: Between Shared Values and Unique Interpretations. STAPS, 63, 75-88.
[24]
Sarthou, J.-J. (2003). Teaching PE: From Didactic Reflection to Educational Action. Paris: Actio Edition.
[25]
Saury, J., Ria, L., Séve, C., & Gal-PetitFaux, N. (2006). Action or Situated Cognition: Scientific Issues and Interests for Teaching in PSE. PSE, 321, 5-11.
[26]
Shulman, L. S. (1986a). Paradigms and Research Programs in the Study of Teaching. In M. C. Wiittrok (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 3-36). Macmillan.
[27]
Shulman, L. S. (1986b). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Grows in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
[28]
Theureau, J. (1992). The Course of Action: Semiological Analysis. Peter Lang.
