Iconotextual narration at the service of creative activity. Didactic device and anthroposemiotic approach to make the pupil a creator-actor of his learning.
Exploratory research conducted in cycle 1 in the canton of Vaud in Switzerland.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51657/ric.v6i2.51468Keywords:
creative activities, semiotics, album, narration, multimodalityAbstract
This research was conducted in three cycle 1 classes in the canton of Vaud in Switzerland. Based on the creative process of Wallas (2003) and the identified factors of creativity (Lubart, 2003), it proposes to put the posture of creator in a social semiotic perspective by using the multimodal narration of the album as a mediating object. The results of this research make it possible to refine the initial process by invoking, in particular, astonishment (Thiévenaz, 2017), inquiry (Dewey, 1993) and Vygotsky's symbolic play (1978). The creative act, by being anchored in the individual's reality, generates experiential learning in and for him, by the group and for the group (Sullivan, 2017).
As pedagogical support of choice, notably because of the richness of the offer, the affective dimension of the images and the narration, the album is a composite object whose semiotic complexity forces a process of metaphorical meaning-making described as highly creative (Kress, 2010). Thus, the organizing principle of each modality present allows for the establishment of relationships which, when deepened by the students' actions, become the basis for learning beyond the strict framework of the discipline and developing skills that are both productive and constructive (Pastré, 2006). As the motivation of the sign-maker depends on his or her interests (Kress, 2010), participation in a narrative that has to find its conclusion places the student in the position of a creator-actor of his or her learning.
The multimodal medium serves here as a material for (re)conceptualisation in which the transmediation (Suhor, 1984, cited in Sullivan, 2017) specific to the composite nature of the medium is put at the service of the creator's posture. The object produced can then take an active role in the construction of meaning (Bowker & Star, 2000), making the process a transformative practice (Conne, 2008) for the learner who critically co-constructs her/his learning (The New London Group, 1996; Sullivan, 2017). Referring back to social semiotics, learning is here considered primarily as a situated meaning-making process (Budach, 2018; Mottier Lopez, 2016) from an anthropological perspective of education (Ingold, 2018).
References
Alary, V. & Chabrol Gagne, N. (2012). L'album: Le parti pris des images. Presses Universitaires Blaise-Pascal.
Beckers, J., Crinon, J., Simons, G. (2012). Approche par compétences et réduction des inégalités d'apprentissage entre élèves. De Boeck Supérieur.
Bonnardel, N., & Lubart, T. (2019). La créativité: approches et méthodes en psychologie et en ergonomie. RIMHE: Revue Interdisciplinaire Management, Homme Entreprise, 378(4), 79-98.
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (2000). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT press.
Budach, G. (2018). «Les objets qui font parler»: vers une pédagogie de la création multimodale et multilingue. Lidil. Revue de linguistique et de didactique des langues, (57).
Conne, F. (2008). L'expérience comme signe didactique indiciel. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques. La Pensée sauvage , 28 (2), 219-264.
Cope, B., Kalantzis, M. (2016). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Learning by design. Springer.
Desbiens, J. F. (2010). L’action située: critique mesurée d’une approche novatrice de l’apprentissage. Ejournal de la recherche sur l’intervention en éducation physique et sport, (19).
Dewey, J. (1916, 1938). Experience and Education. MacMillan.
Dewey, J. & Deledalle, G. (1993) Logique : La Théorie (2e éd). Presses universitaires de France.
Eraly, A. (2011). Quelle sémiotique pour quelle théorie sociale?. SIGNATA. Annales des sémiotiques/Annals of Semiotics, (2), 167-194.
Fobre, M. (1997). Pensée pédagogique et modèles philosophiques: le cas de la situation-problème. Revue française de pédagogie, 49-58.
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. Hilldale, 1(2), 67-82.
Halliday, M. A. (1995). Systemic theory. In Concise History of the Language Sciences (pp. 272-276). Pergamon.
Ingold, T. (2018). L’anthropologie comme éducation. Presses universitaires.
Jewitt, C. (2016). Multimodal analysis. In J. Jewitt (ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and digital communication, Routhledge, 69-84.
Jewitt, C. (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. Second Edition. Routledge.
Jouve, V. (1998). L'effet-personnage dans le roman. Presses universitaires de France.
Kress G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London : Taylor & Francis.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.
Lotman, Y. M. (1989). The semiosphere. Soviet Psychology, 27(1), 40-61.
Lubart, T. (2003). Psychologie de la créativité. Armand Colin.
Masciotra, D., & Medzo, F. (2009). Développer un agir compétent. Vers un curriculum pour la vie. De Boeck Supérieur.
Micheli, R. (2014). Chapitre 1. Essai d’une typologie des modes de sémiotisation de l’émotion. In R. Micheli, Les émotions dans les discours: Modèle d’analyse, perspectives empiriques De Boeck Supérieur, 17-31.
Pastré, P. (2006). Apprendre à faire. In Bourgeois, É. & Chapelle, G. (2011). Apprendre et faire apprendre. Presses Universitaires de France, 109-121
Pier, J. (2018). Monde narratif et sémiosphère. Communications, (2), 265-286.
Retschitzki, J. (2011). La culture en tant que facteur du développement cognitif. Alterstice: revue internationale de la recherche interculturelle/Alterstice: International Journal of Intercultural Research/Alterstice: Revista International de la Investigacion Intercultural, 1(1), 81-93.
Sullivan R.S. (2017). Creativity, Technology, and Learning. Theory for Classroom Practice. Routhledge.
Tardif, J. (1998). La construction des connaissances. 2. Les pratiques pédagogiques. Pédagogie collégiale, 11 (3), 4-9.
The New London Group (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-93.
Theureau, J. (2001). Le travail, c’est la pensée, oui mais la pensée signe. Comprendre que travailler c’est penser: un enjeu industriel de l’intervention ergonomique. Octares.
Thiévenaz, J. (2017). De l’étonnement à l’apprentissage : enquêter pour mieux comprendre. De Boeck Supérieur.
Vergnaud, G. (2011). La pensée est un geste Comment analyser la forme opératoire de la connaissance. Enfance, (1), 37-48.
Vygotski, L. (1997). Pensée et Langage. La Dispute.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. J. Cape.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Maud Lebreton, Rachel Attanasio
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.