Symposium: "Improvising Teaching, Teaching Improvisation"

Theme of the IEEI 2021 conference

Improvisation? This concept is commonly associated with the arts. But it also applies to other fields of practice and research, such as medicine, law, defense, civil security, crafts, sports, teaching, learning, and training. It should be noted that the term is regularly found in the vocabulary of many practitioners (often outside of professional standards) and in that of certain work analysts. The concept can reflect a form of practical reality, considered more or less acceptable or unavoidable; it can also be used to point the finger at dubious amateurism or, conversely, to sing the praises of experts and virtuosos. The disparate nature of the degrees of consideration given to improvisation raises questions.

Is the classic dualism between the "mythical valorization" and "critical devaluation" of improvisation (De Raymond, 1980), or the equally common dualism between structure and spontaneous outburst, a heuristic tool or an obstacle? What isthis praxisknown as improvisation? Is it an experience, a separate activity? Are there conditions for talking about improvisation? To what extent can improvisation be linked to imagination and/or creation and/or intuition and/or invention, etc.? Can improvisation and adaptation be confused? Is it preferable to distinguish between them? How does improvisation work in terms of interaction, attention, sensitivity, and cognition? What is the relationship between improvisation and preparation? Can improvisation be considered a form of emancipation? Is improvisation primarily an individual or a collective practice? Is improvisation only for experts? Or does it contribute to the conditions of expertise? Can it be thought of as a way to become and remain professional? Should we consider that we must learn to improvise or improvise to learn? Can improvisation be learned? Etc. These are some of the questions that will be explored throughout this conference.

Laborde (2005) describes improvisation as an art of memory and the moment (a practice that is embodied, cultural, and sublimated by the relationship with others). Pierrepont (2009), concerning collective improvisation, identifies a complex of four specific properties: it is propositional, situational, immanent, and consists of a combinatorial and transformative dynamic. Hennion (2018) considers that improvisation benefits from being understood not only from the perspective of the improviser (who acts, and acts in order to allow themselves to be acted upon) but also, extending Souriau's ideas and following a pragmatist point of view, from the perspective of the work (which both acts of its own accord and is to be acted upon—in its perpetual accomplishment, it is thus possible and relevant to consider it as accompanied in a distributed manner, by the improviser but also by other actors in the interaction, for example the audience). Anthropologists and sociologists have thus proposed fruitful hermeneutics of improvisation. This is also the case for other researchers such as Mouëllic (2011) who, in his book Improviser le cinéma, defends, among other things, a form of continuity between writing (a certain kind of writing) and improvisation during filming, or Citton (2014), who, in an essay, draws parallels between co-attentional dynamics and improvisation, and the agency of the collective attentional ecosystem that he believes a class constitutes.

In the field of research in education and training sciences, pedagogy, and didactics, improvisation has many uses. For over 40 years, the category has been used to describe and understand classroom interactions and their dynamics (e.g., Erickson, 1982; Gershon, 2006; Sawyer, 2004), to shed light on how students learn (e.g.,Baker-Sennett & Matusov, 1997) and how teachers teach (e.g.,Borko & Livingstone, 1989; Perrenoud, 1994; Tochon, 1993), or to understand the work of the latter (Azéma, 2019), study and transform their training (e.g.Pelletier & Jutras, 2008), or even to discuss specific learning situations and analyze their scope (e.g.Gagnon, 2011). It is clear that it covers different realities, multiple meanings, and sometimes contradictory points of view, which contribute to a variety of understandings.

Today, teachers, trainers, and coaches are always looking for insights into their practices, as well as ways to improve their effectiveness. Learning and development processes are being re-examined, particularly by neuroscience. In this context, it seems essential to continue describing and understanding the forms of interaction that occur in schools, in the classroom, or in training and professional development, coaching, and performance capacity. Similarly, it seems crucial to continue exploring the dynamics of individuation (Simondon, 2013) among those involved in teaching, education, training, and coaching. By placing improvisation at the heart of reflections, practices, and debates, this conference aims to critically examine not only ways of teaching, training, or coaching, but also processes of learning and development.

Bibliographic references:

• Azéma, G. (2019). Improvisation and routine work for new teachers. What activities? What challenges?Activities[Online], 16-1 | 2019, published online on April 15, 2019, URL: http://journals.openedition.org/activites/3941
• Baker-Sennett, J., & Matusov, E. (1997). School “performances”: Improvisational processes in development and education. In R. K. Sawyer (DS.),Creativity in performance(pp. 197-212). Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing Company.
• Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers.American Educational Researcher Journal, 26(4), 473-498.
• Citton, Y. (2014).Pour une écologie de l’attention. Paris: Seuil.
• De Raymond, J.-F. (1980).Improvisation. Paris: Vrin.
• Erickson, F. (1982). Classroom discourse as improvisation: Relationship between academic task structure and social participation structure in lessons. In L.C. Wilkinson (DS.),Communicating in the Classroom(pp.153-181). New York: Academic Press.
• Gagnon, R. (2011). Theatrical improvisation in the service of oral and written expression and its teaching.Swiss Journal of Educational Science, 33(2), 251-265.
• Gershon, W. (2006). Collective improvisation: A theoretical lens for classroom observation.Journal of curriculum and pedagogy, 3(1), 104-135.
• Hennion, A. (2018). The object, belief, and the sociologist,Transposition[Online], Special issue 1 | 2018, published online on January 30, 2018, accessed on May 14, 2018. URL:http://journals.openedition.org/transposition/1673; DOI: 10.4000/transposition.1673
• Laborde, D. (2005).The memory of the moment. The sung improvisations of the Basque bertsulari. Bayonne: elkar.
• Mouëllic, G. (2011).Improvising cinema. Crisnée: Yellow Now.
• Pelletier, J.-P., & Jutras, F. (2008). Components of active improvisation training in managing unexpected events in secondary school classrooms.McGill Journal of Education, 43(2), 187-211.
• Perrenoud, P. (1994). Teaching practice between controlled improvisation and improvisation. In P. Perrenoud (DS.),Training between theory and practice(pp. 21–41). Paris: L’Harmattan. (Article originally publishedin Education et Recherche, 1983, 2, 198–212).
• Pierrepont, A. (2009). Improvisation games, construction games. In A. Pierrepont and Y. Séité (Eds.), Improvisation: Order and Disorder. Human Facts and Social Facts (pp. 19–36).Journal of the Faculty of Arts, Letters, and Cinema. Paris Diderot University – Paris 7.
• Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation.Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-20.
• Simondon, G. (2013).Individuation in the light of the notions of form and information. Grenoble: Millon. (Original text, 1958).
• Tochon, F. V. (1993). The "improvisational" functioning of the expert teacher.Journal of Educational Sciences, 19(3), 437-461.

Registration and practical information

• Registration opens on January 31, 2021
• Registration closes on May 30, 2021
• Deadline for withdrawal (in the event that the conference is held): May 14, 2021.

All individuals attending the conference (speakers, presenters, moderators, attendees, etc.) must register as conference participants via the online registration system (below). This applies to authors, co-authors, and attendees.

Rates

• Researcher, lecturer-researcher, doctoral student (institutional rate).**: €80
• Professional (including educators, primary and secondary school staff, mediators, coaches, etc.): €50
• Student: $30

* Masculine pronouns referring to people refer to both men and women.
** Excluding UM FDE (staff and students of the host institution benefit from free registration)

Registration fees include:

• participation in all activities offered;
• lunch;
• coffee or tea and pastries during the morning welcome and during breaks.

The registration fee does not include other meals, accommodation, or the gala dinner.

Gala Dinner

• The price of the gala dinner at the Brasserie du Corum is €40.
• Advance payment must be made at the time of online registration. There is a checkbox for this purpose.

Payment terms

Payment for registrations can be made either by credit card or by administrative transfer with a purchase order*.

* IMPORTANT! IF YOU ARE PAYING BY PURCHASE ORDER, once you have received the pre-order form (generated automatically by the system at the end of your registration process), have your unit manager prepare your purchase order and send itto Laura Gervais.