1. Objectifs

Intentions :
This paper presents «the results of two Change Laboratory [CL] sessions, a methodology coherent with the theory of expansive learning that fosters learning actions oriented toward a better way to coordinate and cooperate for the benefit of parents, teachers and pupils.» (p. 47)

Questions/Hypothèses :
The authors try to answer the following questions: «[i]s there a common vision of the homework issue among the participants? […] What are the possible actions taken or could be taken to resolve the issue?» (p. 49)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
«The present work corresponds to the first phase of a CL, that is, the questioning or charting the situation […]. Two CL sessions were conducted. The first CL session occurred in April 2016 and gathered all together 14 collaborators (2 researchers, 1 school principal, 11 teachers). […] The second CL session, conducted in November 2016, gathered nine participants, three teachers from the previous CL (2 cycle-two) and a new cycle-one teacher, three parents with children in grades 2, 3 and 5, the school principal and one research-interventionist on site.» (p. 50)

Instruments :
Questionnaire

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique

3. Résumé

«During the first CL session, the teacher and the school principal participants […] concerns were in line with the findings from our prior works that were first presented at the start of the session as mirror data in order to stimulate a collective vision of the homework issue, induce problem-solving and improve parent-teacher collaboration. In the second CL session, teachers from the first CL volunteered to participate and some parents representing different family characteristics (non traditional and large size families and families with children having learning difficulties) were invited. The idea of inviting some parents could be considered as a turning point in the process as a participant teacher […].» (p. 55) Moreover, [c]riticisms or change-oriented expressions were directed to the community (parents) and concerned also the rules, division of labor and tools poles. Families’ non traditional structure and mothers’ low educational level as well as negative past school experience and children with learning difficulties elicited several criticisms with respect to parents’ expected level of involvement (rules pole). Teachers admitted that the different homework assignments deadlines between the cycles (tools pole) represent some adaptation from parents with many children (division of labor pole). They deplore that parents sometimes do the homework themselves (division of labor pole). But having a double role as a teacher and as a parent, helps them to understand parents’ responsibilities with homework helping (division of labor pole).» (p. 52)