About cooperative engineering: theory and emblematic examples

References

• Brandom, R. 1998. Making It Explicit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brousseau, G. 1997. The Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Brousseau, G. 2004. “Les représentations : étude en théorie des situations didactiques.” [Representations: A Study in Theory of Didactical Situations] Revue des sciences de l'éducation 30 (2): 241–277.10.7202/012669ar
   Google Scholar
• Bulterman-Bos, J. A. 2008. “Will a Clinical Approach Make Education Research More Relevant for Practice?” Educational Researcher 37 (7): 412–420.10.3102/0013189X08325555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chevallard, Y., and G. Sensevy. 2014. “Anthropological Approaches in Mathematics Education, French Perspectives.” In Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education, edited by S. Lerman, 38–43. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cloud, D. 2015. The Domestication of Language. Cultural Evolution and the Uniqueness of the Human Animal. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. 1988. Foucault. London: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Descombes, V. 1998. “La Confusion Des Langues.” Enquête 6: 35–54.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. 2004. Reconstruction in Philosophy. London: Dover Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., J. Nummijoki, and A. Sannino. 2012. “Embodied Germ Cell at Work: Building an Expansive Concept of Physical Mobility in Home Care.” Mind, Culture, and Activity 19 (3): 287–309.10.1080/10749039.2012.688177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleck, L. 1981. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago press.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 1976. The Birth of the Clinic. London: Tavistock Publications Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Ilyenkov, E. 1982. The Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concrete in Marx’s Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Kemmis, S. 2009. “Action Research as a Practice‐Based Practice.” Educational Action Research 17 (3): 463–474.10.1080/09650790903093284
   Google Scholar
• Kosík, K. 1976. Dialectics of the Concrete: A Study on Problems of Man and World. Dordrecht: Reidel.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. 1979. The Essential Tension. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leutenegger, F, and F. Ligozat. 2009. “The Treasure Game: Grasping the Premises of the Subject Matter Norms in Pre-School Classes”. Communication, Network 27, European Congress in Educational Research (ECER) Theory and Evidence in European Educational Research? [ 28-30 september] Austria: University of Vienna
   Google Scholar
• Ligozat, F. 2011. “The Determinants of the Joint Action in Didactics: The Text-Action Relationship in Teaching Practice.” In Beyond Fragmentation: Didactics, Learning and Teaching in Europe, edited by B. Hudson and M. A. Meyer, 157–176. Opladen & Farmington Hills MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Marx, K. 2012. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. London / New York: Penguin Classics.
   Google Scholar
• McTaggart, R. 1994. “Participatory Action Research: Issues in Theory and Practice”. Educational Action Research 2 (2), 313–337. 10.1080/0965079940020302
   Google Scholar
• Passeron, J. C. 2013. Sociological Reasoning: A Non-Popperian Space of Argumentation. Oxford: The Bardwell Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryle, G. 2009. “Teaching and Training.” In Collected Essays 1929-1968, edited by G. Ryle, 464–478. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G. 2011. Le sens du savoir. Éléments pour une théorie de l’action conjointe en didactique. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
   Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G. 2012. “About the Joint Action Theory in Didactics.” Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 15 (3): 503–516.10.1007/s11618-012-0305-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G. 2014. “Characterizing Teaching Effectiveness in the Joint Action Theory in Didactics: An Exploratory Study in Primary School.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 46 (5): 577–610  ZDM, the International Journal on Mathematics Education 45(7), 1031–1043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G. 2015. “Analysing Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge from the Perspective of the Joint Action Theory in Didactics.” In Understanding Science Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Growth, edited by Michel Grangeat, 63–85. Rottedam/Boston/Taipei: Sense.10.1007/978-94-6300-313-1
   Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G., D. Forest, S. Quilio, and G. Morales. 2013. “Cooperative Engineering as a Specific Design-Based Research.” ZDM, the International Journal on Mathematics Education 45 (7): 1031–1043.10.1007/s11858-013-0532-4
   Google Scholar
• Sensevy, G., B. Gruson, and D. Forest. 2015. “On the Nature of the Semiotic Structure of the Didactic Action: The Joint Action Theory in Didactics within a Comparative Approach.” Interchange. 46 (4): 387–412.10.1007/s10780-015-9266-2
   Google Scholar
• Tiberghien, A., and L. Malkoun. 2009. “The Construction of Physics Knowledge in a Classroom Community from Different Perspectives.” In Transformation of Knowledge through Classroom Interaction, edited by B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus and R. Hershkovitz, 42–55. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Townsend, A. 2013. “Principled Challenges for a Participatory Discipline.” Educational Action Research 3 (21): 326–342.10.1080/09650792.2013.815038
   Google Scholar
• Venturini, P., and C. Amade-Escot. 2013. “Analysis of Conditions Leading to a Productive Disciplinary Engagement during a Physics Lesson in a Deprived Area School.” International Journal of Educational Research 64C:169–182. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. 1972. On Certainty. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.
   Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. 2009. Philosophical Investigations. Chichester, UK, and Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar