[en] In this article I develop a perspective on the interconnectedness of education and corporeality that allows to analyze concrete school practices in a way that has not been explored so far. After briefly explaining why the body is an important issue for educational research, I explore more extensively a school of thought, which goes back to the work of Merleau-Ponty and which has monopolized the way in which we are inclined to think about corporeality and education. I argue that, in the end, this particular perspective doesn?t take the body seriously. This is because the body is reduced to an instrument, and because the body always appears as a source of meaning. Therefore we run the risk to pay no attention to potentially relevant dimensions of corporeal life that resists human intentionality and any attempt to render the body functional. In order to develop an alternative approach that takes seriously the non-expressive and non-functional body, I turn to the ideas Agamben has formulated in connection with gestures and the potentiality of movement. Gestures concern a repertoire of bodily action/experience that shows in an immediate way what it means that we are creatures of possibility. Elaborating this idea, I concentrate on specific occurrences and practices in the world of education during which we literally coincide with our non-expressive and non-functional bodies, and during which a strong experience of potentiality is granted. In this way it may be argued that certain bodily practices are in and of themselves educationally relevant.

[fr] Dans cet article je d?veloppe un point de vue sur l?interd?pendance de l??ducation et de la corpor?it? qui permet d?analyser des pratiques scolaires d?une mani?re qui n?a pas ?t? explor?e jusqu?ici. Apr?s avoir expliqu? bri?vement pourquoi le corps est un sujet important pour la recherche en ?ducation, j?explore plus en d?tail une ?cole de pens?e, qui remonte ? l??uvre de Merleau-Ponty et qui a monopolis? la mani?re dont nous sommes enclins ? concevoir le r?le de la corpor?it? dans l??ducation. Je soutiens que, ? la fin, ce point de vue particulier ne prend pas le corps au s?rieux. C?est parce que le corps est r?duit ? un instrument et parce que le corps appara?t toujours comme une source de sens. Par cons?quent, nous courons le risque de ne pr?ter aucune attention aux dimensions potentiellement pertinents de la vie corporelle qui r?sistent ? l?intentionnalit? humaine et ? toute tentative de rendre le corps fonctionnel. Afin de d?velopper une approche alternative qui prend au s?rieux l?organisme non-expressive et non-fonctionnelle, je me tourne vers certaines id?es qu?Agamben a formul?es au sujet de ?gestes? et de la potentialit? de mouvement. Les gestes concernent un r?pertoire d?action et d?exp?rience qui montre de fa?on imm?diate ce que veut dire que nous sommes des ?tres de possibilit?. D?veloppant cette id?e, je me concentre sur les ?v?nements et les pratiques sp?cifiques dans le monde de l??ducation au cours desquelles nous co?ncident litt?ralement avec nos corps non-expressives et non-fonctionnelles, et au cours desquelles une forte exp?rience de potentialit? est accord?e. De cette fa?on, je soutiens que certaines pratiques corporelles ont en elles-m?mes une signification intrins?quement p?dagogique.