“What is also Space, Domain, Contract, Framework, Circle, Climate Self…, but also the School and the school system… and can be digital?”

1 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9724 (§ 12 and more). 2You can think about it. If you cannot find the answer, you will find it in the editorial in the latest varia issue, number 44.1 and in the annex here. We ask this question once again in this new varia issue. This issue, the last of 2024, is not made up of articles on the same theme, but brings together some various submissions.

# Presentation of contributions

The first article, by Théo Martineaud, reports on the practices of primary schools teachers during and after the covid-19 crisis in France. Based on two series of semi-structured interviews in 2021 (n=72) and 2022 (n=46), it confirms the importance of a form of ’resourcefulness’ in response to the emergency of confinement. While teachers train on their own or with their peers, self-training is seen as an imposed and time-consuming activity, which cannot compensate for the lack of institutional training. It is carried over into their personal time, particularly during holidays or at weekends, even if it means returning to their classrooms outside lessons for self-training. Faced with such a shortfall, teachers describe their uses as “limited” in the face of technical potentialities that they are unaware of and that are supposed to be offered by the tools they use.

The Ministry’s objective of recreating an educational ecosystem is based primarily on rapid access to educational resources, and teachers describe information-seeking activities on the web as a personal step prior to self-training. However, they have little understanding of the institutional injunctions asking them to self-train in digital techniques, which they consider not to be part of their mission. This lack of understanding reflects a lack of confidence in an authority whose aims and policies they do not fully understand.

2 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5198. 3 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5203. 5It should be noted that DMS has given a great deal of space to these issues, notably in the 2020 debate section devoted to “What the pandemic is doing to educational engineering…”2 and the contribution of Emmanuelle Villiot-Leclercq.3

4 https://project.inria.fr/classcode/le-projet-classcode-elements-finaux/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 5 https://pixees.fr/classcode-v2/l-association/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 6 https://www.didapro.org/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 7 https://theses.fr/2023BRES0047 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 8 https://theses.fr/2023UNIP7138 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 9 https://theses.fr/2024ULILH034 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 10 https://opus.u-paris.fr/catalog/book/18 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 6The second article, by Jérémy Le Du, Julian Alvarez and Daniel Schmitt, describes work aimed at “identifying optimal ways of integrating video game design activities into French schools with a view to developing computational thinking.” After analyzing the existing literature, the article itself describes the implementation of an experimental research program that will be given to several dozen French schools from the start of the 2022 school year. The program, called EGPDP (Educational Game & Play Design Project), is being developed jointly by researchers from the University of Hauts-de-France and the University of Helsinki. While this description is fairly comprehensive, it does not devote much attention to the work carried out in France. For example, the Class Code project,4 for teacher training, and the collective Class’Code,5 the Didapro conferences,6 recent theses of Matthieu Branthome,7 Sevastiani Touloupaki,8 Marielle Léonard,9 the book issued from the ANR project IeCare.10

Readers may wonder why we include this article when there is no distance (or hybrid) learning as such. In fact, the various references we have pointed out show that there is a lively field of research around the learning of computer science and digital instruments, in different ways, opening up the spectrum of questioning in DMS. In other words, is not it legitimate and important to question the understanding of the tools used in training, the processes involved in appropriating these tools, the internal workings of these tools, and even more general training in programming? The debate is open within the editorial team and, we hope, among our readers.

11 https://www.unicef.org/quality-research (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 12 https://pisa.testportal.gov.ua/PISA-2022-Short-report_eng.pdf (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 8The third contribution is a testimonial one, collected and edited by Daniel Peraya, from Yuliia Nenko, professor at the Cherkasy Institute of Fire Safety (Ukraine). It gives the floor to an expert in distance learning and training in times of crisis, an euphemism when it comes to Ukraine. Her testimony gives a well-informed account of the changes in training practices due to confinement, and the impact of the war on the school system. It is found that the combination of e-learning, stress and trauma leads to substantial learning losses for Ukrainian pupils and students.11 According to the PISA reference criteria, these reductions correspond to an approximate loss of half a year’s study in science, one year’s study in mathematics and two years’ study in reading.12

Two reading notes look at the educational issues surrounding a phenomenon that is saturating the news: the so-called generative artificial intelligence. Barbara Szafrajzen presents and comments Hugues Bersini’s book, which provides an overview of the history of artificial intelligence (AI). He explains how it works and warns against its misuse, which is harmful to learning. Gary Marcus’s book, analyzed by Philippe Dessus, is complementary, presenting the intellectual, social and political challenges of AI, particularly of generative AI. It shows the limits of AI from the point of view of both the scientific models used and the strategies of major companies. In the face of the risks analyzed and presented, Gary Marcus calls for citizen action to “tame Silicon Valley.”

Philippe Dessus concludes on the need to think about these issues in an educational context, providing some avenues. Indeed, the imagination that has been built around these AIs remains very present. We can thus question the transition between AI in the singular, scientific field and application field and undoubtedly a distant horizon, to AIs (or AIs in North American writing), which personify assistants that everyone can have, that they can train as they wish with the illusion of owning them. Showing how generative AI works, nourishes the vision of a technology that we pilot. Showing the associated errors and biases does not resist the promises of a bright future and reinforces belief in this technology.

13 For example here: https://etsmtl.libguides.com/IAgenerative/biais (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 14 See https://gagadget.com/fr/how-it-works/210106-linatteignable-sommet-de-lart-pourquoi-lintelligenc (...) 15 Bender Emily M., Gebru Timnit, McMillan-Major Angelina and Shmitchell Shmargaret (2021). On the Dan (...) 16 https://www.usine-digitale.fr/data-centers.N2219114 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 11In fact, the limits are amply described13 and biases, errors (like the six-fingered gloves14 or false references) are intrinsically linked to the very functioning of this technology which cannot understand the texts it manipulates. All this is well summed up in the term stochastic parrot,15 metaphor illustrating the use of statistics (probabilistic models) to convincingly generate texts similar to those of humans, but without understanding their meaning. We would like these AIs to be able to explain what they produce, which they cannot do properly. Explainability is a fundamental issue. We must not forget the cost of these technologies and the energy resources needed to run them,16 quality of service will be heavily dependent on what users are able to pay.

The reliability of answers, in stabilized fields of knowledge such as those taught at school, could certainly be improved. In training, we could develop a form of interaction akin to Colombo, the Californian police lieutenant in a famous TV series. We know the culprit, just as we know the answer (one?). What processes need to be undertaken to prove this guilt? How can we prove that the answer is the right one? It is an arduous task, and one that many students will find difficult to complete. If they only have one answer, what will they have learned?

In any case, as is typical with technologies widely used outside educational institutions, their use will increase inequalities. Questions of authority, trust, legitimacy, transparency, responsibility and regulation are at the heart of the debates surrounding the use of AI in education and training.

17 https://www.nytimes.com/multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024). 18 Readers can refer to various articles that have appeared in DMS, demonstrating the scepticism of th (...) 14The last great revolution announced, but only in the field of education, was the mooc revolution. They made the news in 2012.17 With a very large number of participants, the collection and analysis of interaction data from these participants should enable continuous improvement of the courses, making it possible to generate the best possible courses in just a few years. This culminated in a promise in the form of an oxymoron: the massive personalized course. In 2024, the horizon seems to have shifted!18

19 Bruillard Éric (2014). Les utilisateurs des MOOC : quel regard ? DMS 7 2014, https://doi.org/10.400 (...) 15However, the mooc had been able to restore the role of the teacher and the lecture in a sort of amphitheater of immense dimensions, since it could accommodate a very large number of people at a distance,19 sometimes with the illusion of a personal amphitheater. It is possible to establish a link between this illusory experience and the idea of “softened magistrality” (and also “getting away from a vertical word of authority experienced as arrogant”) taken up by Olivier Aïm in his interview with Claire Peltier. (Magistralité et remédiation, une rencontre « entre SIC et SED »), last article in this issue 48.

20 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9952. 16This interview concludes the series of articles devoted to the debates initiated by Claire Peltier for the “Debates” section of issue 45 of DMS,20 in examining the forms of lecturing today and approaching the lecture as a “model of transmission and relationship destined [perhaps?] to redefine itself.”

21 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9176. 17To bring this editorial to a close, we can return to the idea of trust, the solution to the riddle presented at the beginning of the text and encountered in the articles in this issue: trust in institutions, trust in machines and AI, trust in others, and so on. We should also add Chantal Bois’s earlier article on the educational alliance,21 which places great emphasis on the notion of trust (particularly the climate of trust). The notion of authority also appears. By adding the notion of legitimacy, which is central to any understanding of teachers’ activities, Pierre Rosanvallon’s latest book, “Les Institutions invisibles” (Invisible Institutions) can undoubtedly help us to better frame these three central notions for understanding education and training: trust, authority and legitimacy.

Finally, this editorial is the last to be co-written by Monique Grandbastien as co-editor-in-chief. Last year she announced her wish to take a well-deserved retirement. After a year of mentoring Éric Bruillard, her wish has come true. The Scientific Advisory Board paid tribute to her on 2 December, and DMS will do likewise by publishing a special issue in her honor, due to appear before the end of 2025.

<footnote n="1">1 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9724 (§ 12 and more).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5198.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5203.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4 https://project.inria.fr/classcode/le-projet-classcode-elements-finaux/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5 https://pixees.fr/classcode-v2/l-association/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6 https://www.didapro.org/ (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7 https://theses.fr/2023BRES0047 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8 https://theses.fr/2023UNIP7138 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9 https://theses.fr/2024ULILH034 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10 https://opus.u-paris.fr/catalog/book/18 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11 https://www.unicef.org/quality-research (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="12">12 https://pisa.testportal.gov.ua/PISA-2022-Short-report_eng.pdf (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">13 For example here: https://etsmtl.libguides.com/IAgenerative/biais (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14 See https://gagadget.com/fr/how-it-works/210106-linatteignable-sommet-de-lart-pourquoi-lintelligence-artificielle-midjourney-dessine-t-elle-6-doigts-sur-les/ et https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241001308369/fr/ and even in the mainstream press https://www.leparisien.fr/high-tech/intelligence-artificielle-pourquoi-les-mains-sur-les-photos-fabriquees-ont-souvent-quatre-ou-six-doigts-04-03-2023-V42CHFSQARBDDH74URGTTXC5WY.php (all accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15 Bender Emily M., Gebru Timnit, McMillan-Major Angelina and Shmitchell Shmargaret (2021). On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? FAccT '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, p. 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16 https://www.usine-digitale.fr/data-centers.N2219114 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="17">17 https://www.nytimes.com/multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="18">18 Readers can refer to various articles that have appeared in DMS, demonstrating the scepticism of the journal’s authors, in particular the articles by Christian Depover, Berdanette Charlier and Patrick Guillemet, which appeared in 2014 in issue 5 of DMS (https://journals.openedition.org/dms/483), François Mangenot’s article in issue 7 (https://journals.openedition.org/dms/844) as well as the highly critical article by Pierre Moeglin, published in 2014 and republished in varia 2022-39: « L’enseignement supérieur au défi du numérique. MOOC : de l’importance d’un épiphénomène » (https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.8164).</footnote>

<footnote n="19">19 Bruillard Éric (2014). Les utilisateurs des MOOC : quel regard ? DMS 7 2014, https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.791.</footnote>

<footnote n="20">20 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9952.</footnote>

<footnote n="21">21 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9176.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">22 http://www.education.gouv.fr/ecole-de-la-confiance.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="23">23 http://eduscol.education.fr/cadre-de-confiance.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="24">24 http://cache.media.eduscol.education.fr/226603.pdf (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="25">25 http://gauchet.blogspot.fr/2009/10/la-confiance-est-le-moteur-de.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="26">26 https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/000000801164 (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="27">27 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informatique_de_confiance (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="28">28 https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.fr.html (accessed Dec. 12, 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="29">29 https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9724 (§ 13).</footnote>