Duration
Number of credits
Lecturer
Collégialité, Jean-François Guillaume, France Heuveneers, Edgar Tasia
Coordinator
Language(s) of instruction
French language
Organisation and examination
Teaching in the second semester
Schedule
Units courses prerequisite and corequisite
Prerequisite or corequisite units are presented within each program
Learning unit contents
Designing a lesson plan (materials given to students and materials available to the teacher; estimating timing; assessing learning outcomes).
This does not involve teaching a class of students, but rather presenting a lesson plan to a panel consisting of the social sciences teaching team, a teacher, assistant or university researcher, and at least one upper secondary school teacher.
The lesson topic is assigned at the beginning of the programme (September 2025) by drawing lots. It is worked on during the second individual internship: accompanied by a member of the social sciences teaching team, the student uses trial and error, comments, suggestions and questions from the internship supervisor and teaching experts to improve the presentation of the subject matter, teaching methods and assessment methods.
Learning outcomes of the learning unit
After completing individual work on designing a lesson sequence on a set topic and receiving various types of feedback, students demonstrate their ability to write course materials that support active learning and can be made available to social science teachers.
Prerequisite knowledge and skills
Knowledge and skills related to previous stages of training in social science teaching.
Planned learning activities and teaching methods
Individual work on designing course materials on the assigned topic for the second individual internship.
Class session dedicated to the design and use of problem situations.
Presentation of a guidance note to the social sciences teaching team; discussion of this note.
Presentation of the public lesson file to a jury composed of a university expert on the topic and members of the social sciences teaching team. Assessment of the file's admissibility. Discussion of the content and its didactic transposition.
Drafting of an improved version of the lesson (if acceptable).
Validation of the final version by a panel composed of a member of the social sciences teaching team and two secondary school teachers.
Mode of delivery (face to face, distance learning, hybrid learning)
Face-to-face course
Further information:
Individual work; presentation of this work to a panel; use of feedback provided by the panel.
Course materials and recommended or required readings
Platform(s) used for course materials:
- eCampus
Further information:
Exam(s) in session
Any session
- In-person
oral exam
Written work / report
Further information:
The public lesson may only be submitted for assessment by the jury if the student has written and presented a guidance note for this public lesson at the end of teaching placement B. Deadline for submitting the guidance note: 9 March 2026 or 16 March 2026 (depending on the date set for the debriefing of teaching placement B). Feedback interviews for this guidance note: 18 March 2026.
The public lecture file is assessed in two stages.
An initial mark (out of 20 points) is set at the end of the defence before an 'internal' jury composed of one academic expert and two members of the social sciences teaching team.
A second assessment (out of 30 points) will be given after the lesson file has been corrected by a member of the teaching team and two teachers working in secondary schools.
Only public lesson files that have been awarded a mark of 10/20 or higher by the 'internal' jury will be submitted for a second assessment after correction. Files that have been awarded a mark lower than 10/20 must be resubmitted at another exam session.
How does the "internal" jury assess the admissibility and quality of the public lesson?
The "internal" jury for public lessons takes the following criteria into account when assessing the files submitted to it.
Firstly, compliance with formal requirements.
- The file is an original production: there is no plagiarism. The use of AI is specified and detailed.
- The bibliographical sources consulted are mentioned.
- The theme is approached from the perspective of the social sciences and not from another discipline or a course in philosophy and citizenship education.
- The document is operational and effectively implements an active learning approach. The reader must be able to understand the meaning, nature and content of the proposed teaching approach. The pages are numbered; the titles are consistent and orderly; spelling and syntax rules are respected; the materials provided are accessible and legible. The student is put to work in the learning approach: this is not a file for a lecture or conference.
Secondly, mastery of subject matter and methodology.
- Mastery of subject matter: accuracy, precision, clarity and rigour in content; updating of concepts (particularly when analysis of the subject matter requires reference to the legal framework).
- Appropriateness of subject matter to the needs and abilities of the target audience.
- Epistemological caution or vigilance: addressing facts in all their complexity, avoiding any form of oversimplification.
- Methodological rigour: a common thread running through the approach, with a link between the starting point (initial problem situation) and the end point (summative assessment), and the inclusion of an intermediate measurement point (formative assessment). In other words, the dossier must necessarily include an initial problem situation, a formative assessment and a summative assessment.
Thirdly, mastery of teaching methods, i.e. the quality of the teaching approach: presence of a summary text covering the essential elements of the lesson; quality of the initial problem situation (in relation to the essential elements selected for the lesson; plausible; degree of precision of the question asked after the presentation of the situation); quality of the summative assessment (in relation to the essential elements of the lesson; goes beyond a mere restitution of knowledge); relevance of the documents used during the lesson and the instructions given; justification of the approaches chosen (individual work, group work, collective work).
Repeated faults or shortcomings in the didactic transposition are likely to be penalised with a failing mark. It is up to the jury to assess the extent of the deficit.
If the public lesson file meets the formal requirements, if it offers mastered disciplinary content and methodology, and if the teaching methods are deemed acceptable, the performance is awarded a mark of at least 10/20. The mark awarded to the dossier is assessed taking into account the level of mastery of teaching methods.
The comments, remarks and suggestions made by the jury are communicated to the student electronically. It is then up to the student to consider all the comments and make a reasoned and thoughtful selection, based on the essential principles of teaching transposition.
A corrected version of the public lesson must be submitted by the date set by the social sciences teaching team. The quality of this corrected version is assessed by one of the members of the social sciences teaching team (who, among other things, checks whether the student has taken into account the comments made) and two social sciences teachers working in a secondary school (who provide an overall assessment of the quality of the work on the basis of, among other things, the possibility of using it as is in a classroom).
Both public lesson files (initial version and corrected version) must be submitted by the deadlines set.
Deadline for the initial version: 27 April 2026, 12 noon.
Deadline for the corrected version: 5 June 2026, 12 noon.
If one of the files is submitted after the deadline, the student's performance will be penalised with a serious failure.
In the event of a serious failure in the public lesson defended before the jury, the student's overall performance for the AESS2228-A course will be penalised with a serious failure.
In the event of a serious failure in the corrected lesson sent to the social sciences teaching team (failure to take into account the questions and comments made, incomplete documents, incorrect content, etc.), the student's overall performance for the AESS2228-A course will be penalised with a serious failure.
Work placement(s)
No internship.
Organisational remarks and main changes to the course
Please note! Writing the public lesson plan is the sole responsibility of the student: they must demonstrate their ability to design a learning sequence independently (see expected outcomes).
The teaching team may be called upon in the event of significant difficulties or hesitations. In this case, an individual meeting will be arranged - assistance cannot be provided through a "simple" exchange of emails. Students should prepare specific questions or requests relating to a particular element of content or methodology. The teaching team does not respond to requests such as: 'Tell me what to do' or 'What would you do in my place?'.
Contacts
Jean-François Guillaume, Professor
Jean-Francois.Guillaume@uliege.be
France Heuveneers, Teaching Assistant
fheuveneers@uliege.be
Edgar Tasia, Assistant
Edgar.Tasia@uliege.be
04 366 35 03
Office 1.90, Building B31, Agora Quarter, Place des Orateurs, University of Liège at Sart Tilman.