La réforme de la formation des enseignants s’inscrit dans un contexte marqué par une désaffection longue pour le métier de professeur des écoles, une défiance grandissante des professeurs vis-à-vis de l’institution, une représentation peu structurée du métier chez les débutants, et une mise en cause de l’engagement professionnel des formateurs en INSPE. Au regard de ces fortes contraintes, quelques axes de travail sont mis en exergue : la formalisation par les équipes d’INSPE d’un modèle de référence pour la formation, l’incarnation d’une posture délibérative en formation, le questionnement réciproque de la polyvalence et des didactiques, l’accompagnement des étudiants.

Research on the intersection between geography and higher education training shows that a geographical approach to university disciplines remains to be developed. This text aims to outline such a framework. Political and analytical challenges are presented through the work of French philosophers Jean-Louis Fabiani and Jean-Michel Berthelot. It suggests a model for understanding the spatial dimensions of academic disciplines. A matrix of different concepts suggests various directions for geographical study: institutional delimitation of discipline, discipline networks, discipline universe of objects, and discipline-learning configurations. One of these directions is the development of the geography of disciplinary learning. To this end, the text specifies what are the spatial dimensions of an academic discipline and explains how a situated, discursive and configurational approach can help us to conceptualize it. Two case studies revisited in the final of the article aim to clarify and illustrate this project. This research was based on theoretical and conceptual frameworks in education and labor sciences, where the spatial dimensions of learning are not central. The objective of this revisit is precisely to highlight these dimensions. The two research cases mainly concern the academic training of future second-degree professors. This circumscribed field of observation has enabled a variety of approaches to be experimented with, as evidenced by the two studies. The first study explores what could be a geography of disciplinary devices in university training. The second study deals with what could be a geography of the work of teachers and students in these disciplines. More general questions arise from the analyses conducted in both cases.