Projects

Redesign of a Research Methodology Course

1. Institutional Context

Université Paris Nanterre
UFR SPSE – Sciences psychologiques et sciences de l’éducation

Bachelor’s degree (L2 – Year 2), Psychology

Tutorial sessions in Experimental Methodology
Course lead: Jean-Baptiste Légal (jlegal@parisnanterre.fr)

2. Officially Declared Objectives

The institutional syllabus defined the objectives as follows:

  • Master theoretical notions such as:
    • Null hypothesis testing
    • Type I and Type II errors
    • Statistical tests used in psychology
  • Scientifically describe:
    • Main effects
    • First- and second-order interactions
    • Absence of interaction
  • Pre-register a study
  • Apply APA 7 standards

These objectives complied with national accreditation requirements.

3. Diagnosis: Misalignment Between Declared Objectives and Actual Competencies

My analysis of the course structure, combined with student feedback, revealed a structural gap:

  • Theoretical foundations of experimental methodology are already taught in Year 1.
  • APA standards are covered elsewhere in the curriculum.
  • In practice, students are assessed on their ability to understand and structure scientific reasoning.

The implicit core competency was therefore:

Important

Reading, interpreting, and structuring a scientific article.

However, this central competency was neither explicitly formulated nor structurally embedded in the course design.

I identified a misalignment between:

  • Declared objectives (content-centered),
  • and actual competencies mobilized (analysis, structuring, methodological writing).

4. Identified Issues

a) Dispersion and Redundancy

  • Redundancy with other courses.
  • Accumulation of unprioritized content.
  • Weak curricular coherence.

b) Statistical Section Inconsistencies

Two tensions emerged:

  1. Extensive presentation of numerous statistical tests beyond L2 level.
  2. Misalignment with actual research practice, where OLS regression models dominate.

Regression models were only marginally addressed, considered too complex for L2 students.

c) Lack of a Unifying Thread

Concepts appeared as isolated blocks rather than components of a coherent competency framework.

5. Contribution: Refocusing and Red Thread Approach

I proposed reorganizing the course around a central competency:

Reading, interpreting, and structuring a scientific article.

To achieve this, I introduced a red thread approach:

  • Progressive analysis of one real scientific article, supplemented by other examples from scientific revues.
  • Contextualization of theoretical concepts.
  • Coherent integration of variables, hypotheses, experimental designs, and results.

Statistical knowledge became a contextualized tool rather than an autonomous objective.

The goal was not mathematical mastery, but understanding:

  • What a statistical test allows us to infer,
  • When it is appropriate,
  • How to interpret results.

APA standards were removed from the course scope to reinforce curricular coherence.

6. Strengthened Alignment with Pre-registration

Pre-registration was repositioned as the structuring operational framework.

I proposed increasing in-class pre-registration exercises in order to progressively develop:

  • Clear hypothesis formulation,
  • Structured theoretical context,
  • Precise experimental design description,
  • Anticipation of analytical logic.

The objective was to build foundational competencies required for future academic writing, without claiming to train students yet in full article production.

7. Assessment Redesign

Initial structure: - 50% in-class exam - 50% pre-registration project

Adopted modifications:

  • Removal of the APA exercise.
  • Redesign of remaining exercises based on real scientific articles.
  • Increased writing tasks (hypothesis formulation, logical structuring) to counterbalance generative AI use.
  • Rebalancing:
    • 70% in-class exam
    • 30% pre-registration project
      (proposal initiated by me)

Some additional writing adjustments were collectively proposed by colleagues following the initial redesign.

8. Institutional Impact

Adopted changes led to:

  • Formal update of assessment frameworks at institutional level.
  • Revision of teaching materials.
  • Concrete restructuring of the course architecture.

Organizational Restructuring and Management of NCEP (2023)

1. Institutional Context

NCEP – College affiliated with Université Paris Lumières (UPL),
at the interface of:

  • Université Paris Nanterre
  • Université Paris 8
  • Université Paris Lumières (conventional structure)

Role held:
Administrative, Academic and Financial Manager (Category A)
Sole management position within the unit.

Direct supervisor: Johnny Gogibus, Secretary-General (DGS) of the COMUE
(johnny.gogibus@culture.gouv.fr)

Appointment after five months as an administrative assistant (Category C), in a context of prolonged leadership vacancy.

2. Initial Situation

Unit without a manager for several months.

High structural complexity:

  • Three partner universities.
  • Multiple hierarchies.
  • Distinct administrative and IT systems.
  • Students legally attached to two universities, but graduating from a third.
  • Accumulated administrative errors and incomplete files over three years.

Lack of formalized procedures and strong reliance on informal practices.

3. Track 1 – Organizational Recovery and Workflow Optimization

Diagnosis

  • Undocumented processes.
  • Fragmented information flows.
  • Proliferation of unsecured individual files.
  • Delayed payments for teaching staff (incomplete files).
  • High legal and organizational risk.

Actions

1. Process mapping
- Full analysis of the student lifecycle: enrollment → graduation. - Full analysis of the teaching staff lifecycle: recruitment → scheduling → payment.

2. Formalization and standardization (SOP – Standard Operating Procedures)
- Drafting of an internal operations manual. - Clarification of responsibilities and interfaces.

3. Multi-stakeholder governance
- Active interface with HR, academic leadership, IT, and international relations. - Mapping of contacts and decision-making workflows. - Stabilization of validation circuits.

4. Document management overhaul
- Migration to secure Nextcloud storage. - Centralization of files. - Structured collaboration through shared folders and templates.

5. Operational optimization
- Streamlining admissions and enrollment cycles. - Reorganization of course scheduling. - Resolution of room booking conflicts. - Closure of payment cases left unresolved for three years.

Results

  • Stabilized processes.
  • Reduced administrative errors.
  • Secured documentation flows.
  • Regularized payments.
  • Improved visibility with institutional partners.

4. Track 2 – Curriculum Re-engineering

Diagnosis

  • Inconsistencies in curricula and course grids.
  • Unscheduled courses.
  • Gaps between actual course content and official curricula.
  • Credit calculation issues.
  • Complex configuration in APOGEE.

Actions

  • Full curriculum audit.
  • Identification of structural inconsistencies.
  • Formal escalation to academic leadership.
  • Close collaboration with academic directors and instructional engineers (UPN / UP8).
  • Revision of course titles, credits, and shared modules.

Results

  • Corrected and validated curricula.
  • Alignment between actual content and official structure.
  • Removal of “ghost courses”.
  • Simplified APOGEE configuration.
  • Increased clarity for students and administrative services.

5. Track 3 – Strengthening Academic Compliance

Key challenges

  • Compliance with assessment calendars.
  • Compliance with university regulations.
  • Proper supervision of Master’s defenses.
  • Internship management.
  • Mandatory international mobility (L3).

Contributions

  • Clarification of assessment procedures.
  • Strict application of regulations.
  • Arbitration in conflict situations.
  • Legal security for academic validations.

Impact

  • Reduced ambiguity.
  • Secured academic decisions.
  • Improved transparency for students and teaching staff.

6. Skills mobilized

  • Unit management
  • Multi-stakeholder project management
  • Process mapping
  • Procedure standardization
  • Inter-institutional governance
  • Organizational optimization
  • Curriculum re-engineering
  • Regulatory compliance
  • Change management

Joint PhD: Complex Project Management and Transferability to Instructional Design

Joint doctoral candidate (EPHE – France / UCLouvain – Belgium),
conducting a multi-year research project mobilizing management, analytical, and design competencies transferable to instructional design.

Supervisors:

1. Multi-institutional project management

Governance and coordination

  • Interface with two university administrations (France / Belgium).
  • Coordination with two supervisory teams.
  • Management of distinct academic calendars.
  • Compliance with the regulatory requirements of both systems.

Strategic planning

The PhD is structured into work packages:

  • Source research and collection (libraries, archives).
  • Academic publications.
  • Conference communications.
  • Progressive thesis writing.
  • Fulfillment of teaching/training obligations.

International missions

  • Funding search and acquisition.
  • Negotiation of agreements and collaborations.
  • Complex logistical planning.
  • Coordination with partner institutions abroad.

Risk management

  • Anticipation of publication delays.
  • Trade-offs between research output and parallel obligations.
  • Time reallocation and prioritization.

2. Contextual analysis (Analysis – ADDIE)

My doctoral research analyzes knowledge production and dissemination systems in the 17th century.

This approach is comparable to the “Analysis” phase in ADDIE.

Identifying real needs

In the study of pedagogical and devotional literature, I analyze:

  • Implicit audience needs.
  • Cultural and spiritual expectations.
  • Gaps between editorial supply and actual demand.
  • Drivers of success and failure.

This corresponds to a retrospective learning needs analysis.

Stakeholders and values analysis

I reconstruct:

  • Authors’ intentions.
  • Institutional constraints.
  • Economic stakes.
  • Power relations.
  • Cultural and religious identities.

This work is directly transferable to:

  • organizational culture analysis,
  • value mapping,
  • learner profiling.

Constraints analysis

Historical systems cannot be understood without:

  • economic constraints,
  • material constraints,
  • political constraints,
  • institutional constraints.

Similarly, any instructional design project requires an analysis of organizational and budget constraints in order to implement solutions in real conditions.

3. Structuring and design (Design – ADDIE)

Historical research requires rigorous formalization:

  • Category definition.
  • Concept delimitation.
  • Objective clarification.
  • Coherent argumentative architectures.

This competency is directly applicable to:

  • competency framework design,
  • learning objective definition,
  • objective–activity–assessment alignment,
  • coherent learning pathway structuring.

Just as I analyze the internal coherence of a system of thought or an editorial network,
I can analyze and structure the coherence of a learning system.

4. Development and production (Development – ADDIE)

The PhD involves:

  • Multilingual writing.
  • Structured documentation.
  • Advanced technical workflows:
    • LaTeX
    • Markdown / Quarto
    • R
    • Pandoc
    • bibliographic management (Zotero)

This toolkit is directly applicable to:

  • learning content production,
  • structured documentation,
  • digital resource creation.

5. Implementation and coordination (Implementation – ADDIE)

Conducting the PhD requires:

  • Coordination across two institutions.
  • Publication planning.
  • International mission organization.
  • Conference presentations.
  • Management of multiple calendars.

This corresponds to operational implementation of a complex project.

6. Evaluation and iteration (Evaluation – ADDIE)

Research operates through an iterative cycle:

  • Drafting
  • Submission
  • External peer review
  • Revision
  • Improvement

Each article or chapter is evaluated and refined.

This mirrors formative evaluation and continuous improvement cycles in instructional design.

7. Synthesis: the PhD as an ADDIE laboratory

The PhD functions as a real laboratory for ADDIE-like project management:

  • Fine-grained analysis of needs and context
  • Rigorous and structured design
  • Mastered technical development
  • Multi-stakeholder implementation
  • Iterative evaluation and continuous improvement

The difference lies in the domain (history), not in the methodology.