【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 scenario descriptions do not deal with domain concepts such as studied knowledge or programs. This lack makes it difficult to find relevant scenar ios in a specific subject, and to identify the designer’s intentions which aim most frequently to solve issues related to learn some particular knowledge or acquire some particular petence or knowhow. Then, for a given scenario, the pedagogical or didactical strategy is not often clarified (for example, the choice of an “expositive” approach or the choice of a more participative approach like collective problem solv ing). This lack of elicitation frequently implies a very precise analysis of the scenario to stand out the strategy or approach which could be an important criterion of choice. Finally, teachers suggest that the design task could be facilitated by providing librar ies of typical strategies, scenarios, or situations of various granularities. Each of 本科畢業(yè)設計（論文）外文翻 譯 8 these ponents should be illustrated by concrete reproducible examples. We present in the following section the theoretical background which can help to cover these needs and on which we base our approach. 3 Proposition of a Conceptual Framework All these observations lead us, not to propose an alternative solution to EMLs, but to plete them by offering models, methods and tools to sustain design and reuse by nonputer specialists. A second part of the project, not detailed here, consists in providing mechanisms to translate businessoriented models towards different EML. Theoretical Background Our research concerns the teacherdesigner activity and we base our approach on a set of plementary theoretical works concerning theory of activity: ? anization of activity, proposed by Russian psychologists such as Leontiev [11], defines hierarchical levels (activity, action, operation) which allow distinguishing intentional, strategic and tactical dimensions in the activity。 ? situated character of the activity, studied by Lave and Wenger [12] insists on the importance of the context in which activities take place. ? importance of routines or schemas, that represents typical solutions given to recur rent problems in specific contexts. Those features have been particularly studied by Schank and Abelson in the context of teaching activity [13]. As previously said, we also take into account the recent works concerning Business Process Engineering and GoalOriented Requirements Engineering and instantiate them in the particular context of learning scenario design. For example, in MAP Model [8], concepts of goal and intention are considered as equivalent. MAP Model is described in these terms: “A map is a process model ex pressed in a goal driven perspective. It provides a process representation system based on a nondeterministic ordering of goals and strategies. A map is represented as a labeled directed graph with goals as nodes and strategies as edges between goals.”… “ A Strategy is an approach, a manner to achieve a goal”. In our experimental context, we have confronted teachersdesigners with those concepts of intentions and strategies. By linking them to their regular uses, they were able to define two different articulated levels: a first didactical level dealing with domain specific knowledge and a second pedagogical level dealing with anizing learning situations. For each level, they were able to define intentions and strategies. From this background, we have progressively coelaborated a “businessoriented” model ISiS (Intentions, Strategies, interactional Situations) after a twoyear project tightly associating teachersdesigners. After evaluation of different authoring solu tions in learning design [5, 6], we have chosen to develop a graphical environment ScenEdit [14] based upon ISiS model. Intentions and Strategy in the Context of Learning Scenarios 本科畢業(yè)設計（論文）外文翻 譯 9 We illustrate our model with an example based on a collaborative learning scenario, LearnElec Scenario dedicated to the concept of “power of a light bulb” in electricity domain at secondary school. In this scenario, the teachers’ first didactical intention is “to destabilize” a frequently encountered “misconception” of students in electricity which is that “proximity of the battery has an influence on current intensity”. After having elicited his intention, the teacherdesigner may choose the appropriate strategy he wants to use to reach this goal. In our example, the didactical intention is implemented with a specific didactical strategy called “scientific investigation strat egy” posed of four phases: hypothesis elaboration, solution elaboration, hypothe sis testing and conclusion as you can see on figure 1. Each phase can be performed through various pedagogical modes and can be re fined by another intention according to the type of activity, the availability of puter services, etc.. In our example, the first didactical phase “hypothesis elaboration” is refined by a pedagogical intention called “increase the ability to work in a collabo rative way”. This intention is implemented with a strategy called “elaborating a pro posal by making a consensus” posed of two phases: “Make an individual proposal” and “Confront proposals. Obtain a consensus”. For each phase, an interac tional situation can be defined: “Individual proposal on a wiki” and “Argued debate on a forum with consensus”. During these two phases the teacher has an activity of “Group management” symbolized by an interactional situation called “Group management”. In the following section, we present more formally ISiS conceptual model. Implementation of ISiS Model: Towards Flexible and Continued Design Processes ISiS framework is not properly a method and does not propose a specific order to bine design steps. ISiS is b