this summary is part of current research analysing professional activity in education. It focuses on the study of the relationship between the socio-cognitive sphere and the pragmatic sphere in the field of education. It presents first the dynamics of the evolution of my research object and then in a second and third stage the core of the summary note on my current subject: searching for elements representing potentially or actually organisers of teaching practices. The purpose is to analyse the verbal practices that teachers send to their students in pedagogical communication, particularly in conjunction with representations via symbolic language. It focuses on generic teaching practices, i.e. those shared by teachers. Based on a discipline contributing to the sciences of education, the Social Psychology, I regard verbal practices as recurrent verbal acts which, by this very recurrence, reflect particular intentions guided by more or less conscientious representations. It is this relationship between representations (socio-cognitive sphere) and verbal practices (pragmatic sphere) which is particularly studied in this summary, by comparing verbal practices observed in an educational situation (representation events in practice) with practices declared and justified in interview (representations of practices). My advances are essentially conceptual and theoretical. They are part of research aimed at knowledge of practice. Unveiling not only destitution but also socio-cognitivo-pragmatic breaks contribute to scientific reflection seeking to highlight professional knowledge involved in practices. I operationalise the weaknesses, or breaks, by identifying different types of generities that I call: — Symmetrical generality. It is carried out when the practices found in the classroom correspond to those described and justified in maintenance (or where practices not found in the classroom have also been reported by teachers to be unsuitable). The representations delivered for interview have the status of operating organisers of the practices (or, in the second case, that of potentially functioning organisers of the absence of practices). — Implicit generality. It occurs when the practices found in the classroom are not described and justified in maintenance. Representations (inferred by the researcher, about field practices) then have the status of potential organisers of the practices. — Agreed generality. It is present when, conversely, the practices described and justified in maintenance are not found in class. The representations delivered by teachers are not the organisers of the practices. Rather, they feed into professional thinking. — Finally, contextual generality. It is at work when teachers report and justify practices they do not do, whereas paradoxically the researcher finds such practices in the classroom. In this case, the representations are not the organisers of the practices. Other contextual factors influence the latter. I analyse the practices in which representations whose social psychologists have highlighted the impact on behaviour in experimental situations (representations of themselves, others, task, context), and possibly which representations of another type, are organising or potentially organising, or not organising, ordinary teaching practices. Some of the results obtained make it possible, for example, to link certain generic verbal practices with the representations of the teaching task of a heterogeneous nature, or with the representations that teachers have the cognitive abilities of the pupils according to the school status they attribute to them. To study the relationship between the socio-cognitive sphere and the pragmatic sphere in ordinary teaching situations, this summary provides a methodological approach and an operating framework illustrating structural and hermeneutical guidance.