In university pedagogy, in contexts of change and innovation, and in particular in the context of digital use, which calls into question the structures and organisation of human action, teaching postures are increasingly being questioned. But what’s behind this so undefined word “posture”? Where are the methodological tools that allow it to be studied more precisely? The purpose of this article is to reflect work initiated by the authors to answer these two questions and to make a few proposals for further research that could lead to the conceptualisation of this concept and its methodological documentation. Building on the definition of Lameul (2006), which highlights the components of the concept of posture (beliefs, intentions, actions), we set out the possible use of Pratt Associates’ Teaching Perspectives Inventory (1998) to distinguish five postural trends. Furthermore, we explain how the HY-SUP project chose to borrow the Prosser and Trigwell instrument Approaches to Teaching Inventory (1999). Having studied the two instruments, we show the advantages and limits of use. In view of the fact that these tools do not take into account everything that we believe is posture (Lameul, 2006, 2016), we propose to supplement it by including specific questions in interviews with teachers (relevance of mixed methods) with a view to improving instrumentation that takes better account of all the components of this complex concept.