Clases de ciencias en laboratorios de informática:una construcción discursiva do monopolio participativo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/lc.v18i35.3843Palabras clave:
Tecnología y educación, Trabajo colaborativo, Aprendizaje basado en eluso de computadoras, Enseñanza de las ciencias, Análisis del discursoResumen
En el presente estudio examinamos como la naturaleza de los estudiantes durante unaactividad escolar que incluye el uso de computadoras no solo es mediada por su arreglofísico dentro del grupo, como también contribuye al comienzo de monopolio. Utilizandola teoría sociocultural del aprendizaje y el análisis del discurso como herramientaspara el análisis e interpretación de los intercambios verbales y no-verbales entre losmiembros del grupo de trabajo en el aula de la escuela primaria, presentamos lasimplicaciones negativas de este tipo de dinámica del grupo en referencia a la cohesióngrupal y la enseñanza y aprendizaje en ciencias en dichos ambiente escolares.
Descargas
Citas
AZEVEDO, Roger. Computers environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), p. 193-197, 2005.
BLATCHORD Peter; KATNICK, Peter; BAINES, Ed.; GALTON, Maurice. Changes in grouping practicesover primary and secondary school. International Journal of Education Research, 39,p. 9-34, 2003.
BROWN, Annemarie Sullivan; PALINCSAR, Ann. Guided cooperative learning and individual knowledge, acquisition. In: L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1989, p. 393-451.
CALDERON, Muriel; HERTZ-LAZAROWITZ, Rachel; SLAVIN, Robert. Effects of bilingual cooperative integrated reading and composition on students making the transition from Spanish to Englishreading. Elementary School Journal, 99,p. 153-165, 1998.
EDWARDS, Derek; POTTER, Jonathan. Discursive psychology. London: Sage, 1992.
EGAN, Gerard. The skilled helper: A systematic approach to effective helping. Pacific Grove, CA:Brooks/Cole, 1997.
GOODWIN, Charles. Gestures as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation. Semiotica, 62,p. 29-49, 1986.
HAMMERSLEY, Martin. Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: Methods or paradigms?Discourse & Society, 14(6), p. 751-781, 2003.
De OLIVEIRA”“JAYME, Bruno; REIS, Giuliano; ROTH, Wichael”“Wolff (2011). Egomorphism in simplewords: Discursive pedagogical artefact in/for environmental education. Journal of Education Research,4(4). Disponível em: <https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=24164&osCsid=b17406f46d25c202a8c2998398043182>. Acesso em: 20 ago. 2011.
JOHNSON, David; JOHNSON, Roger; MITCHEL, John; FREDRICKSON, John. The impact of conflict resolution training on middle school students. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, p. 11-21, 1997.
KAPUT, James. Technology and mathematics education. In: D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for researchon mathematics teaching and learning. New York: Macmillan, p. 515-556, 1992.
KULIK, James. (Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. In: E. L. Baker; H.F. O’Neil Jr. (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training. Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum, p. 9-34, 1994.
LAVE, Jean; WENGER, Etienne. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge,England: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
LEONT’EV, Alexei Nikolaevich. The problem of activity in psychology. In: J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Theconcept of activity in Soviet psychology. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 1981, p. 37-71.
LINDGREN, Rob; SCHWARTS, Daniel. Spatial learning and computer simulations in science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), p. 419-438, 2009.
LOUCAS, Louca; ZACHARIAH, Zachariah. The use of computer-based programming environments ascomputer modeling tools in early science education: the cases of textual and graphical programlanguages. International Journal of Science Education, 30(3), p. 285-321, 2008.
MARBACH-AD, Gili; SOKOLOVE, Phillip. Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, p. 854-870, 2000.
MCNEILL, David. Action, thought, and language. In P. Llyod; C. Fernyhough (Eds.), Lev Vygotsky:Critical assessments: Thought and language, Vol. II, p. 23”“30. Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge, 1999.
MACNEILL, David. Catchments and contexts: non-modular factors in speech and gesture production.In: D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2000,p. 312”“328.
MILLER, Judith, TRIMBUR, John.; WILKES, John. Group dynamics: Understanding group success andfailure in collaborative learning. In K. Bosworth; S. Hamilton (Eds.), Collaborative learning: Underlyingprocesses and effective techniques. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994, p. 56-73.
MOOS, Daniel,; AZEVEDO, Roger. Learning with computer-based learning environments: a literature review of computer self-efficacy. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), p. 576-600, 2009.
NORRIS, Cathleen; SMOLKA, Jennifer; SOLOWAY, Elliot. Extracting value from research: A guide forthe perplexed. Techonology & Learning, 20, p. 45-48, 2000.
PAPADOURIS, Nicos; CONSTANTINOS, Constantinou. A methodology for integrating computer-basedlearning tools in science curricula. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(4), p. 521-538, 2009.
REIS, Giuliano. Committing treason to oneself: Neglecting the effectiveness of translated activities inscience and environmental education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(1), p. 133-140, 2009.
ROBERTS, Tim; MCINNERENY, Joanne. Collaborative or cooperative learning? In: T. S. Roberts (Ed.),Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Hersey, PA: Information Science Publishing, 2004,p. 203”“241.
ROTH, Michael”“Wolff; WOSZCZYNA, Carolyn; SMITH, Gillian. Affordances and constraints of computersin science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, p. 995-1017, 1996.
SCHMUCK, Richard; SCHMUCK, Patricia. Group process in the classroom.Dubuque, IA: William C.Brown, 1979.
STAARMAN, Judith; AARNOUTSE, Cor; VERHOEVEN, Ludo. Connecting discourses: Intertextuality ina primary school CSCL practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 39,p. 807-816, 2003.
VALANIDES, Nicos; ANGELI, Charoula. Professional development for computer-enhanced learning: acase study with science teachers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 26(1), p. 3-12, 2008.
VAN JOOLINGEN, Wouter; DE JONG, Ton; DIMITRAKOPOULOU, Angelique. Issues in computersupported inquiry learning in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, p. 111-119, 2007.
VAN JOOLINGEN, Wouter; DE JONG, Ton; LAZONDER, Ard; SAVELSBERGH, Elwin; MANLOVE, Sarah.Co-Laboratory: research and development of an online learning environment for collaborativescientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior 21, p. 671-688, 2005.
VYGOTSKY, Lev Semyonovich. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2016 Linhas Críticas
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
- Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, sendo o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons Attribution License, o que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria do trabalho e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado.
