Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2008 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Lourencini, Silvia Sales Frias
 |
Orientador(a): |
Alves, Maria Leila
 |
Banca de defesa: |
Palma Filho, João Cardoso
,
Almeida, Danilo Di Manno de
 |
Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
Idioma: |
por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Metodista de São Paulo
|
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
PÓS GRADUAÇÃO EM EDUCAÇÃO
|
Departamento: |
Educação
|
País: |
BR
|
Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
Link de acesso: |
http://tede.metodista.br/jspui/handle/tede/1105
|
Resumo: |
Considering the innumerable fragilities of my own chemistry teacher formation; also considering the legal disposals and the curricular orientations of current educational policy that incorporate theoretical approaches fundamental to the concretization of learning , and considering, furthermore, that the transformations in the pedagogical procedures do not follow the development of sciences of education, this study investigation focus is: a) Are the chemistry teachers who act in high school education duly prepared to face the requirements placed by the National Curricular Parameters for High School (PCNEM) and the reality of public school? b) What do teachers make so that students learn chemistry? c) Does the policy of chemistry teacher formation provide the formation of teaching chemists? In order to obtain data answering these questions, I resourced to a qualitative research of ethnographic character, applying questionnaires to a group of 12 chemistry teachers who act in Great São Paulo state high school public net. The questionnaire questions were grouped in three categories: learning of concepts, learning of procedures and learning of values. In 2001, García Barros and Martinez Losada used these categories in a research with teachers of the basic education in Spain, with emphasis in the two first ones, to inquire what type of activities are habitually carried on in chemistry teaching and to know the importance the respondent teachers assign to the procedures they use in the teaching process. Collected data, analyzed under the light of contributions of the scholars that compose the theoretical body of this study and the proposals contained in the PCNEM, evidence that the teachers know how, as defined by Carvalho and Perez (2001), is the result of a precarious initial formation and of the almost inexistence of continued formation processes in the school.(AU) |