Situações argumentativas no ensino de Ciências da Natureza: Um estudo de práticas de um professor em formação inicial em uma sala de aula de Educação de Jovens e Adultos
Ano de defesa: | 2010 |
---|---|
Autor(a) principal: | |
Orientador(a): | |
Banca de defesa: | |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
Idioma: | por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
UFMG |
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
País: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Palavras-chave em Português: | |
Link de acesso: | http://hdl.handle.net/1843/FAEC-8MCQ3C |
Resumo: | This study aimed to characterize how a prospective teacher uses language to influence the processes that can promote learning in spontaneous or planned argumentative situations during Science lessons in a Adults Education (AE) Program. Besides trying to identify what are the knowledge teachers raised or processed in such situations. To contextualize and justify this research problem was presented an review of the literature, which highlighted the importance of language and argument for the teaching and learning in science and the need to better understand the practices of prospective teachers during situations argumentative. Also explained the trend in the field of prospective teachers in searching the knowledge and expertise of teachers who are deployed in practice. Another aspect of the research field of science education focus on the product lines of argument using the Toulmin model. However, this reference is not suitable to answer our research problem, which is related to the process of argumentation. Thus, it was necessary to rely on other theoretical and methodological Pragma-dialectics, which enabled to analyze in detail the argumentative discourse. Moreover, it was used as a perspective ethnographic, based in Interactional Ethnography which enabled to analyze the context in which these situations were inserted (key principle: the holistic perspective), meet the participants' perspective about these situations (key principle: emic perspective) and contrasting argumentative situations to make visible things that were invisible when we analyze these situations alone (key principle: contrastive perspective). This perspective also guided the selection of participants, collecting and analyzing data. Regarding the results of this research it was realized that the fact that the prospective teacher adopt a dialogical approach, allows the argument from the Pragma-dialectics, continue to be present in science classrooms, especially, spontaneously . This posture is materialized in the way the prospective teacher used the language, opening the discussion, using questions that stimulated participation and placement of adults students. However, for questions to be antagonistic to their point of view also functioned as strategies to address the issues in favor of the view of school science. Moreover, it is noted that when differences of opinion remained the main implicit, that dialogue was difficult, because the prospective teacher was unaware of the central aspect of the difficulty of understanding of students, therefore, was more difficult to create conditions for building knowledge. This aspect may have implications for Teacher Education, because if the teachers will now understand that students can follow a different logic from the logic of science, can create conditions so that this logic becomes visible to the group and identify the points of dialogue between scientific knowledge and society, increasing the chances of learning. |