Trayectorias de desarrollo profesional docente para un uso pedagógico de la argumentación a partir del uso de soportes curriculares digitales
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
El presente artículo tiene como objetivo describir las transformaciones de prácticas pedagógicas y uso pedagógico de la argumentación en docentes, a partir del apoyo de materiales curriculares soportados tecnológicamente con un software piloto denominado argumentApp. Se utilizó una metodología cualitativa, mediante el estudio de cuatro casos de profesores y estudiantes de cuatro escuelas de la Región Metropolitana en Chile. Los datos, recogidos mediante observaciones de clases y entrevistas en profundidad, indican que los docentes incorporaron prácticas colaborativas en el aula y produjeron un mayor número de preguntas de argumentación. Se observan diferencias en el modo de apropiarse de la herramienta tecnológica y de su aporte a la dinámica de aprendizaje en el aula. Los resultados se discuten considerando el aporte de intervenciones de desarrollo profesional situadas en un contexto concreto de práctica y las dimensiones que permiten construir una intervención que favorezca una enseñanza dialógica.
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
© 2020 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación. Este es un artículo Open Access bajo la licencia CC BY-NC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Citas
Alexander, Robin (2004), Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking classroom talk, Cambridge, Diálogos.
Andriessen, Jerry y Baruch Schwarz (2009), “Argumentative Design”, en Mirza Muller y Natalie Perret-Clermont (eds.), Argumentation and Education, Nueva York, Springer, pp. 145-174.
Andriessen, Jerry, Michael Baker y Dan Suthers (2003), “Argumentation, Computer Support, and the Educational Context of Confronting Cognitions”, en Jerry Andriessen, Michael Baker y Dan Suthers (eds.), Arguing to Learn, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 1-25.
Arias, Ana María, Amber Bismack, Elizabeth Davis y Annemarie Palincsar (2016), “Interacting with a Suite of Educative Features: Elementary science teachers' use of educative curriculum materials”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 53, núm. 3, pp. 422-449.
Arias, Ana María, Sean Smith, Elizabeth Davis, John Carlos Marino y Annemarie Palincsar (2017), “Justifying Predictions: Connecting use of educative curriculum materials to students' engagement in science argumentation”, Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 28, núm. 1, pp. 11-35.
Ávalos, Beatrice (2011), “Teacher Professional Development in Teaching and Teacher Education over Ten Years”, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 27, núm. 1, pp. 10-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
Ball, Deborah y David Cohen (1996), “Reform by the Book: What is–or might be–the Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform?”, Educational Researcher, vol. 25, núm. 9, pp. 6-14.
Beyer, Carrie y Elizabeth Davis (2008), “Fostering Second Graders' Scientific Explanations: A beginning elementary teacher's knowledge, beliefs, and practice”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 17, núm. 3, pp. 381-414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400802222917
Borgatti, Stephen. P., Martin Everett y Linton Freeman (2002), Ucinet 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis, Harvard, MA, Analytic Technologies.
Boylan, Mark, Mike Coldwell, Bronwen Maxwell y Julie Jordan (2018), “Rethinking Models of Professional Learning as Tools: A conceptual analysis to inform research and practice”, Professional Development in Education, vol. 44, núm. 1, pp. 120-139.
Clarke, David y Hilary Hollingsworth (2002), “Elaborating a Model of Teacher Professional Growth”, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 18, núm. 8, pp. 947-967.
Chen, Ying-Chih, Brian Hand y Lory Norton-Meier (2017), “Teacher Roles of Questioning in Early Elementary Science Classrooms: A framework promoting student cognitive complexities in argumentation”, Research in Science Education, vol. 47, vol. 2, pp. 373-405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9506-6
Chen, Chien-Hsien y Hsiao-Ching She (2012), “The Impact of Recurrent On-Line Synchronous Scientific Argumentation on Students’ Argumentation and Conceptual Change”, Educational Technology & Society, vol. 15, núm 1, pp. 197-210.
Desimone, Laura M. (2009), “Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional Development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures”, Educational Researcher, vol. 38, núm. 3, pp. 181-199.
Evans, Linda (2014), “Leadership for Professional Development and Learning: Enhancing our understanding of how teachers develop”, Cambridge Journal of Education, vol. 44, núm. 2, pp. 179-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.860083
Gómez Zaccarelli, Florencia, Ann-Kathrin Schindler, Hilda Borko y Jonathan Osborne (2018), “Learning from Professional Development: A case study of the challenges of enacting productive science discourse in the classroom”, Professional Development in Education, vol. 44, núm. 5, pp. 721-737.
Grossman, Pam y Clarissa Thompson (2008), “Learning from Curriculum Materials: Scaffolds for new teachers?, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 24, núm. 8, pp. 2014-2026.
Guskey, Thomas R. (1986), “Staff Development and the Process of Teacher Change”, Educational Researcher, vol. 15, núm. 5, pp. 5-12.
Guskey, Thomas R. (2002), “Professional Development and Teacher Change”, Teacher and Teaching: Theory and Practice, vol. 8, núm. 3, pp. 381-390.
Howe, Christine (2009), “Collaborative Group Work in Middle Childhood: Joint construction, unresolved contradiction and the growth of knowledge”, Human Development, vol. 39, núm. 4, pp. 71-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000215072
Howe, Christine (2017), “Advances in Research on Classroom Dialogue: Commentary on the articles”, Learning and Instruction, vol. 48, pp. 61-65.
Howe, Christine, Sonia Ilie, Paula Guardia, Riikka Hofmann, Neil Mercer y Fran Riga (2015), “Principled Improvement in Science: Forces and proportional relations in early secondary school teaching”, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 37, núm. 1, pp. 162-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.975168
Jiménez-Aleixandre, María P. y Sibel Erduran (2007), “Argumentation in Science Education: An overview,”, en Sibel Erduran y María P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (coords.), Argumentation in Science Education Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 3-28.
Kuhn, Deanna y Amanda Crowell (2011), “Dialogic Argumentation as a Vehicle for Developing Young Adolescents’ Thinking”, Psychological Science, vol. 22, núm. 4, pp. 545-552.
Kuhn, Deannay Wadiya Udell (2003), “The Development of Argument Skills”, Child Development, vol. 74, núm. 5, pp. 1245-1260.
Larrain, Antonia, Christine Howe y Paulina Freire (2018), “’More is not Necessarily Better’: Curriculum materials support the impact of classroom argumentative dialogue in science teaching on content knowledge”, Research in Science & Technological Education, vol. 36, núm. 3, pp. 282-301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1408581
Larrain, Antonia, Paulina Freire y Christine Howe (2014), “Science Teaching and Argumentation: One-sided versus dialectical argumentation in Chilean middle-school science lessons”, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 36, núm. 6, pp. 1017-1036.
Leitão, Selma (2008), “Arguing and Learning”, en Cynthia Lightfood y Maria Lyra (eds.), Challenges and Strategies for Studying Human Development in Cultural Contexts, Roma, Firera Publishing, pp. 221-251.
Leiva, David, Cecilia Cardemil, Sylvia Ritterhaussen, Marcela Latorre y Enrique Rodríguez (2000), “El texto escolar: una alternativa para aprender en la escuela y en la casa”, Santiago, PUC-Facultad de Educación/CIDE/MINEDUC.
Lindvall, Jannika, Ola Helenius y Marie Wiberg (2018), “Critical Features of Professional Development Programs: Comparing content focus and impact of two large-scale programs”, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 70, pp. 121-131.
Marion, Russ (1999), The Edge of Organization: Chaos and complexity theories of formal social systems, Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Marco‐Bujosa, Lisa M., Katherine McNeill, María González‐Howard y Suzanna Loper (2017), “An Exploration of Teacher Learning from an Educative Reform‐Oriented Science Curriculum: Case studies of teacher curriculum use”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 54, núm. 2, pp. 141-168.
Martinic, Sergio y Marco Villalta (2015), “La gestión del tiempo en la sala de clases y los rendimientos escolares en escuelas con jornada completa en Chile”, Perfiles Educativos, vol. 37, núm. 14, pp. 28-49. DOI: https://doi.org//10.1016/j.pe.2013.03.001
McNeill, Katherine y Amanda Knight (2013), “Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Scientific Argumentation: The impact of professional development on K-12 teachers”, Science Education, vol. 97, núm. 6, pp. 936-972. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21081
Mercer, Neill y Christine Howe (2012), “Explaining the Dialogic Processes of Teaching and Learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory”, Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, vol. 1, núm. 1. pp. 12-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001
Mercer, Neill y Karen Littleton (2007), Dialogue and the Development of Children's Thinking, Londres, Routledge.
Mornata, Cecilia y Étienne Bourgeois (2011), “Teacher Epistemic Beliefs and their Articulation to Broader Personal Beliefs. An empirical exploration”, ponencia presentada en The European Conference on Educational Research, Berlín, septiembre de 2011.
Murphy P. Karen, Jeffrey A Greene, Elizabeth Allen, Sara Baszczewski, Amanda Swearingen, Liwei Wei y Ana Butler (2018), “Fostering High School Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Argumentation Performance in Science through Quality Talk Discussions”, Science Education, vol. 102, núm. 6, pp. 1239-1264. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21471
Nussbaum, E. Michael y Gale Sinatra (2003), “Argument and Conceptual Engagement”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 28, núm, 3, pp. 384-395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
Nystrand, Martin, Adam Gamoran, Robert Kachur y Catherine Prendergast (1997), Opening Dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom, Nueva York, Teachers College Press.
Opfer, V. Darleen y David Pedder (2011), “Conceptualizing Teacher Professional Learning”, Review of Educational Research, vol. 81, núm. 3, pp. 376-407.
Osborne, Jonathan, Shirley Simon, Andri Christodoulou, Christina Howell-Richardson y Katherie Richardson (2013), “Learning to Argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 50, núm. 3, pp. 315-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073
Pehmer, Ann-Kathrin, Alexander Gröschner y Tina Seidel (2015), “How Teacher Professional Development Regarding Classroom Dialogue Affects Students' Higher-Order Learning”, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 47, pp. 108-119.
Pimentel, Diane y Katherine McNeill (2013), “Conducting Talk in Secondary Science Classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs”, Science Education, vol. 97, núm. 3, pp. 367-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21061
Preiss, David, Antonia Larraín y Susana Valenzuela (2011), “Discurso y pensamiento en el aula matemática chilena”, Psykhe, vol. 20, núm. 2, pp. 131-146.
Putnam, Ralph T. e Hilda Borko (2000), “What do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking Have to Say about Research on Teacher Learning?”, Educational Researcher, vol. 29, núm. 1, pp. 4-15.
Reznitskaya, Alina y Gregory Maughn (2013), “Student Thought and Classroom Language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching”, Educational Psychologist, vol. 48, núm. 2, pp. 114-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.775898
Ruthven, Kenneth, Riikka Hofmann, Christine Howe, Stefanie Luthman, Neil Mercer y Keithg Taber (2011), “The epiSTEMe Pedagogical Approach: Essentials, rationales and challenges”, Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, vol. 31, núm. 3, pp. 131-136.
Sánchez-Amaya, Tomás y Hamlet González-Melo (2016), “Saber pedagógico: fundamento del ejercicio docente”, Educación y Educadores, vol. 79, núm. 2, pp. 241-253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/edu.2016.19.24
Sedova, Klara, Martin Sedlacek y Roman Svaricek (2016), “Teacher Professional Development as a Means of Transforming Student Classroom Talk”, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 57, pp. 14-25.
Sfard, Anna (2007), “When the Rules of Discourse Change, but Nobody Tells you: Making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive standpoint”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 16, núm. 4, pp. 565-613.
Stake, Robert (1999), Investigación con estudio de casos, Madrid, Morata.
Strauss, Anselm. L. y Juliet Corbin (2002), Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundada, Medellín, Universidad de Antioquia.
Veyrunes, Philippe y Julia San Martín (2016), “Analizar las interacciones en el aula durante la clase dialogada: ¿qué implicaciones existen para la formación de los profesores?, en Jorge Manzi y María Rosa García (eds.), Abriendo las puertas del aula: transformación de las prácticas docentes, Santiago de Chile, Ediciones CEPPE-UC, pp. 93-124.