No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
espanolEl objetivo del articulo es examinar que ocurre cuando consideramos distintas unidades de analisis y diferentes dimensiones en el analisis de interacciones entre alumnos y profesores durante el desarrollo de las tareas escolares. Se distinguen cinco unidades de analisis -ciclos, episodios, actividades tipicas de aula, sesiones y unidades curriculares (enumeradas de menor a mayor amplitud)- y tres dimensiones o focos: los contenidos elaborados -la dimension Que, para la cual se toman como referencia modelos cognitivos de las tareas desarrolladas-, los patrones de discurso y estructuras de participacion que regulan la actividad social y mental de alumnos y profesores -la dimension Como, que tiene su origen en una concepcion sociocultural- y el nivel de autonomia asumido por los alumnos -la dimension Quien, que requiere emplear a la vez ambos marcos teoricos. Cada dimension proporciona una interpretacion diferente del mismo segmento segun el tipo de procesos cognitivos implicados (alto o bajo nivel), el tipo de estructura de participacion prevaleciente (simple/compleja) y el nivel medio de participacion de los alumnos (determinado de acuerdo con una escala de cinco puntos). Se presentan datos de un corpus de 21 interacciones analizadas mediante este sistema que muestran la existencia de numerosas disociaciones. Por ejemplo, encontramos interacciones con estructuras complejas de participacion (n=3) que generan contenidos de bajo nivel (y a la inversa). Estos resultados sugieren la necesidad de clarificar que unidad y dimension son consideradas en cada caso.Ademas,el analisis de cada interaccion permite vislumbrar que cambios son factibles y, considerando todo el corpus,cabe valorar el impacto de la formacion en el desarrollo profesional de los docentes, que es el objetivo ultimo de estos analisis. EnglishThe goal of the present paper is to explore what happens when different units of analysis and different dimensions regarding teacher-student interactions are taken into account. Five units of analysis are distinguished: cycles, episodes, typical classroom activities, sessions, and lessons (in ascending order of area coverage); and also three dimensions: content (the What dimension; using cognitive models to analyze the tasks),discourse patterns and structures of participation regulating social and cognitive activity of both teachers and students (the How dimension; using a socio-cultural perspective), and the level of mastery shown by the students (the Who dimension; using cognitive and socio-cultural frameworks).Each unit of analysis can be interpreted in the light of each dimension; hence, defining what type of cognitive process is implemented (high- or low-level), what type of structure of participation is prevalent (simple or complex) and what level of mastery students have attained on average (in a five-point scale). Data were collected from a corpus consisting of 21 interactions and were analysed based on the framework shown, with numerous inconsistencies. For instance, interactions showing complex structures of participation (n = 3) but producing low-level contents; the reverse was also true. Results suggest that defining which unit of analysis and which dimension are considered is relevant. Moreover, the analysis of each teacher-student interaction is helpful in showing what changes are feasible; and, considering the whole corpus, it is possible to evaluate the effect of instruction on professional development, his being the major goal of the present paper.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.