A fala-em-interação em sala de aula no ensino médio : participação e construção conjunta de conhecimento em uma equipe de trabalho
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This master thesis aims to describe and analyze the classroom talk-in-interaction in a private high school in Paranavaí which works with Learning Workshops methodology. The theoretical and methodological assumptions are based on Ethnomethodological Conversation Analysis and Michoetnography, and this research is linked with others that also used these epistemological tools to study participation and learning issues in school contexts, understanding learning as social action (GARCEZ, 2006; 2012, SCHULZ, 2007; ABELEDO, 2008; CONCEIÇÃO, 2008; UFLACKER, 2012; LOPES, 2015). The search was conducted through fieldwork, which involved participant observation and generation of 30 hours of audiovisual data. The recordings were made in the forth quarter of 2014 with a working team composed by six students from different high school grades who were part of the classroom in which the search was conducted. In general, the contents of this corpus pointed to the fact that the attendees organized their participation around a learning subject trying to deal with it. This fact was used to the formulation of analytical categories of participation and joint knowledge construction, which this study was organized on. For more detailed analysis of these categories and systematization of results, there were targeted, selected and transcribed four talk-in-interaction data, which highlight the organization of participation and the joint knowledge construction as evidence of learning. The results show that, in the analyzed scenario, the participants manage and organize the participation being guided to a schedule and/or a learning subject which became relevant in the local contingency, because of it, in this context, there are learning opportunities. About the joint knowledge construction, the methods used by the interactors to deal with a learning subject are understood as instances of joint knowledge construction. So that, to produce an understanding that helps the participants to advance in the dealing with the subject, a participant is legitimized with status of the necessary knowledge to do so, and this participant was either a student or a teacher. Finally, the results support the position that we are facing a more democratic classroom where students and teachers ratify each other continuously on the school agenda and on their local and situated competence, contributing to youth leadership in the teaching-learning process at school.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».