Formación Inicial Docente: Una mirada al Proceso de Construcción de Conocimiento Profesional desde la Práctica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen: Los procesos de formación de profesores han estado fuertemente influenciados por una lógica aplicacionista y una visión fragmentada y prescriptiva de la naturaleza del conocimiento. Se puede observar una enseñanza basada en la oralidad, en un bajo trabajo práctico y una escasa vinculación con la realidad educativa y los requerimientos del contexto. Se hace necesario que en dichos procesos se reconozca a los futuros profesores como sujetos de conocimiento con quienes se debiese generar una estructura curricular práctica activa y reflexiva.El reconocer la complejidad de los procesos que se llevan a cabo en el contexto educacional, hace necesario transitar desde una lógica instrumental/mecanicista, proceso-producto a una perspectiva epistemológica donde se rescate el dinamismo del ámbito educacional y la complejidad del sistema social en que éste se encuentra inserto. Palabras clave: Formación Inicial Docente - Construcción de Conocimiento Profesional – Prácticas – Reflexión Profesional Abstract Teacher education processes have been heavily influenced by application logic, as well as, to a fragmented and prescriptive vision of the nature of knowledge, instead of the construction of it. A teaching process based on the predominance of oral discourse, low practical work, and a limited relation with educational reality and context needs, has been observed. It seems necessary to recognize student - teachers as knowledge subjects with whom there should be an active/reflective curricular activity, and also recognize the complexity of the processes that take place in the educational context. In other words, it is necessary to move from an instrumental, process/ product perspective towards an epistemological perspective able to recognize the dynamism in the educational system and the complexity of the social system in which it is immersed. Key Words: Initial Teacher Formation- Professional Knowledge Construction- Practicum- Professional Reflection
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".