THE PROFESSIONAL HABITUS AND CONSTRUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE: The Professor in Modernity. 

 

José Ribamar Tôrres Rodrigues PhD in Education from USP Master in Education from PUC / SP Internship in Teacher Training in the IUFM of DOUAI / France Stage for Teacher training in Cuba Former member of the State Board of Education / PI Former Coordinator of the State Education Forum Member of Appraisers Bank MEC / INEP. : ribamartorres@blogspot.com.br E-Mail: jrib.torres@gmail com Tel (86) 99415-9958 .

 

ABSTRACT 

The changes that occurred in the last fifty years defined a new role for the teacher in Post-Modernity. With that, new paradigms of living, feeling and acting were inserted in the discussion of the teaching and learning process and around the role of the teacher in contemporary times. theoretical-methodological ideas emphasizing the emphasis on transformations, the crisis in education and the proposal to re-adapt the role of the teacher, the emergence of new paradigms such as post-modernity and complexity, the innovative, new technologies and the dialogicity of construction of knowledge. Questions and not certainties are emphasized, criticism of the Newtonian-Cartesian model of fragmented, linear, permanent knowledge in a spiral format where certainty replaces doubts. In this sense, the proposal questions the center of the learning relationship: the student or the teacher?

Key-Words: Habitus. Construction of Knowledge. teacher.

 RESUMÉ 

Les changements survenus au cours des cinquante dernières années ont défini un nouveau rôle pour l'enseignant dans la post-modernité. Avec cela, de nouveaux paradigmes de vie, de sentiment et d'action ont été insérés dans la discussion sur le processus d'enseignement et d'apprentissage et sur le rôle de l'enseignant à l'époque contemporaine. idées théorico-méthodologiques mettant l'accent sur les transformations, la crise de l'éducation et la proposition de réadapter le rôle de l'enseignant, l'émergence de nouveaux paradigmes tels que la post-modernité et la complexité, les technologies innovantes et nouvelles et la dialogicité de la construction des connaissances. Les questions et non les certitudes sont soulignées, la critique du modèle newtonien-cartésien de connaissances fragmentées, linéaires et permanentes dans un format en spirale où la certitude remplace les doutes. En ce sens, la proposition interroge le centre de la relation d'apprentissage: l'élève ou l'enseignant? 

Mots-clés : Habitus. Construire des connaissances. prof.

 

RESUMEN

 Los cambios que ocurrieron en los últimos cincuenta años definieron un nuevo papel para el maestro en la posmodernidad, con lo cual se insertaron nuevos paradigmas de vida, sentimiento y actuación en la discusión del proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje y en torno al papel del maestro en los tiempos contemporáneos. Ideas teórico-metodológicas que enfatizan el énfasis en las transformaciones, la crisis en la educación y la propuesta de readaptar el papel del profesor, la aparición de nuevos paradigmas como la posmodernidad y la complejidad, las nuevas tecnologías innovadoras y la dialogicidad de la construcción. de conocimiento. Se enfatizan las preguntas y no las certezas, la crítica del modelo newtoniano-cartesiano de conocimiento fragmentado, lineal y permanente en un formato espiral donde la certeza reemplaza las dudas. En este sentido, la propuesta cuestiona el centro de la relación de aprendizaje: ¿el alumno o el profesor? 

Mots-clés : Habitus. Construire des connaissances. prof.

 

SOMMARIO

 I cambiamenti avvenuti negli ultimi cinquant'anni hanno definito un nuovo ruolo per l'insegnante in Post-Modernità, con il quale sono stati inseriti nuovi paradigmi di vita, sentimento e recitazione nella discussione sul processo di insegnamento e apprendimento e sul ruolo dell'insegnante nei tempi contemporanei. idee teorico-metodologiche che enfatizzano l'enfasi sulle trasformazioni, la crisi nell'istruzione e la proposta di riadattare il ruolo dell'insegnante, l'emergere di nuovi paradigmi come la postmodernità e la complessità, l'innovativa, le nuove tecnologie e la dialogicità della costruzione di conoscenza. Vengono enfatizzate le domande e non le certezze, le critiche al modello newtoniano-cartesiano di conoscenza frammentata, lineare e permanente in un formato a spirale in cui la certezza sostituisce i dubbi. In questo senso, la proposta mette in discussione il centro della relazione di apprendimento: lo studente o l'insegnante? 

Palabras clave: Habitus. Construcción del Conocimiento. profesor.

 

Zusammenfassung Die Veränderungen in den letzten fünfzig Jahren definierten eine neue Rolle für den Lehrer in der Postmoderne. Damit wurden neue Paradigmen des Lebens, Fühlens und Handelns in die Diskussion des Lehr- und Lernprozesses und um die Rolle des Lehrers in der heutigen Zeit eingefügt. theoretisch-methodologische Ideen, die den Schwerpunkt auf Transformationen, die Bildungskrise und den Vorschlag zur Neuanpassung der Rolle des Lehrers, die Entstehung neuer Paradigmen wie Postmoderne und Komplexität, die innovativen, neuen Technologien und die Dialogizität des Bauens legen des Wissens. Fragen und nicht Gewissheiten werden hervorgehoben, Kritik am Newton-Kartesischen Modell fragmentierten, linearen, permanenten Wissens in einem Spiralformat, in dem Gewissheit Zweifel ersetzt. In diesem Sinne hinterfragt der Vorschlag das Zentrum der Lernbeziehung: den Schüler oder den Lehrer? 

Stichwort: Habitus. Konstruktion von Wissen. Lehrer.

 

 РЕЗЮМЕ

 Изменения, произошедшие за последние пятьдесят лет, определили новую роль учителя в постмодернизме, благодаря чему в обсуждение процесса преподавания и обучения и роли учителя в современную эпоху были включены новые парадигмы жизни, чувств и действий. теоретико-методологические идеи, подчеркивающие акцент на трансформациях, кризисе в образовании и предложение по реадаптации роли учителя, появление новых парадигм, таких как постмодерн и сложность, инновации, новые технологии и диалогичность построения знаний. Подчеркиваются вопросы, а не определенность, критика ньютоново-декартовой модели фрагментированного, линейного, постоянного знания в спиральном формате, где определенность заменяет сомнения. В этом смысле предложение ставит под сомнение центр учебных отношений: ученик или учитель? 

 Ключевые слова: Габитус. Строительство знаний. Учитель.

V bol'shinstve publikatsiy osnovnoye vnimaniye udelyayetsya aktivnym metodikam v protsedurakh obucheniya, takim kak invertirovannyy klass, geymifikatsiya, proyektnoye obucheniye (PBL), tematicheskoye issledovaniye i drugiye. Odnako neobkhodimo ponimat' eti protsedury kak istoricheskiye, sotsial'nyye, didakticheski-pedagogicheskiye oblasti i ikh vzaimosvyazi, v raznyye vremena i raznyye nauchnyye napravleniya, pytayas' ob"yasnit' i oboznachit' v kazhdyy istoricheskiy moment kontseptsii cheloveka i obshchestva, a takzhe chelovecheskogo, sotsial'nogo formirovaniye, kul'turnoye, vozniksheye v rezul'tate kontseptsii prepodavaniya, obucheniya i obucheniya, chtoby uchit'sya. 

 Klyuchevyye slova: Gabitus. Stroitel'stvo znaniy. Uchitel'.

The purpose of this article is to highlight paradigms that I consider innovative such as technological resources, intellectual autonomy, critical-reflective thinking and action, construction of new knowledge from research, continuing education, the role of the teacher as an articulator and mediator of the teaching process and learning and assessment as an element of the process that provide new indicators for overcoming each stage. This reflection is based on the theoretical categories of Marx's dialectic, renewed from the idealist Hegelian thought, no longer of ideas, but of material reality and the concept of Campo by Pierre Boudieux (1996). Morin's hermeneutic and emancipatory rationality (2002). LLP - Legitimate Peripheral Participation by Lave and Wenger (1988), Daily Life by Agnes Heler (1988). dialogicity of Peulo Freire (1982). Knowledge by Mairice Tardif and Clermont Gauthier (1997) and Theory of communicative action by Jüngen Habermas (1986). Pedagogical Habitus by J. R. Rodrigues (2001). First, some theoretical and social categories that require different conceptual nuances to avoid the risk bias that lead us to accept a truth standard in the analysis of the socio-educational and professional context that is more positivist than critical. 

It is noteworthy that socio-educational transformations are not a privilege of the 20th century, but rather evolutions of a process of the stability-change binomial that are evidenced and solidified in the midst of a historical-social context. In this sense, the discourse of "CRISIS" could not refer only to moments of evidence and consolidation of factors that are part of this process of gestation of changes. 

Thus, the crisis is much more related not to the readaptation of processes and people , but with the lack of institutional and professional responses to establish synchrony between thinking and acting. 

Thus, one could not run the risk of understanding a change in the functionalist perspective, where change would mean returning to the point of previous stability and not overcoming it. it is possible to think about the teacher's readaptation to new demands, but producing with him a new reference for thinking, feeling and acting in accordance with emerging needs, but without denying the historical-social knowledge as a reference for new knowledge. 

Hence, it is likely that only the student, only the teacher, only knowledge or the social historical context can be defined as the center of the learning relationship. Considering that the construction of knowledge is a network dialectic, to question who is the center of the learning relationship would be to adopt the logic of Newtonian-Cartesian thought..

 Thus, knowing that learning is no longer a single function of the school or the teacher, but of various locus inside and outside the school, it is possible to say that mediation is a continuum where historical context, knowledge, alternate, student and teacher, in a dialectical movement that always starts and reaches each stage of the process through knowledge as the engine of this teaching and learning relationship, simultaneously, where the social historical context gives the meanings of this process of knowledge construction that constitutes the THESIS, whose friction with other theses circulating in the CAMPO (Bourdieu) will produce a synthesis that is legitimized in a new thesis. 

Knowledge enters as one of the mediation references when the knowledge of students and professors and the historical context enter into a relationship of construction of new knowledge. Student and teacher enter as mediators when they expose their repertoires of knowledge in opposition to the scientific and historical-cultural knowledge that competes in this relationship, The new paradigms of what is usually called the post-modern, post-industrial, contemporary or knowledge society have not replaced the traditional paradigms, although they surpass them.

 Traditional and modern paradigms live in constant conflict, as they are present in the thought and action of different social sectors that overlap and remain alive because the historical and cultural moments of societies are not unique or homogeneous, but diversified and simultaneous in overcoming paradigms unique and totalizing. 

 Thus, it shows the importance of the reflective teacher as a thinking and articulating being of these different cultural moments, capable of building from traditional and modern elements. new practices that respond to social and professional demands. Finally, the innovative paradigm such as technological resources, intellectual autonomy, critical-reflective thinking and action, construction of new knowledge from research, continuing education, the role of the teacher as one of the articulators and mediators collide with other factors such as the process professional development (working conditions, salary conditions and planning, management and management practices). 

 The knowledge indexing process takes into account all the internal and external factors that contribute to an individual and collective synthesis of a given cultural context. In this aspect, we use the concept of INDEXING by Harold Grafinkel (1960) to apply it in the educational process in an attempt to explain how the indexing of knowledge built in a given cultural context happens automatically (common sense), in a technical-practical way. and reflexively in a system of connectivity in competing networks whose main fighting weapons, in my view, are: language, attitudes (values), the context of social relations and meaning.

 Thus, we risk saying that the learning process constitutes a continuum of articulated indexing whose meanings are simultaneously indexed and indexed, that is, it does not represent a static corpus of knowledge, but in permanent construction, hence we call this dialectical movement indexing in the Indexing perspective -indexed-indexer. It is not enough to train the teacher as if this would magically act to change the reality of the pedagogical work of teaching and learning. 

It is not enough to train them in new technologies that in reality, as a rule, what is called training is nothing more than transferring to the teacher techniques that will transform him not into a producer of knowledge, but into a repeater of models in contrast to the discourse of intellectual autonomy, of creating a critical-feflexive thinking. In fact, continuing education courses mostly try to replace the knowledge of the teacher's experience, inoculating him with this knowledge imposed without any reflections, alien to his reality and difficult to apply, instead of helping him to articulate and systematize the context of the knowledge construction process of the local-universal-local reality. 

The idea that technological resources are summarized in hardwere became common sense when TECHNOLOGIES refer to instruments and procedures that can be applied in the teaching and learning process. The action of continuing education centered on the teacher is a big mistake for improving the teaching and learning process when technicians and managers should be involved. 

The innovation discourse is not supported when it is verified the action of verticalized pedagogical practice from the teacher to the students, without taking into account the context of the subject's life and the historical cultural process of society. 

This represents the process of teacher education in universities and training centers that, as a rule, emphasize the transfer of models that will determine a practice of repetition of techniques in the classroom, enshrining the model of academic rationalism and teaching technology which in turn reflects the concern with training for immediate purposes of the socioeconomic process. 

If the processes of planning, management and evaluation of the teaching and learning action of educational institutions are not modified, the entire apparatus of investments in technologies and in teacher education will be in vain. How to build professional and human expertise with the teacher if the control processes, planning, management and management structures are not changed?

 References 

BOURDIEU. Pierre. Practical Reasons: About the theory of action, Campinas, Papirus Editora, 1996. FREIRE Paul. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 11th Ed. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 1982. GAUTHIER, Clermont et al. Pour a theory of pedagogy. Québec, Les Presses de L’Université Laval, 1997. ________, Clermont ET AL. Introduction to complex thinking. Porto Alegre: Sulina, 2005. GARFINKEL, Harold. Ethnomethodological Studies of Work. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. HELLER, Agnes. Sociology of everyday life. 2nd Edition, Barcelona, Ediciones Península, 423p., 1987. WASH, Jean. Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life (Learning in Doing), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1988). (1986), The Theory of Communicative Action: The Critique of Functionalist Reason, vol. 2, Cambridge, Polity Press. 1986.