ENSINO SUPERIOR E INOVAÇÃO: concepções e práticas da proposta de metodologia circular HIGHER EDUCATION AND INNOVATION: conceptions and practices of the proposed circular methodology José Ribamar Tôrres Rodrigue. Doutor em Educação pela USP. Mestre em Educação pela PUC/SP. Estágio em Formação de Professores no IUFM de DOUAI/ França. Ex-Membro do Conselho Estadual de Educação/PI. Ex-Coordenador do Fórum Estadual de Educação. Ex-Membro do Banco de Avaliadores do MEC/INEP BLOG: jrib.torres@gmail.com TEL: (86) 99415-9958. 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. Former member of the State Board of Education / PI. Coordinator of the State Education Forum. Former of Appraisers Bank MEC / INEP. e-mail: jrib.torres@gmail.com. Tel. 55+86+99415 9958 Resumo Trata-se de discutir concepções circulantes no campus do processo de ensino e aprendizagem. São várias as abordagens metodológicas em consequência de um ciclo de práticas, inseridos em um contexto cultural, político e social de época. Essas abordagens são cunhadas de muitos apelidos, conforme as características culturais (teóricas, históricas e metodológicas) de cada época. Apesar de tantos nomes que servem de marketing para profissionais, empresas e instituições de ensino, as metodologias se fundamentam em uma série de abordagens teórico-práticas. No entanto, grande parte das que se encontram em aplicação nas instituições de ensino, hoje, defendem o princípio da aprendizagem centrada no aluno como protagonista do processo, sendo o professor apenas a diretriz, a fonte de orientação, mas também aprendiz em cujo processo de aprendizagem estabelece campos de interação e campus de representações, onde cada um coloca suas ideias, troca opiniões por força desse contexto histórico dominante. Na metodologia circular se defende não, apenas, o único protagonismo do aluno, mas etapas de protagonismo no processo de ensino e aprendizagem assumido de forma contínua e alternada por atores e situações como: aluno, professor, contexto histórico-cultural que vão gerar novos conteúdos, habilidades e valores d uma época. Abstract % Resumen Se trata de discutir concepciones y prácticas que circulan en el campus en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje. Existen varios enfoques metodológicos como resultado de un ciclo de prácticas, insertas en un contexto cultural, político y social de la época. Estos enfoques se acuñan con muchos sobrenombres según las características culturales (teóricas, históricas y metodológicas) de cada época. A pesar de tantos nombres que sirven de marketing para profesionales, empresas e instituciones educativas, las metodologías se basan en una serie de planteamientos teórico-prácticos. Sin embargo, la mayoría de las que hoy se encuentran en práctica en las instituciones educativas defienden el principio del aprendizaje centrado en el alumno como protagonista del proceso, siendo el docente sólo la pauta, la fuente de orientación, pero también el aprendiz en cuyo proceso de aprendizaje se aprende. establece campos de interacción y campus de representaciones, donde cada uno pone sus ideas, intercambia opiniones en virtud de este contexto histórico dominante. La metodología circular defiende no sólo el protagonismo único del estudiante, sino etapas de protagonismo en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje que asumen de manera continua y alternada actores y situaciones tales como: estudiante, docente, contexto histórico-cultural que generarán contenidos, habilidades y valores. Sommario Si tratta di discutere concezioni e pratiche che circolano nel campus nel processo di insegnamento e apprendimento. Diversi sono gli approcci metodologici frutto di un ciclo di pratiche, inserite in un contesto culturale, politico e sociale dell'epoca. Questi approcci vengono coniati con molti soprannomi a seconda delle caratteristiche culturali (teoriche, storiche e metodologiche) di ogni epoca. Nonostante tanti nomi che fungono da marketing per professionisti, aziende e istituzioni educative, le metodologie si basano su una serie di approcci teorico-pratici. Tuttavia, la maggior parte di quelli che sono in pratica oggi nelle istituzioni educative difendono il principio dell'apprendimento centrato sullo studente come protagonista del processo, con l'insegnante che è solo la linea guida, la fonte di orientamento, ma anche lo studente nel cui processo di apprendimento l'apprendimento stabilisce campi di interazione e campus di rappresentazioni, dove ognuno mette le proprie idee, scambia opinioni in virtù di questo contesto storico dominante. La metodologia circolare difende non solo il solo protagonismo dello studente, ma fasi di protagonismo nel processo di insegnamento e apprendimento assunto continuamente e alternativamente da attori e situazioni quali: studente, insegnante, contesto storico-culturale che genereranno contenuti, competenze e valori. Sommaire Il s'agit de discuter des conceptions et des pratiques qui circulent sur le campus dans le processus d'enseignement et d'apprentissage. Il existe plusieurs approches méthodologiques résultant d'un cycle de pratiques, insérées dans un contexte culturel, politique et social de l'époque. Ces approches sont affublées de nombreux surnoms selon les caractéristiques culturelles (théoriques, historiques et méthodologiques) de chaque époque. Malgré tant de noms qui servent de marketing aux professionnels, aux entreprises et aux établissements d'enseignement, les méthodologies reposent sur une série d'approches théoriques et pratiques. Cependant, la plupart de ceux qui sont en pratique dans les établissements d'enseignement aujourd'hui défendent le principe de l'apprentissage centré sur l'étudiant en tant que protagoniste du processus, l'enseignant n'étant que la ligne directrice, la source d'orientation, mais aussi l'apprenant dans le processus d'apprentissage duquel apprendre établit des champs d'interaction et des campus de représentations, où chacun pose ses idées, échange ses opinions en vertu de ce contexte historique dominant. La méthodologie circulaire défend non seulement le seul protagonisme de l'élève, mais des étapes de protagonisme dans le processus d'enseignement et d'apprentissage assumées en continu et en alternance par des acteurs et des situations tels que : élève, enseignant, contexte historico-culturel qui va générer des contenus, des compétences et des valeurs. Zusammenfassung Es geht um die Diskussion von auf dem Campus kursierenden Vorstellungen und Praktiken im Lehr- und Lernprozess. Es gibt mehrere methodologische Ansätze als Ergebnis eines Zyklus von Praktiken, die in einen kulturellen, politischen und sozialen Kontext der Zeit eingefügt wurden. Diese Ansätze sind mit vielen Spitznamen versehen, die den kulturellen Merkmalen (theoretisch, historisch und methodisch) jeder Epoche entsprechen. Trotz so vieler Namen, die als Marketing für Fachleute, Unternehmen und Bildungseinrichtungen dienen, basieren die Methoden auf einer Reihe von theoretischpraktischen Ansätzen. Die meisten derjenigen, die heute in Bildungseinrichtungen praktiziert werden, verteidigen jedoch das Prinzip des schülerzentrierten Lernens als Protagonisten des Prozesses, wobei der Lehrer nur die Richtlinie, die Quelle der Anleitung ist, aber auch der Lernende in dessen Lernprozess lernt schafft Interaktionsfelder und Repräsentationscampus, wo jeder seine Ideen einbringt, Meinungen kraft dieses vorherrschenden historischen Kontextes austauscht. Die zirkuläre Methodik verteidigt nicht nur die alleinige Protagonistin des Schülers, sondern auch Protagonismusphasen im Lehr- und Lernprozess, die kontinuierlich und abwechselnd von Akteuren und Situationen übernommen werden, wie z. B.: Schüler, Lehrer, historischkultureller Kontext, die Inhalte, Fähigkeiten und Werte hervorbringen. Резюме Речь идет об обсуждении концепций и практик, циркулирующих в кампусе в процессе преподавания и обучения. Существует несколько методологических подходов в результате цикла практик, включенных в культурный, политический и социальный контекст того времени. Этим подходам придумано множество прозвищ в соответствии с культурными характеристиками (теоретическими, историческими и методологическими) каждой эпохи. Несмотря на так много названий, которые служат маркетингу для профессионалов, компаний и учебных заведений, методологии основаны на ряде теоретико-практических подходов. Однако большинство из тех, что сегодня практикуются в учебных заведениях, отстаивают принцип личностно-ориентированного обучения как главного героя процесса, при этом учитель является лишь ориентиром, источником руководства, но также и учащимся, в процессе обучения которого происходит обучение. устанавливает поля взаимодействия и кампусы представлений, где каждый излагает свои идеи, обменивается мнениями в силу этого доминирующего исторического контекста. Циркулярная методология защищает не только единственного протагониста учащегося, но и этапы протагонистства в процессе преподавания и обучения, которые постоянно и попеременно принимают действующие лица и ситуации, такие как: студент, учитель, историко-культурный контекст, который будет генерировать содержание, навыки и ценности. Rezyume Rech' idet ob obsuzhdenii kontseptsiy i praktik, tsirkuliruyushchikh v kampuse v protsesse prepodavaniya i obucheniya. Sushchestvuyet neskol'ko metodologicheskikh podkhodov v rezul'tate tsikla praktik, vklyuchennykh v kul'turnyy, politicheskiy i sotsial'nyy kontekst togo vremeni. Etim podkhodam pridumano mnozhestvo prozvishch v sootvetstvii s kul'turnymi kharakteristikami (teoreticheskimi, istoricheskimi i metodologicheskimi) kazhdoy epokhi. Nesmotrya na tak mnogo nazvaniy, kotoryye sluzhat marketingu dlya professionalov, kompaniy i uchebnykh zavedeniy, metodologii osnovany na ryade teoretiko-prakticheskikh podkhodov. Odnako bol'shinstvo iz tekh, chto segodnya praktikuyutsya v uchebnykh zavedeniyakh, otstaivayut printsip lichnostno-oriyentirovannogo obucheniya kak glavnogo geroya protsessa, pri etom uchitel' yavlyayetsya lish' oriyentirom, istochnikom rukovodstva, no takzhe i uchashchimsya, v protsesse obucheniya kotorogo proiskhodit obucheniye. ustanavlivayet polya vzaimodeystviya i kampusy predstavleniy, gde kazhdyy izlagayet svoi idei, obmenivayetsya mneniyami v silu etogo dominiruyushchego istoricheskogo konteksta. Tsirkulyarnaya metodologiya zashchishchayet ne tol'ko yedinstvennogo protagonista uchashchegosya, no i etapy protagoniststva v protsesse prepodavaniya i obucheniya, kotoryye postoyanno i poperemenno prinimayut deystvuyushchiye litsa i situatsii, takiye kak: student, uchitel', istoriko-kul'turnyy kontekst, kotoryy budet generirovat' soderzhaniye, navyki i tsennosti. Initially, it is necessary to build some theoretical delimitations of some authors such as Edgard Morin, Paulo Freire, John Dewey and Antonio Gramsci who offer us theoretical categories that somehow articulate in the different campuses that involve the teaching and learning process. Edgard Morin (2003) establishes three dimensions that imply the characteristics of knowledge production: the technical rationality that emphasizes the instrumental character of the teaching pedagogical action, the hermeneutic rationality whose approach emphasizes the critical-reflective and the emancipatory rationality that implies in conscious action and citizen participation in transforming reality. These theoretical categories emphasize the cognitive and political processes of knowledge construction. Paulo Freire (1996) places the teaching and learning process as a conscious construction where the subject moves from a common sense process to a historical conscience where knowledge mobilizes his participation to transform the living conditions of thinking, feeling and acting as overcoming the passive activity that he calls banking education and a subject's action for a leading role in the construction process of historical, social and cultural meanings. Dewey (2007) emphasize the action of the subject as a builder of knowledge, characterized by a mindset open to change where all social, cognitive and psychological factors define new knowledge., Gramsci (2007) considers that basic knowledge of reading, writing, mathematics, geography and history are fundamental for the subject to perceive the world around him, but it is necessary to provoke catharsis for a citizen conscience where the subject assumes himself as an organic intellectual , that is, to participate in the organization, direction and leadership of the social struggle that will produce cultural, social and economic hegemony as an essential principle of citizen education. Proposed by Jonathan Bergmann in partnership with professor Aaron Sams in 2007 (Colorado – USA), it defends the concept of inverted classroom – or flipped classroom in which the professor induces active learning, preparing the student for an increasingly complex world and uncertain, constituting one of these approaches of the so-called active methodologies. Such terminologies are, in my view, inadequate. Firstly, because the inverted class only changes the logic of the direction of the learning activity, continuing the sense of linearity that we call methodological positivism. methodological. As a result, the belief that this logic constitutes innovation is, at the very least, a big mistake, since it constantly changes the position of the reference focus as in the movement of a pendulum, constituting a traditional approach in reverse. It is not the time of domain of the knowledge space by the subjects involved in the learning process that determines a traditional model or a so-called innovative model. It is not enough to invert the logic of the teaching and learning process and maintain the linearity of the interaction process as a one-way street. In reality, the so-called traditional model and the so-called innovative model are not exclusive, on the contrary, they are diluted or moved according to the dynamics of the learning process in terms of the type of student, the material working conditions, the cultural context in which the institution of teaching/faculty is inserted, the model of teacher training the degree of autonomy of decisions of the curricular execution in relation to the teaching system and internally in the institution or faculty. Both the so-called traditional and innovative models must be formatted according to the area of knowledge, type and cultural level of the students and the level of the course. Far be it from us to be innocent of wanting to replace the so-called traditional model with the so-called innovative model, that would be pedagogical positivism. `On the other hand, the teacher does not have the autonomy, sometimes intellectual and sometimes institutional, to exercise a practice according to his knowledge, skills and values, since tons of rigid rules of each institutional model are imposed on him and when he does it, it is because the institution vertically imposed a model in vogue that produces a good institutional image for marketing purposes. Unfortunately, institutions disseminated a profile of a good teacher as one who masters scientific and methodological content to repeat them in the classroom according to the proposal determined by the institution or faculty. So it would be fair to ask the innocent question: How can teachers innovate without changing the management profile of education systems, public education policies, institutional management and pedagogical coordination practices? The proposal presented in this article goes beyond these approaches of methodological or pedagogical positivism towards a model of teacher and student autonomy based on interactivity, knowledge construction and critical-reflexive application, based on the process of analysis, judgment and choice. Hence, the process of pedagogical indexing merges into interactivity procedures, through the structures of interaction and representation that take place in a network from the horizontal and vertical axes. Thus, from our doctoral thesis, we raised the processes of construction of pedagogical knowledge in teaching practice and one of the axes is interactivity. Thus, we coined linear or mechanical interactivity as that which is given by the verticality of the teacher or by the horizontality by the student, which just by changing the holder of the action, student or teacher, cannot be classified as traditional or innovative. Circular or organic interactivity as that which favors the process rather than the product and takes place simultaneously by different subjects and technological resources, and networked interactivity as that which takes place permanently and at the same time with different spaces for building knowledge, different subjects and by different means or technological resources. Our methodological proposal consists of non-linked steps, like a spiral, but articulated in a network where cycles move in interfaces and are reorganized: Diagnostic evaluation and prognostic evaluation before and after each action and before and after each step 2. Selection of materials, pedagogical tools, resources and evaluation permeating the entire process. The teacher must have made available on the AVA platform, in the class or in the previous month, the theoretical material and the activity script (questions, problem-situation, pre-research projects, case studies and others) on selected material and made available that the students they must do it individually to bring it to the next class, if it is from the half-yearly calendar or in the following month, if from the modulated calendar. 3. Individual student construction with virtual support, via Platform, during the time preceding the next class. 4. Summary of the student's individual construction is discussed and re-elaborated through equalized groups in the classroom where students are numbered in increasing cardinal order of 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. when the teacher provides the 2nd script of activities, deepening the script distributed for individual study. Then the groups are reorganized from the numbering done previously. Thus, new groups will be formed, taking all those who received number 1, another group with those who received number 2, another with those who received number 3, another with those who received number 4 and so on. These new groups resynthesize the results of the initial group and systematize the results to be presented. Each group presents the systematized results with the participation of the teacher during and after each presentation 6. The syntheses of each group are exposed or shown via chalkboard, data show, poster, video, graph or other visual means where all the syntheses are visualized in the same space of the resource used when the teacher, from questions, comparisons, characterization, analysis, synthesis and application, contrasting, exemplification, relevance and inserts the theoretical-scientific foundation, launching new questions that lead the student to apply or relate the foundation inserted by him in the understanding of the constructed syntheses 7. At this stage, the professor, together with the students, systematize and theoretically substantiate the subjects of the various groups that presented their syntheses. 8. Each group poses questions to the opposite group. The teacher coordinates the debate and makes the general synthesis and already articulates with the next subject of study The innovative process of our proposal ranges from teaching and learning practices, emphasizing the logic of working on success to work on mistakes. It goes from the prescribed path to the constructed path. extends the prior prescription by discovery in the process. It overcomes the emphasis on conclusions by the emphasis on new questions. It goes beyond the single vision to multifaceted vision. It adds to the formal/instrumental conception the reflective or practical-reflexive conception. Our circular methodology approach does not deny previous knowledge, but rather reconstructs and reframes it in a given cultural context in a new scientific perspective. The proposal that we expose here, of Circular Methodology, surpasses the so-called inverted classroom because it adds to the physical time and space the real and virtual social time and space that are articulated in different networks of interaction, construction, application and new questions. In addition, the proposal presented here brings a new vision of evaluation that replaces the formal approach of time and space to a critical-reflexive conception permeating all stages of the teaching and learning process, concomitantly with the self-assessment of the subjects involved, including the teacher. The central axis of this proposed circular methodology is interactivity, which we classify as linear or horizontal; circular or vertical and in a network that we graphically represent below. Teacher's cultural space--------------Student's cultural space Socio-historical context Working conditions Representative Chart of Relationships in the Teaching and Learning Process a) Linear interactivity - (Horizontal) - is the interaction of the individual activity stage carried out between teacher and student and characterized as horizontality of learning relationships. Teacher Student b) Circular interactivity - is the interaction of the activities stage between students of the same study group where, guided by the teacher, students exchange information about the results built individually, systematize the information in a logical organization and elaborate the unique result of the group. 1 2 3 4 5 6 c) Interactivity in a network - it is the interaction of the activity stage between students from different groups that form another group. It consists of numbering the students of the same group as: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and the new groups will be formed by all the numbers 1 of the groups, another new group with all the numbers 2, another with all the numbers 3, another with all numbers 4, another with all numbers 5 and so on until the number of students in each group that were previously numbered was completed. 2 1 3 4 5 6 So the new groups will be formed like this: Groups of 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Group of 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Group of 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Group of 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 The circular methodology articulates with social, cultural, technological and human factors and has as pedagogical principles such as interdisciplinarity, theory and practice regarding contents, skills and values that are inserted in the process of construction of knowledge that guide thinking, feeling and professional action, private life and the active role of the citizen as a participant in the historical process of a given society. References DEWEY, John. Democracy and Education. São Paulo: Platano Editora, 2007. FREIRE, Paul. Pedagogy of Autonomy. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1996. GRAMSCI, Antonio. Quaderni del Carcere. Torino: Einaudi, 2007. MORIN, Edgard. The Seven Knowledges Necessary for the Education of the Future. São Paulo: Cortez, 2003.