Tres elementos fundamentales en la formación de docentes de ciencias.

dc.contributor.authorTalanquer, Vicentespa
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-02T16:53:41Z
dc.date.available2021-08-02T16:53:41Z
dc.date.issued2017-05-24
dc.description.abstractEn este ensayo se describen, analizan y discuten tres elementos formativos que se consideran fundamentales en la preparación docente, primero la conceptualización de la disciplina como forma productiva de pensar y actuar sobre el mundo; segundo, la habilidad para seleccionar y/o diseñar tareas instruccionales retadoras y activas que promuevan la construcción de explicaciones y/o soluciones a fenómenos o problemas concretos de interés. Finalmente la capacidad de implementar tareas instruccionales de manera responsiva, des-de un modelo de evaluación formativa, para apoyar, enriquecer, cuestionar y dirigir el pensamiento. Se analiza que un proceso de enseñanza centrado en estos aspectos satisface múltiples metas de la educación en ciencias, tales como, desarrollar comprensiones significativas de conceptos e ideas centrales: promover la participación en diversas prácticas científicas; involucrar la argumentación y otras formas discursivas empleadas en la construcción y evaluación del conocimiento cien-tífico; diseñar soluciones de interés para estudiantes y la sociedad. Además de crear oportunidades de aprendizaje con un nivel apropiado de reto intelectual. Finalmente se reflexiona sobre la enseñanza responsiva de la disciplina, como medio para facilitar la participación equitativa y favorecer el desarrollo profesional de los docentes, quienes aprenden a responder de manera productiva a las ideas de sus estudiantes en situaciones específicas y contextos variados.spa
dc.description.abstractenglishThis paper describes, analyzes and discusses three educational elements that are considered fundamental in teacher training: first, the conceptualization of the discipline as a productive way of thinking and acting about the world; second, the ability to select and/or design challenging and active instructional tasks encouraging the development of explanations and/or solutions to specific phenomena or problems of interest; finally, the ability to implement instructional tasks in a responsive manner from an educational evaluation model so as to support, enrich, question and guide the way of thinking. The article analyzes the fact that a teaching process focused in these aspects fulfills multiple science education goals, such as developing meaningful understanding of central concepts and ideas; encouraging the participation in several scientific practices; involving the argumentation and other discursive forms used in the development and evaluation of scientific knowledge; designing solutions of interest for students and society; and creating learning opportunities with an appropriate level of intellectual challenge. Finally, a reflection is made on the responsive teaching of the discipline as a means to facilitate equitable participation and favor the professional development of teachers, who learn to productively respond to the ideas of their students in specific situations and varied contexts.eng
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.format.mimetypetext/xmlspa
dc.identifierhttps://revistas.upn.edu.co/index.php/TED/article/view/6043
dc.identifier10.17227/01203916.6043
dc.identifier.issn2323-0126
dc.identifier.issn2665-3184
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12209/15750
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherEditorial Universidad Pedagógica Nacionalspa
dc.relationhttps://revistas.upn.edu.co/index.php/TED/article/view/6043/5005
dc.relationhttps://revistas.upn.edu.co/index.php/TED/article/view/6043/7658
dc.relation.referencesBennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Educa-tion: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25.eng
dc.relation.referencesBlack, P. y Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.eng
dc.relation.referencesBlack, P. y Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Edu-cational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5-31.eng
dc.relation.referencesChi, M. T. H. y Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49, 219-243.eng
dc.relation.referencesCoffey, J. E.; Hammer, D.; Levin, D. M. and Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1109-1136.eng
dc.relation.referencesCowie, B. y Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 6(1), 101-116.eng
dc.relation.referencesDarling-Hammond, L. y Bransford, J. (eds.) (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world. John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, CA.eng
dc.relation.referencesDoyle, W. y Carter, K. (1984). Academic tasks in classrooms. Curriculum Inquiry, 14, 129-149.eng
dc.relation.referencesFang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47-65.eng
dc.relation.referencesGarcía, J. J. y Rentería, E. (2011). Modelización de problemas para desarrollar habilidades de experimentación. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis (ted), 29, 44-64.spa
dc.relation.referencesGess-Newsome, J. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and its impact on instruction. En J. Gess-Newsome and N. G. Lederman, (eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implica-tions for science education (pp. 51-94). Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands.eng
dc.relation.referencesKang, H.; Windschitl, M.; Stroupe, D. y Thompson, J. (2016). Designing, launching, and implementing high quality learning opportunities for students that advan-ce scientific thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. doi:10.1002/tea.21329eng
dc.relation.referencesLevin, D. M. y Richards, J. (2011). Learning to attend to the substance of student thinking in science. Science Educator, 20(2), 1-11.eng
dc.relation.referencesMercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together, Londres: Routledge.eng
dc.relation.referencesMora, W. M. y Parga, D. L. (2008). El conocimiento didáctico del contenido en química: integración de las tramas de contenido histórico-epistemológicas con as tramas de contexto-aprendizaje. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis (ted), 24, 56-81.spa
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.creativecommonsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
dc.sourceTecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED; Núm. 41 (2017); 183.196spa
dc.sourceTecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED; No. 41 (2017); 183.196spa
dc.sourceTecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED; n. 41 (2017); 183.196spa
dc.subjectFormación docentespa
dc.subjectPlaneaciónspa
dc.subjectInstrucciónspa
dc.subjectEvaluación formativaspa
dc.subjectFormación docentespa
dc.subjectPlaneaciónspa
dc.subjectInstrucciónspa
dc.subjectEvaluación formativaspa
dc.subject.keywordsTeacher trainingeng
dc.subject.keywordsPlanningeng
dc.subject.keywordsInstructioneng
dc.subject.keywordsFormative evaluationeng
dc.titleTres elementos fundamentales en la formación de docentes de ciencias.spa
dc.title.translatedThree fundamental elements in the training of science teachers.eng
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501eng
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleeng
dc.type.localArtículo de revistaspa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Archivos