Design Principles About the use of Facebook to Mediate Discussions on Physics Topics in High School
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2022u12431264Keywords:
Teaching Physics, Design Principles, FacebookAbstract
This paper is part of an Educational Design Research (EDR) project, whose goal is to concurrently generate theoretical insights and real-world applications while working with stakeholders. Therefore, within the framework of the Institutional Program of Scholarships for Initiation to Teaching (PIBID), we sought to investigate alternatives for physics teaching problems using information and communications technology (ICT). The objective of this work was to analyze intervention and design principles on the learning of the theme of time relativity in Einstein’s Physics, with the use of Facebook as support to mediate the discussions. Thus, we applied the four steps of the intervention development process identified by Reeves (2000) within the scope of the EDR. The results show that the team evolved as we observed the decisions that were required throughout the process. It was discovered that in order to achieve a goal within a set of restrictions, it was necessary to acquire an awareness of the objectives and constraints for which it is projecting itself, as well as better observe the resources available for the development of a design. We classified development into two categories: the ability to overcome obstacles rather than give up; and the ability to rethink the impact of the design. Finally, six principles were developed that might be used to lead future operations in similar situations.
Downloads
References
Barnett, M., Keating, T., Harwood, W., & Saam, J. (2002). Using Emerging Technologies To Help Bridge The Gap Between University Theory And Classroom Practice: Challenges And Successes. School Science And Mathematics, 102(6), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17887.x
Blonder, R., & Shelley, R. (2015). I Like Facebook: Exploring Israeli High School Chemistry Teachers’ Tpack And Self-Efficacy Beliefs. Education and Information Technologies, 22, 697–724. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9384-6
Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working Toward A Strong Conceptualization Of Scientific Explanation For Science Education. Science Education, 95(4), 639–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449
Chassot, A. (2000). Alfabetização Científica: Questões E Desafios Para A Educação. Editora Unijuí.
Coll, M., & Monereo, C. (Orgs.) (2010). Psicologia Da Educação Virtual: Aprender E Ensinar Com As Tecnologias Da Informação E Comunicação. Armed.
Diogo, R. C., & Gobara, S. T. (29 de Janeiro–02 de Fevereiro, 2007). Sociedade, Educação E Ensino De Física No Brasil: Do Brasil Colônia Ao Fim Da Era Vargas. XVII Simpósio Nacional De Ensino De Física, São Luís, Maranhão.
Edelson, D. C. (2002.). Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage In Design. The Journal of the Learning Science, 11(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_4
Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative Learning In Work Teams: Analyzing Cycles Of Knowledge Creation In Practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R-J. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives On Activity Theory (pp. 377–404). Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies Of Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings And Future Challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Discursive Manifestations Of Contradictions In Organizational Change Efforts: A Methodological Framework. Journal Of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 368–387. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811111132758
Engeströn, Y. (2012). Aprendizagem Expansiva: Por Uma Conceituação Pela Teoria Da Atividade. In K. Illeris (Org.), Teorias Contemporâneas Da Aprendizagem (pp. 68–90). Editora Penso.
Enyedy, N., & Hoadley, C. M. (2006). From Dialogue To Monologue And Back: Middle Spaces In Computer-Mediated Learning. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 413–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9000-2
Friedman, A. J., & Ginsburg, A. (2013). Monitoring What Matters About Context And Instruction In Science Education: A Naep Data Analysis Report. https://www.nagb.gov/reports-media/reports/monitoring-what-matters.html
Gaspar, A. (2004). Cinquenta Anos De Ensino De Física. Educação: Revista De Estudos Da Educação, Ano 13, (21), 71–91.
Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis Of A Global Online Debate And The Development Of An Interaction Analysis Model For Examining Social Construction Of Knowledge In Computer Conferencing. Journal Of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431. https://doi.org/10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG
Henri, F. (1992). Computer Conferencing And Content Analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing (pp. 117–136). Springer-Verlag.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning, And Values. Greenwood Press.
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs In The Fridge: Sources Of Early Inter. International Journal of Science Education, 32(5), 669–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902792385
Mcneill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting Students’ Construction Of Scientific Explanations By Fading Scaffolds In Instructional Materials. Journal Of The Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
Mckenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting Educational Design Research. Routledge.
Mckenney, S. & Reeves, T. C. (2019). Conducting Educational Design Research (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Mckenney, S., Nieveen, N., & Van den Akker, J. (2006). Design Research From A Curriculum Perspective. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research (pp. 67–90). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088364
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework For Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Moreira, M. A. (2018). Uma Análise Crítica Do Ensino De Física. Estudos Avançados, 32(94), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-40142018.3294.0006
Mwanza, D. (2001, June 09–13). Where Theory Meets Practice: A Case For An Activity Theory-Based Methodology To Guide Computer System Design. Proceedings Of Interact’ 2001: Eighth Ifip Tc 13 Conference On Human-Computer Interaction, Tokyo, Japan.
Nieveen, N., Mckenney, S., & Van den Akker, J. (2006). Educational Design Research: The Value Of Variety. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research (pp. 151–158). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088364
Nieveen, N. (2009). Formative Evaluation In Educational Design. In T. Plomp, N. Nieveen (Eds.), An Introduction To Educational Design Research (pp. 89–101). Slo.
Nolan, C. (Direção). (2014). Interstelar [Filme]. Warner Bros.
Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., & Mcgillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Open University Press.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education In Europe: Critical Reflections. The Nuffield Foundation.
Pedrisa, C. M. (2001). Características Históricas Do Ensino De Ciências. Ciências em Foco, 1(1), 1–7. https://econtents.bc.unicamp.br/inpec/index.php/cef/article/view/9161
Pimentel, D. S., & Mcneill, K. L. (2013). Conducting Talkin Secondary Science Classrooms: Investigating Instructional Moves And Teachers’ Beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21061
Plomp, T., Nieveen, N., Nonato, E., & Matta, A. (2018). Pesquisa-Aplicação Em Educação: Uma Introdução. Artesanato Educacional Ltda.
Rap, S., & Blonder, R. (2016). Let’s Face(Book) It: Analyzing Interactions In Social Network Groups For Chemistry Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 62–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9577-1
Reeves, T. C. (2000). Socially Responsible Educational Technology Research. Educational Technology, 40(6), 19–28. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44428634
Reeves, T. C. (2006). Design Research From A Technology Perspective. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research (pp. 52–66). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088364
Rogoff, B. (1998). Observando A Atividade Sociocultural Em Três Planos: Apropriação Participatória, Participação Guiada E Aprendizado. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Río, A. Alvarez, A. (Eds.), Estudos Socioculturais Da Mente (pp 123–142). Artmed.
Rogoff, B. (2005). A Natureza Cultural Do Desenvolvimento Humano. Artmed.
Rosa, C. W., & Rosa, A. B. (2005). Ensino De Física: Objetivos E Imposições No Ensino Médio. Revista Electrónica De Enseñanza De Las Ciencias, 4(1), 1–18. http://reec.uvigo.es/volumenes/volumen4/ART2_Vol4_N1.pdf
Rosa, C. W., & Rosa, A. B. (2007). Ensino Da Física: Tendências E Desafios Na Prática Docente. Revista Iberoamericana De Educación, 43(1), 1–12. https://rieoei.org/RIE/article/view/2343
Rosa, C. W., & Rosa, A. B. (2012). O Ensino De Ciências (Física) No Brasil: Da História Às Novas Orientações Educacionais. Revista Ibero-Americana De Educação, 58(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.35362/rie5821446
Santaella, L. (2013). Leitor Prossumidor: Desafios Da Ubiquidade Para A Educação. Revista Ensino Superior Unicamp. https://www.revistaensinosuperior.gr.unicamp.br/artigos/desafios-da-ubiquidade-para-a-educacao
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-Based Research And Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments. Education Technology Research And Development, 53(4), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Wertsch, J. V. (2008). The Narrative Organization Of Collective Memory. Ethos, 36(1), 120–135. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20486564
Wertsch, J. V., Del Río, P., & Alvarez, A. (1998). Estudos Socioculturais Da Mente. Artmed.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Raul dos Santos Neto, Susan McKenney, Miriam Struchiner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors are responsible for the veracity of the information provided and for the content of the papers.
The authors who publish in this journal fully agree with the following terms:
- The authors attest that the work is unpublished, that is, it has not been published in another journal, event notices or equivalent.
- The authors attest that they did not submit the paper to another journal simultaneously.
- The authors retain the copyright and grant to RPBEC the right of first publication, with the work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- The authors attest that they own the copyright or the written permission from copyright owners of figures, tables, large texts, etc. that are included in the paper.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, to publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication in order to increase the impact and citation of published work.
In case of identification of plagiarism, inappropriate republishing and simultaneous submissions, the authors authorize the Editorial Board to make public what happened, informing the editors of the journals involved, any plagiarized authors and their institutions of origin.
