There is no doubt that today, the use of new forms of online interaction meets the new needs of students; the incentive to active and meaningful learning for the student can already be proven through several projects already developed in every country; rapid and efficient access to relevant and diversified information is evident and the improvement of the quality of communication between teachers and students is made possible by the interactive tools.
Today, technology is useful for learning, because its ignorance has generated in the modern world the same kind of exclusion that the illiterate suffers in the world of writing. But now comes the following question, what is necessary? This is a difficult question to answer, because it depends on the context, the reality in which one lives and the autonomy of each one. What can be said, without error, is that it is necessary to understand that the essential thing is to believe in the cognitive potential of each one. “It is essential to discover the joy of knowledge, because it is the basis of autonomy and subjectivity.”
Another important measure is not to listen to myths. Will the issue of computers take the place of teachers? It is always placed, which reinforces the idea that the teacher refuses to innovate. But what really exists is the lack of comfort with the use of technology in educational environments, which is due to the scarce government investment in teacher education and updating policies.
For the teacher who sees in technology a way to better qualify his pedagogical practices, it is fundamental to see reality and especially to fight against the paralyzing neoliberal discourse that dominates the educational environment. It is necessary to know the mistaken policies that are part of the history of the use of information technology in education in Brazil.
To avoid resistance through ignorance is to understand that the computer and educational software, whatever it is, is an auxiliary tool of the student’s learning process. A bad class is bad with or without technology, and a good class will always be good regardless of the technology used. This means that: quality is in the content that must be well planned and made available so that it is possible for the student to acquire knowledge.
The media should be appropriate to the content as this comes first. Technology does not create environments that do away with the teacher, it is necessary for the teacher to take on the task of designing didactic material and pedagogy to be used in the teaching process. Not to innovate in the production of didactic material and in the learning methodologies, means to leave to the charge of professionals of the technological area, the task of teaching through software developed without the bias of education, which in general has been occurring frequently.
It is a fact that the profiles of the professionals, who today plan educational software, are of computer programmers, who are not aware of the educational area. Planning a good project requires the formation of a multidisciplinary team, whose participants complement the project using their specific and diversified skills.
Today much is said about the need to educate oneself to the means, that is, to educate for the use of the own tool of the digital world. But much is said and done little about the preparation of teachers in the student’s orientation to these new concepts and new relationships that arise in this technological world. It is in this context that information from different directions reaches individuals whose reality does not allow them to develop critical analytical capacity, fundamental competence to avoid the collapse of important values for the development of citizenship, ethics and solidarity. Through this approach, the use of technology integrates new knowledge into the educational practice, providing the teacher with a greater critical capacity of his pedagogical action and a greater range of possibilities in the search for the interest of his students.
- EDUCATION AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES
In the area of education, of course, a simile. The educator always felt the need to update himself, not only in the field of his knowledge, but also in his pedagogical function. The traditional teaching methods are those consolidated over time, which dominate in educational institutions. Still persists, with many teachers, the method where the teacher speaks, the student listens; the teacher says, the student writes; The teacher commands, the student obeys. Most, however, are already more malleable: the teacher talks, the student discusses; the teacher makes a note; the teacher asks, the student ponders. In specific cases, the student speaks, the teacher listens, the group debates and everyone takes notes, including the teacher, trying to meet the needs that arise.
This and other issues lead to the crisis of education, from primary to university. The use of the overhead projector, or overhead projector, that deserved the nickname of “retroprofessor” was widely used in institutions. It made the teacher’s life easier, not needing to always write on the board, especially when the teacher teaches the same discipline to more than one class, contemporaneous or not. Incidentally, even the chalkboard and the chalk has been modernized: today the white board with the special cancelable brush is very common. But what harms is not the use of the overhead projector, as in other technological applications, but the misuse of the same.
First and foremost, we must be careful about excesses: the teacher should not only read, dictate, or write or even project transparencies throughout the class. Should offer alternative. The use of a technique, such as the overhead projector, for more than one continuous hour, becomes tiring, and students lose concentration. Another projector, which is not so used due to the quality of the projection, is the episcopio, or projector of opaque. It allows the projection of images or texts of a book, without the need to create transparencies. But to design texts is not advised, because it needs a dark room and loses much quality in the visualization.
The video device, with a monitor (TV), is increasingly popular. Most universities, public and private schools have, in the audiovisual sector, 20-inch televisions with built-in video, making it easier to transport and use them. A data show, which projects the image of video on a screen, as in a movie theater, you find in certain situations, such as in conference rooms and graduate courses. Having a video library available at the university would be ideal, but few institutions organize such a sector. In addition to very interesting documentaries produced mainly by public television, we have films that are classics of literature or dealing with controversial themes or cultural interest.
Whoever makes a better university is not only a dean, but everyone participates in the process. Teachers and students are largely responsible for this. They may not be aware of this. When it is required from an institution, it may be indifferent at first. But if the requirements persist the institutions can not be made blind and deaf. Thus, for example, if a university does not have a video library, this need has probably not been demonstrated. The equipment for didactic use is becoming more and more sophisticated. New overhead projectors, for example, project the image sharper, regulate more easily, have more sensitive focus and screen size commands, or even remote control.
Modern videos have heads, four for image and three for audio; allow you to stop the image without distortion, to go back or forward frame-to-frame, that is, they are more and more like an editing island. But they are already becoming obsolete, with the appearance of the DVD. Dates Show and multimedia projectors allow you to project the image of a video or computer onto a large screen, and you can use videotape, floppy disk, cd, dvd or hard disk. They are replacing all other equipment, making it much easier to work with them. Images are better, be it fixed or animated, colors or black and white, text or photo.
Technology changes the mass media and, in parallel, the means of teaching, not only in the classroom, as I have said so far. It is changing even the classroom itself, with the introduction of distance learning, for example. First were the traditional post office that encouraged home teaching by correspondence. Private lessons no longer needed the teacher’s presence. Then came the radio: the teacher talks to you without being by your side physically, no matter where you are as long as you have a radio on. The vinyl records and the “K-7” tape made their time, until the appearance of CDs, along with television and video, making it even easier to teach at a distance: sound and image at your disposal. Now we have the internet, with an almost infinite variety of possibilities. The mail is still present: sending tapes and disks, audio, images and multimedia, in addition to the handouts. The internet is slowly becoming more and more reliable.
- TEACHING AND TRAINING
“Globalization” and teacher work: in the context of technologies, it is globalization, the object of Torres’ studies (1998, p. 28), characterized as ideological construction, be it as some, as an explanatory concept of a new world order, aspect of this reality can not be ignored: education as a whole and teaching work in particular are being reconfigured.
In other words, in the perspective of “globalization” and “globalitarianism”, a term coined by Ramonet (1999) to account for the kind of dictatorship of the single mind that regulates ideological construction, the school must break with its present historical form new challenges. The pretension, in this work, is to analyze the determinations (concrete and presupposed) and the (hegemonic and disputed by hegemony) meanings of this reconfiguration, based on the discourses that introduce and justify the current teacher education policies.
Another aspect seems to be consensual in the reconfiguration of work and teacher training: the possibility of the presence of so-called “new technologies” or, more precisely, of information and communication technologies (ICT). This presence has been increasingly constant in the pedagogical discourse, understood as both the set of language practices developed in concrete situations of teaching and those aimed at reaching a level of explanation for these same situations.
In other words, ICTs have been identified as a defining element of current teaching discourses and teaching, even if they prevail in the latter. Nowadays, in the most different spaces, the most diverse texts on education have, in common, some kind of reference to the presence of ICT in teaching. However, such a presence has been attributed so diverse senses that it disallows singular readings. Thus, if there is apparently no doubt about a central place attributed to ICT, there is also no consensus as to its delimitation.
Lévy (1999) affirms that, in the limit, ICT is put as a structuring element of a new pedagogical discourse, as well as of social relations that, because they are unpublished, support neologisms like “cyberculture”. At the other extreme, what new technologies support is a form of real-world murder, with the liquidation of all references, in simulacrum games and simulation (Baudrillard, 1991).
For Moran (2004) in the interme- diary, they may constitute new formats for the same old conceptions of teaching and learning, inscribed in a conservative modernization movement, or even, in specific conditions, instituting qualitative differences in pedagogical practices. In summary, the presence of ICT has been invested with multiple meanings, ranging from the alternative of overcoming the limits imposed by “old technologies”, represented mainly by chalkboard and printed materials, to the response to the most diverse educational or even for socioeconomic-political questions.
In the words of Mattelart (2002, p.9), the second half of the twentieth century was marked by the “formation of beliefs in the miraculous power of information technologies”. Even if it seems naive in principle, this last movement is inscribed in a mode of ICT objectification inextricably linked to the conception of the ‘information society’.
- ICT for Distance Education
According to Fonseca (1998), international organizations have forced, through the establishment of “conditionalities” for the granting of credits and the application of sanctions for their noncompliance, the incorporation of ICT as a central element of any educational policy attentive to the transformations engendered by the call scientific-technological revolution and the needs of the economy.
In the words of Barreto and Leher “A brave new world emerges with globalization and the technological revolution that propels it towards the virtuous future.” (…) From this premise, international organizations and governments echo the same proposition: education must be reformed from top to bottom, making it more flexible and capable of increasing the competitiveness of nations, the only means of obtaining a passport for the select group of countries capable of competitive integration in the globalized world “(2003: 39).
In this movement, a new educational paradigm has been announced. The announcement is recurring on the website of the MEC, whose formulation, it is worth insisting, has led the speech of international organizations to the last consequences, positioning the technologies in the place of the subjects. This paradigm is constituted by technological substitution and instrumental rationality, is inscribed in “flexibilization”, especially in the precariousness of teaching work, being coherent with the logic of the market: the greater the presence of technology, the less the need of human labor.
Chaui (1999) predicts fewer and fewer teachers and students, on the grounds that the performance of the latter depends less on the formation of the former and more of the materials used. Strictly speaking, the MEC discourse operates two inversions: it substitutes the logic of production for circulation and the logic of work for communication, in the belief that, “without changing the process of teacher training in basic education and without changing their salaries demeaning, everything will go well with education as long as there are televisions and computers in schools. “
As Mattelart (2002) points out, “Internet access to ‘universal knowledge’, which will necessarily have its source in the existing knowledge monopolies, would solve the problem not only of the digital fracture, but also of the of the social fracture “(Mattelart, 2002, p.164). In these terms, the proposal of “technologies for all” is formulated, such as overcoming the so-called “digital divide”.
On the other hand, as the World Bank itself points out, as Leher (1997, 130) points out, that the use of technology is the “privileged instrument for inserting countries into the hegemonic flow of Time”, it also recognizes the impracticability of countries characterized by slow (developing, peripheral, southern) times to be inserted in the fast pace of the (central) (central) countries.
Thus, while new possibilities are proclaimed, such as overcoming the digital divide, a kind of educational apartheid on a planetary scale is instituted, based on its own re-signification. While the discourse deals with the democratization of access, social practices show that this kind of dividing line between the included and the excluded is not about access or lack of access, but about the ways in which it is produced and the senses that it is invested.
- Current Trends
For Freitas (1992), the turn-of-the-century formulations, albeit on a new basis, are no more than a resumption of the proposals produced in the 1970s. “Its fundamental characteristic remains here: an analysis of the education torn from its determinants historical and social “. Therefore, they take a markedly neotechnicist trait, from the management of education through competences, to the so-called “self-instructional” materials, to the alternatives of a society without schools.
What is new are much more elaborate speeches, from the most diverse points of view, as well as more agile in the conquest of thicker materiality. Thus, in the relations between discourse and social change, the “commodification” of educational discourse goes beyond the limits of the symbolic dimension and establishes, concretely, the place of over-commodification of education: courses as packages, provision of educational services, . Or, from another angle, the field of ideology would have been reconfigured to promote the conditions most favorable to the intended changes.
In any case, the relations between discourse and social change need to be the object of careful political analysis, in order to account for new cliches that, circulating, contribute to the production of an imaginary which makes a particular interpretation appear as the necessary to sustain the legitimation and fixation of hegemonic meanings.
It is worth remembering that from the discursive point of view, ideology corresponds to the hegemony of meaning. The hegemonic sense of ICT points to the primacy of the technical dimension, erasing the fundamental issues. When it comes to its educational incorporation, there seems to be no room for the analysis of its modes and meanings.
In the Manichean perspective of “plugged or lost”, any objections may be the target of the disqualification that marks the second group. In the meantime, in the first, discussions can be based on questions such as the differences between cooperative and collaborative learning, or between constructivism and constructionism (Papert, 1993), within the limits of the pedagogical sphere, without referring to its economic, political and social.
In this context, it is important to verify the affirmation of a “new paradigm”, recurrent in the MEC website, or emergent paradigm, usually associated with the removal of the supposedly simplistic objectivities towards complexity (Morin, 1998). It is undeniable the hegemony of the teaching virtualization movement, from the perspective of e-learning, whose most common translation has been “distance education via the Internet”: a form of learning in which technological mediation is highlighted in the most diverse “learning environments”.
Even without entering into the merits of the polysemy of this expression, it is important to point out that it no longer contemplates teaching, concentrating on the second element of the pair: learning. The teaching-learning unit is broken, which has given support to the most diverse studies on educational practices, supposing learning without teaching or even teaching fully identified with the materials that support the alternatives of e-learning. In any case, this break can not be dissociated from the “new place” of the teacher, as a professional of teaching.
As for the clichés in circulation, it is possible to observe a significant shift from “one does not learn only in school” to “one does not learn in school”, in that it refers to the tendency of deterritorialization of the school. Not only is all the emphasis being placed on learning environments, but the texts already contemplate diverse “educations” materialized in the expressions “academic education” and “corporate education”.
To return to the starting point of this set of reflections, it is possible to affirm that the proposed deterritorialization can not be thought outside the market parameters and the assumption that the school must break with its present historical form to face the challenges of “globalization”. Rejecting this logic, the biggest challenge is to face the attempt to erase the historical and social determinants of the school. In the words of Alves (2004: 218):
What is at stake is not only the competent discourse: “One who can be uttered, heard and accepted as true or authorized because he has lost his ties with the place and time of his origin” (Chaui, 1989, p.9). It is, among other issues, the reduction of ICT to EAD, as a material form of “commodification”. These are the contemporary clashes between the proposal of education as a commodity and its defense as emancipatory law and practice.
- The Use of New Technologies in Education
Studies show that the use of new information and communication technologies (NICTs), as a tool, makes an enormous contribution to the practice of schools at any level of education. This use presents multiple possibilities that can be realized according to a certain conception of education that pervades any school activity.
It is important to note that, since the beginning of the 1990s, public schools in several states have been equipped with a true arsenal of technologies: TV School, video-school, computer centers, etc. All these projects have the pretension to teach with the support of the machines and thus to improve the pedagogical practice. Certainly such technologies have at some point aided the teaching process and perhaps the learning process, but the result has been little observable in practice and formal education remains essentially unchanged.
For LOING (1998), the introduction of NICTs in education must be accompanied by a reflection on the need for a change in the conception of learning that is practiced in most schools today.
According to LITTO (1992), the current educational system is a mirror of the mass industrial system, where students pass from one series to another in a sequence of standardized materials as if it were an industrial assembly line. The accumulated knowledge is poured into their heads; students with greater ability to absorb facts and submissive behavior are placed on a faster track while others are placed on the medium speed track.
“Defective products” are taken off the assembly line and returned for “repair”. We are living in an era of transformation, an era of global interdependence with the internationalization of the economy and the overvaluation of communication and information. Industrial society organizations structured to perform hierarchical tasks of command and control are being replaced, due to their competitiveness and complexity, by forming groups around specific projects.
Command and control give way to learning and response, in an attempt by each organization to be the first to reach the market with good quality products or services. The appropriate environment for doing this type of work has been the one that privileges face-to-face meetings of groups, but also provides instant access to the Internet and disks and disks containing answers to enable group decision making. Thus proving that the learning or working environment determines, in part, the nature of the product.
With the technological and scientific revolution, society has changed a lot in recent decades. Thus, education does not only have to adapt to the new needs of this knowledge society, but, above all, it has to take a leading role in this process. The technological resources of communication and information have developed and diversified rapidly. They are present in the daily lives of all citizens, who can not be ignored or despised.
Although it is possible to teach and learn without them, schools have invested more and more in NICTs. Because of the enormous influence that these ICTs, especially computing, have currently exerted on education, it is necessary to reflect on the conception of learning that should permeate the use of this technology in educational practice.
A very widespread idea in education is that ICTs, especially informatics, serve to facilitate the process of teaching and learning. This idea is linked to the fact that technology has entered the life of man to facilitate. In this way, the use of ICTs is based on a Behaviorist learning conception, where learning means displaying appropriate behavior. Thus the primary purpose of education is to train students to exhibit a particular behavior and to control it externally.
A second idea is the use of the computer in education as a device to be programmed, carrying out the description – execution – reflection – debug – description cycle, which is extremely important in the acquisition of new knowledge. According to VALENTE (1998), faced with a problem situation, the learner has to use all his cognitive structure to describe to the computer the steps to solve the problem using a programming language.
The description of the problem resolution will be performed by the computer. This execution provides feedback only from what was requested by the machine. The learner should reflect on what was produced by the computer; if the results do not match the desired one, the learner has to seek new information to incorporate them into the program and repeat the operation. In this way, the computer complicates the life of the learner instead of facilitating it.
With this cycle, the learner has the opportunity to find and correct his own mistakes and the teacher, to understand what the learner is doing and thinking. Therefore, the process of finding and correcting the error constitutes a unique opportunity for the student to learn about a particular concept involved in solving a problem or on problem solving strategies.
The execution of the description – execution – reflection – debug – description cycle does not happen simply by placing the apprentice in front of the computer. Student-computer interaction must be mediated by a professional learning agent who has knowledge of the meaning of the process of learning through the construction of knowledge so that he can understand the ideas of the learner and how to act in the process of building knowledge to intervene appropriately in situation in order to assist you in this process.
This idea is based on the principles of Piaget’s constructivist theory, which starts from the premise that knowledge comes not only from the subject’s innate programming, nor from his unique experience of the object, but is a result of both the reciprocal relationship of the subject with his environment, and of the articulations and disarticulations of the subject with this object. From these interactions arise successive cognitive constructions capable of producing new structures in a continuous and incessant process.
Therefore, the use of NICTs in education should aim to mediate the construction of the students’ conceptualization process, seeking the promotion of learning and developing important skills to participate in the knowledge society and not simply facilitating their teaching and learning process. learning. For NICTs to promote the expected changes in the educational process, they should be used not as teaching or learning machines, but as a pedagogical tool to create an interactive environment that provides the learner with a problem situation to investigate, and refine their initial ideas, thus building their own knowledge.
The use of NICTs in education will not guarantee the learning of the students, since they are teaching instruments that can and should be at the service of the process of construction and appropriation of the learners’ knowledge. The introduction of these resources in education must be accompanied by a solid training of teachers so that they can use them in a responsible way and with true pedagogical potentialities, not being used as fun machines and pleasant to pass the time.
- Computer science as an object of study
We must propose IT as an object of study and not just as a teaching-learning resource. This study should be informed by research in the area investigating:
The question of the use of information technology in education, based on experience and practices not developed by the a priori defense that this use is to improve the teaching-learning process and meaningful learning;
Culture of informatics and its relations with school culture and other cultural universes.
It is necessary to ask: to what extent does the use, for example, of the Internet favor the construction of an intercultural perspective in the school or the strengthening of monocultural positions or prejudices in relation to the culture of the different ones, or to what extent does the use of the internet a different culture, in the intertwining of cultures in school.
It is also necessary to study, in the processes of distance education mediated by the computer:
The relationship of time flexibility to teaching-learning activities with questions of intensification of teaching work;
The new characteristics of the teacher’s role and evaluation processes.
Finally, we must deal with the technological resources of the knowledge society in a critical way, which involves the understanding that:
These resources are inscribed in capitalist relations of production, in a context of redefinition of the theory of human capital, which is reconceptualized in the new organizations with intellectual capital;
These resources are articulated with current issues of structural unemployment and underemployment;
No entanto, o conhecimento o conhecimento e o desenvolvimento tecnológico são forças materiais também na concretização de valores que se relacionam com os interesses dos excluídos, contradizendo os valores próprios da acumulação capitalista;
Em todo contexto discutido, a educação assume papel crucial na socialização e construção do conhecimento e da cultura, podendo ultrapassar o caráter instrumental do conhecimento, tendo em vista a formação de cidadãos comprometidos com: a igualdade e a inclusão sociais; a tolerânciae o diálogo intercultural.
As transformações nas formas de comunicação e de intercâmbio de conhecimentos, desencadeadas pelo uso generalizado das tecnologias digitais nos distintos âmbitos da sociedade contemporânea, demandam uma reformulação das relações de ensino e aprendizagem, tanto no que diz respeito ao que é feito nas escolas, quanto a como é feito. Precisamos então começar a pensar no que realmente pode ser feito a partir da utilização dessas novas tecnologias, particularmente da Internet, no processo educativo. Para isso, é necessário compreender quais são suas especificidades técnicas e seu potencial pedagógico.
As Novas Tecnologias e Educação visa discutir as possibilidades que o ciberespaço oferece para a criação de novos padrões de aquisição e construção dos conhecimentos, ao permitir o uso integrado e interativo de diversas mídias, a exploração hipertextual de um volume enorme de informações e a comunicação a distancia.