Interações discursivas durante o trabalho em pequenos grupos: um estudo de caso em uma escola brasileira
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-4634202652294605porPalabras clave:
Trabalho em grupo, Interação discursiva, Diálogo de sala de aula, Análise quantitativaResumen
Diversas pesquisas têm demonstrado que o trabalho em pequenos grupos desempenha um papel importante na aprendizagem, promovendo o desenvolvimento cognitivo e a compreensão conceitual. No entanto, esses resultados positivos são alcançados principalmente quando a conversa em grupo é produtiva. Com o objetivo de preencher uma lacuna na literatura acadêmica sobre o contexto brasileiro, este artigo explora as interações discursivas que emergem durante o trabalho em pequenos grupos de alunos. Os dados foram coletados em três turmas do 5º ano de uma escola de Minas Gerais. O estudo analisa quantitativamente 42 episódios de diálogo em grupo, caracterizando o contexto do diálogo (conteúdo, instrução e fora do tema) e as funções discursivas das falas (convite, convite dialógico, contribuição, contribuição dialógica, acompanhamento e avaliação dialógica). O esquema de codificação foi desenvolvido especificamente com base em aspectos-chave da interação dialógica, conforme definidos na literatura. O estudo revela que os grupos dedicam aproximadamente metade do tempo à discussão do conteúdo da tarefa, e o restante às instruções e às interações digressivas. Quando os alunos se concentram no conteúdo, a maioria das falas corresponde a contribuições (24% dialógicas) e menos de um quinto corresponde a convites (8% dialógicos). O artigo também examina as variações na frequência dos códigos em diferentes tarefas e grupos. Apenas algumas diferenças foram consideradas estatisticamente significativas. O estudo conclui que os estudantes brasileiros geralmente não interagem por meio de interações dialógicas. Essa conclusão é discutida segundo três dimensões: entendimento compartilhado, conhecimento mínimo e gestão de divergências.
Descargas
Referencias
ALEXANDER, Robin. Culture and pedagogy: international comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001.
ALEXOPOULOU, Evinella; DRIVER, Rosalind. Small-group discussion in physics: peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 33, n. 10, p. 1099-1114, 1996.
ANDRIESSEN, Jerry E. B.; SCHWARZ, Baruch B.. Argumentative design. In: MULLER MIRZA, Nathalie; PERRET-CLERMONT, Anne-Nelly (org.). Argumentation and education. Boston: Springer, 2009. p. 145-174.
ASTERHAN, Christa S. C.; SCHWARZ, Baruch. Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog. Cognitive Science, v. 33, n. 3, p. 374-400, 2009.
ASTERHAN, Christa S. C.; SCHWARZ, Baruch. Argumentation for learning: well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist, v. 51, n. 2, p. 164-187, 2016.
BAINES, Ed; BLATCHFORD, Peter; KUTNICK, Peter. Promoting effective group work in the primary classroom: a handbook for teachers and practitioners. London: Routledge, 2009.
BARNES, Douglas. From communication to curriculum. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1976.
BENNETT, Judith et al.. Talking science: the research evidence on the use of small group discussions in science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, v. 32, n. 1, p. 69-95, 2010.
BLATCHFORD, Peter et al.. Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. International Journal of Educational Research, v. 39, n. 1-2, p. 153-172, 2003.
CHI, Michelene. Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, v. 1, n. 1, p. 73-105, 2009.
CHRISTIE, Donald et al.. Supporting group work in Scottish primary classrooms: improving the quality of collaborative dialogue. Cambridge Journal of Education, Cambridge, v. 39, n. 1, p. 141-156, 2009.
CORDEN, Roy. Literacy & learning through talk: strategies for the primary classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000.
DAWES, Lyn. Research report: Talk and learning in classroom science. International Journal of Science Education, v. 26, n. 6, p. 677-695, 2004.
DAWES, Lyn. Talking points: discussion activities in the primary classroom. London: Routledge, 2012.
FUENTES, Miquel Àngel. What do students talk about? The relevance of content-focused and non-content-focused talk types within peer-interaction tasks. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, v. 19, p. 29, 2013.
GALTON, Maurice; HARGREAVES, Linda; PELL, Tony. Group work and whole-class teaching with 11- to 14-year-olds compared. Cambridge Journal of Education, Cambridge, v. 39, n. 1, p. 119, 2009.
GARCIA-MILA, Merce et al.. The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education, v. 97, n. 4, p. 497-523, 2013.
GRAU, Valeska; WHITEBREAD, David. Self and social regulation of learning during collaborative activities in the classroom: the interplay of individual and group cognition. Learning and Instruction, v. 22, n. 6, p. 401-412, 2012.
HARDMAN, Jan. Developing and supporting implementation of a dialogic pedagogy in primary schools in England. Teaching and Teacher Education, v. 86, e102908, 2019.
HENNESSY, Sara et al.. Developing a coding scheme for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, v. 9, p. 16-44, 2016.
HOWE, Christine. Collaborative group work in middle childhood. Human Development, v. 52, n. 4, p. 215-239, 2009.
HOWE, Christine. Optimizing small group discourse in classrooms: effective practices and theoretical constraints. International Journal of Educational Research, v. 63, p. 107-115, 2014.
HOWE, Christine. Peer dialogue and cognitive development. A two-way relationship?. In: LITTLETON, Karen; HOWE, Christine (org.). Educational dialogues: understanding and promoting productive interaction. London: Routledge, 2010a. p. 32-47.
HOWE, Christine. Peer groups and children's development. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010b.
HOWE, Christine; MCWILLIAM, Donna. Peer Argument in educational settings variations due to socioeconomic status, gender, and activity context. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, v. 20, n. 1-2, p. 61-80, 2001.
HOWE, Christine; MCWILLIAM, Donna; CROSS, Gillian. Chance favours only the prepared mind: Incubation and the delayed effects of peer collaboration. British Journal of Psychology, v. 96, p. 67-93, 2005.
HOWE, Christine; MERCER, Neil. Children's social development, peer interaction and classroom learning. Primary Review Research Survey 2/1b, Cambridge, 2007. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://cprtrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/research-survey-2-1b.pdf Acesso em: 11 mar. 2026.
» https://cprtrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/research-survey-2-1b.pdf
HOWE, Christine; TOLMIE, Andy. Group work in primary school science: discussion, consensus and guidance from experts. International Journal of Educational Research, v. 39, n. 1-2, p. 51-72, 2003.
HOWE, Christine et al.. Group work in elementary science: towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, v. 17, n. 5, p. 549-563, 2007.
HOWE, Christine et al.. Teacher-student dialogue during classroom teaching: does it really impact on student outcomes?. Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 28, n. 4-5, p. 462-512, 2019.
KERSHNER, Ruth et al.. Teachers as 'natural experimenters': using T-SEDA to develop classroom dialogue. In: HARGREAVES, Eleanore; ROLLS, Luke (org.). Reimagining professional development in schools. London: Routledge, 2020. p. 102-122.
KUTNICK, Peter; COLWELL, Jennifer. Dialogue enhancement in classrooms: towards a relational approach for group working. In: LITTLETON, Karen; HOWE, Christine (org.). Educational dialogues: understanding and promoting productive interaction. London: Routledge, 2010. p. 192-215.
KUTNICK, Peter et al.. The effects of pupil grouping: literature review. Nottingham: DfES, 2005.
LAGO, Leonardo. Diálogo de sala de aula: teoria e prática do ensino dialógico. São Paulo: LF, 2024.
LAGO, Leonardo. Discursive interactions in a Brazilian primary school: an exploratory case study. 2021. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) - Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/334555 Acesso em: 11 mar. 2026.
» https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/334555
LAGO, Leonardo; WINTERBOTTOM, Mark. Promoting discursive interactions in science lessons: conceptual learning and classroom talk culture. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, v. 23, p. 3389-3415, 2025.
LARRAIN, Antonia et al.. Counter-arguing during curriculum-supported peer interaction facilitates middle-school students' science content knowledge. Cognition and Instruction, v. 37, n. 4, p. 453-482, 2019.
LIGHT, Paul; LITTLETON, Karen. Cognitive approaches to group work. In: FAULKNER, Dorothy; LITTLETON, Karen; WOODHEAD, Martin (org.). Learning relationships in the classroom. London: Routledge, 1998. p. 171-188.
LUXFORD, Heather; SMART, Lizzie. Learning through talk: developing learning dialogues in the primary classroom. Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.
MERCER, Neil. The educational value of 'dialogic talk' in whole-class dialogue. New perspectives on spoken English in the classroom: discussion paper. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 2003.
MERCER, Neil. The guided construction of knowledge: talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1995.
MERCER, Neil. The quality of talk in children's collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, v. 6, n. 4, p. 359-377, 1996.
MERCER, Neil. Words and minds: how we use language to think together. London: Routledge, 2000.
MERCER, Neil; LITTLETON, Karen. Dialogue and the development of children's thinking: a sociocultural approach. London: Routledge, 2007.
MICHAELS, Sarah; O'CONNOR, Catherine. Conceptualizing talk moves as tools: professional development approaches for academically productive discussion. In: RESNICK, Lauren; ASTERHAN, Christa S. C.; CLARKE, Sherice N. (org.). Socializing intelligence through talk and dialogue. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association, 2015. p. 333-347.
MOATE, Josephine. Reconceptualising the role of talk in CLIL. Journal of Applied Language Studies, v. 5, n. 2, p. 17-35, 2011.
MUHONEN, Heli et al.. Knowledge-building patterns in educational dialogue. International Journal of Educational Research, v. 81, p. 25-37, 2017.
O'CONNOR, Catherine; MICHAELS, Sarah. Shifting participant frameworks: orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In: HICKS, Deborah (org.). Discourse, learning, and schooling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. p. 63-103.
O'DONNELL, Angela M.; KING, Alison (org.). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum, 1999.
SCHWARZ, Baruch; BAKER, Michael. Dialogue, argumentation and education: history, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
SINCLAIR, John; COULTHARD, Richard Malcolm. Towards an analysis of discourse: the English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press, 1975.
SOHMER, Richard et al.. Guided construction of knowledge in the classroom: the troika of talk, tasks and tools. In: SCHWARZ, Baruch; DREYFUS, Tommy; HERSHKOWITZ, Rina (org.). Transformation of knowledge through classroom interaction. London: Routledge, 2009. p. 105-129.
SPRING. SPRinG Project: improving the effectiveness of pupil group-work in classrooms. Social Pedagogic Research into Group-Work, [s. l.], [s. d.]. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://www.spring-project.org.uk/ Acesso em: 11 mar. 2026.
» http://www.spring-project.org.uk/
VAN DER VEEN, Chiel et al.. Design, implementation, and evaluation of dialogic classroom talk in early childhood education. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, v. 29, p. 100515, 2021.
VRIKKI, Maria et al.. Dialogic practices in primary school classrooms. Language and Education, v. 33, n. 1, p. 85-100, 2018.
WEBB, Noreen. Student Interaction and Learning in Small Groups. Review of Educational Research, v. 52, n. 3, p. 421-445, 1982.
WEBB, Noreen; FARIVAR, Sydney. Developing productive group interaction in middle school mathematics. In: O'DONNELL, Angela; KING, Alison (org.). Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum, 1999. p. 117-150.
WEBB, Noreen; NEMER, Kariane Mari; ING, Marsha. Small-group reflections: parallels between teacher discourse and student behavior in peer-directed groups. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 15, n. 1, p. 63-119, 2006.
WEBB, Noreen et al. Engaging with others' mathematical ideas: Interrelationships among student participation, teachers' instructional practices, and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, v. 63, p. 79-93, 2014.
WEGERIF, Rupert. Orientations and ground rules: a framework for researching educational dialogue. In: KERSHNER, Ruth et al. (org.). Research methods for educational dialogue. London: Bloomsbury, 2020. p. 27-46.
WEGERIF, Rupert; DAWES, Lyn. Thinking and learning with ICT: raising achievement in primary classrooms. London: Routledge, 2004.
WEGERIF, Rupert; MERCER, Neil; DAWES, Lyn. From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development. Learning and Instruction, v. 9, n. 6, p. 493-516, 1999.
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Educação e Pesquisa
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Los conceptos emitidos en los artículos son de exclusiva responsabilidad de sus autores y no reflejan necesariamente la opinión de la redacción.
Está permitida la reproducción total o parcial de los trabajos, siempre y cuando se indique explícitamente la fuente.
