Enseñanza de la escritura en Chile : prácticas didácticas, adaptaciones pedagógicas y conocimientos de las y los profesores de 4º a 6º básico
No hay miniatura disponible
Archivos
Fecha
2022
Autores
Profesor/a Guía
Facultad/escuela
Idioma
es
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad Andrés Bello
Nombre de Curso
Licencia CC
Licencia CC
Resumen
El proyecto doctoral se enfoca en el análisis de las prácticas basadas en evidencias y las
adaptaciones para la enseñanza de la escritura de docentes de cuarto a sexto grado de Educación
Básica en Chile y la identificación los factores individuales relacionados a la implementación de
dichas prácticas. Para ello, se asume una mirada cognitiva y sociocultural tanto del desarrollo de
los procesos de escritura como de su enseñanza en la Educación Básica (Bazerman et al., 2017;
Berninger & Chanquoy, 2012; Graham et al., 2013; Graham et al., 2019; Rowe, 2009). La
investigación adopta un diseño explicativo secuencial de métodos mixtos y está compuesta por dos
estudios consecutivos.
El primer estudio se enfocó en estudiar las prácticas basadas en evidencias y adaptaciones
didácticas que realizan las y los docentes para enseñar escritura. Así como, el tiempo que dedican
a su enseñanza, la percepción de preparación para enseñar escritura y la autoeficacia para hacerlo.
Adicionalmente, analizamos cómo la formación docente, la autoeficacia y los años enseñando
pueden predecir la frecuencia de implementación de prácticas didácticas y adaptaciones para
enseñar escritura. Para ello, se encuestaron 254 docentes de cuarto a sexto grado que enseñan
Lenguaje y Comunicación en establecimientos municipales y subvencionados de 15 regiones del
país. Los principales resultados del Estudio 1 muestran que las y los docentes de cuarto a sexto
grado utilizaban el 60% de las prácticas basadas en evidencia semanalmente; que asignaban el
95% de las tareas de escritura al menos una vez al mes; y que las adaptaciones para escritores con
dificultades eran realizadas una vez a la semana o más seguido. Adicionalmente, las y los docentes
se mostraron más positivos sobre su formación docente y autoeficacia para enseñar escritura que
las y los profesores de las mayoría de los estudios realizados en otros países (Graham, 2019).
El segundo estudio se enfocó en profundizar los factores asociados a las y los docentes para
enseñar escritura. Para ello, se analizó el papel que tienen la formación, los conocimientos
pedagógico-disciplinares y los años de experiencia enseñando, como facilitadores u obstáculos
para la implementación de prácticas didácticas para enseñar escritura. Los datos de este estudio
fueron recopilados por medio entrevistas semiestructuradas realizadas a 38 docentes de cuarto a
sexto Básico de 11 regiones de Chile. Entre los principales resultados podemos mencionar que la
mayoría de las y los docentes (89%) percibieron que su formación en pregrado es una barrera para
la enseñanza de la escritura y valoraron otras maneras de formación, como la formación en servicio
o la experiencia enseñando. Del mismo modo, identificaron que cinco tipos conocimientos
pedagógico-disciplinares pueden actuar como facilitadores o barreras. Esto incluye el
conocimiento de estrategias para diferenciar la escritura, el conocimiento para evaluar la
escritura, el conocimiento para facilitar el proceso de escritura, el conocimiento sobre distintos
géneros textuales y, el conocimiento de diferentes estrategias pedagógicas. Los docentes indicaron
que la falta de conocimientos en cada una de estas áreas puede ser una barrera para enseñar
escritura en sus aulas y mientras que su manejo sirvió como un facilitador para sus prácticas
didácticas.
En términos globales, y a partir de los resultados del Estudio 1 podemos decir que las y los
docentes aplican una serie de prácticas basadas en evidencias y adaptaciones pedagógicas para
enseñar escritura. Del mismo modo, aquellos que reportaron estar mejor preparados para la
enseñanza de la escritura y tienen más confianza en su capacidad de enseñar escritura, aplicaron
una variedad de prácticas basadas en evidencia, tareas de escritura e implementaron una serie de
adaptaciones pedagógicas para escritores con dificultades. Sin embargo, cuando en el Estudio 2 se
les preguntó directamente acerca de su formación y conocimientos pedagógico-disciplinares para enseñar escritura éstos en su mayoría manifestaron comentarios críticos acerca de su preparación
en pregrado, pues consideran que no es suficiente para enseñar escritura, valorando otros espacios
formativos, como la preparación en ejercicio, la autoformación y/o los años de experiencia
enseñando escritura. Por último, indistintamente de las instancias formativas en las y los docentes
aprendieron a enseñar a escribir, destacan que el conocimiento pedagógico-disciplinar es un
elemento importante para proveer programas de enseñanza sólidos y sistemáticos. Con base en
estos resultados se presentan las discusiones, contribuciones, limitaciones y recomendaciones para
futuros estudios en el área.
En conclusión, los conocimientos generados mediante esta investigación doctoral
contribuyen al avance de los estudios en el área de la enseñanza y aprendizaje de la escritura que
se llevan a cabo en el actual currículum nacional, aportando información actualizada sobre cuáles
son las prácticas didácticas y adaptaciones que las y los docentes aplican con mayor frecuencia,
así como los conocimientos pedagógico-disciplinares que las y los docentes destacan como
necesarios para la enseñanza de la escritura.. De este modo, se espera que los resultados obtenidos,
junto con las discusiones y conclusiones del proyecto sean un aporte para orientar los esfuerzos y
recursos destinados a mejorar la enseñanza de la escritura, ya sea por medio de políticas públicas
o programas de formación continua para docentes de Educación Básica, teniendo en la mira que
estos adquieran los conocimientos pedagógico-disciplinares necesarios para garantizar que sus
alumnas y alumnos se desarrollen como escritores competentes. Esto último es particularmente
relevante a la luz de los nuevos Estándares Pedagógicos y Disciplinares publicados recientemente
(Ministerio de Educación-CPEIP, 2021a, 2021b) y del Sistema de Desarrollo Profesional Docente.
The doctoral project focuses on the analysis of evidence-based practices and adaptations for the teaching of writing by teachers of fourth to sixth grade of elementary education in Chile and the identification of individual factors related to the implementation of these practices. For this purpose, a cognitive and sociocultural view of both the development of writing processes and their teaching in Basic Education is assumed (Bazerman et al., 2017; Berninger & Chanquoy, 2012; Graham et al., 2013; Graham et al., 2019; Rowe, 2009). The research adopts a sequential mixed methods explanatory design and is composed of two consecutive studies. The first study focused on studying the evidence-based practices and didactic adaptations that teachers make to teach writing. As well as, the time they dedicate to their teaching, the perception of preparation to teach writing and the self-efficacy to do so. In addition, we analyzed how teacher training, self-efficacy and years teaching can predict the frequency of implementation of didactic practices and adaptations to teach writing. For this purpose, 254 teachers from fourth to sixth grade who teach Language and Communication in municipal and subsidized schools in 15 regions of the country were surveyed. The main results of Study 1 show that fourth to sixth grade teachers used 60% of the evidence-based practices on a weekly basis; that they assigned 95% of the writing tasks at least once a month; and that adaptations for writers with difficulties were carried out once a week or more often. Additionally, teachers were more positive about their teacher training and self-efficacy for teaching writing than teachers in most studies conducted in other countries (Graham, 2019). The second study focused on deepening the factors associated with teachers to teach writing. To this end, the role of training, pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge, and years of teaching experience as facilitators or obstacles to the implementation of didactic practices for teaching writing was analyzed. The data for this study were collected through semi-structured interviews with 38 teachers from fourth to sixth grade in 11 regions of Chile. Among the main results we can mention that most of the teachers (89%) perceived their undergraduate training as a barrier to teaching writing and valued other forms of training, such as in-service training or teaching experience. Similarly, they identified that five types of pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge can act as facilitators or barriers. This includes knowledge of strategies to differentiate writing, knowledge to assess writing, knowledge to facilitate the writing process, knowledge about different textual genres, and knowledge of different pedagogical strategies. Teachers indicated that the lack of knowledge in each of these areas can be a barrier to teaching writing in their classrooms and that their management served as a facilitator for their didactic practices. In global terms, and from the results of Study 1, we can say that teachers apply a number of evidence-based practices and pedagogical adaptations to teach writing. Similarly, those who reported being better prepared for teaching writing and more confident in their ability to teach writing applied a variety of evidence-based practices, writing tasks, and implemented a number of pedagogical adaptations for struggling writers. However, when in Study 2 they were asked directly about their pedagogical-disciplinary training and knowledge to teach writing, most of them expressed critical comments about their undergraduate preparation, since they consider that it is not enough to teach writing, valuing other formative spaces, such as in-service training, selftraining and/or years of experience teaching writing. Finally, regardless of the formative instances in which the teachers learned to teach writing, they emphasize that pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge is an important element to provide solid and systematic teaching programs. Based on these results, discussions, contributions, limitations, and recommendations for future studies in the area are presented. In conclusion, the knowledge generated through this doctoral research contributes to the advancement of studies in the area of teaching and learning of writing that are carried out in the current national curriculum, providing updated information on which didactic practices and adaptations are most frequently applied by teachers, as well as the pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge that teachers highlight as necessary for the teaching of writing. Thus, it is hoped that the results obtained, together with the discussions and conclusions of the project, will contribute to guide efforts and resources aimed at improving the teaching of writing, whether through public policies or continuing education programs for elementary school teachers, so that they acquire the necessary pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge to ensure that their students develop as competent writers. The latter is particularly relevant considering the new Pedagogical and Disciplinary Standards recently published (Ministerio de Educación-CPEIP, 2021a, 2021b) and the Teacher Professional Development System (Sistema de Desarrollo Profesional Docente).
The doctoral project focuses on the analysis of evidence-based practices and adaptations for the teaching of writing by teachers of fourth to sixth grade of elementary education in Chile and the identification of individual factors related to the implementation of these practices. For this purpose, a cognitive and sociocultural view of both the development of writing processes and their teaching in Basic Education is assumed (Bazerman et al., 2017; Berninger & Chanquoy, 2012; Graham et al., 2013; Graham et al., 2019; Rowe, 2009). The research adopts a sequential mixed methods explanatory design and is composed of two consecutive studies. The first study focused on studying the evidence-based practices and didactic adaptations that teachers make to teach writing. As well as, the time they dedicate to their teaching, the perception of preparation to teach writing and the self-efficacy to do so. In addition, we analyzed how teacher training, self-efficacy and years teaching can predict the frequency of implementation of didactic practices and adaptations to teach writing. For this purpose, 254 teachers from fourth to sixth grade who teach Language and Communication in municipal and subsidized schools in 15 regions of the country were surveyed. The main results of Study 1 show that fourth to sixth grade teachers used 60% of the evidence-based practices on a weekly basis; that they assigned 95% of the writing tasks at least once a month; and that adaptations for writers with difficulties were carried out once a week or more often. Additionally, teachers were more positive about their teacher training and self-efficacy for teaching writing than teachers in most studies conducted in other countries (Graham, 2019). The second study focused on deepening the factors associated with teachers to teach writing. To this end, the role of training, pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge, and years of teaching experience as facilitators or obstacles to the implementation of didactic practices for teaching writing was analyzed. The data for this study were collected through semi-structured interviews with 38 teachers from fourth to sixth grade in 11 regions of Chile. Among the main results we can mention that most of the teachers (89%) perceived their undergraduate training as a barrier to teaching writing and valued other forms of training, such as in-service training or teaching experience. Similarly, they identified that five types of pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge can act as facilitators or barriers. This includes knowledge of strategies to differentiate writing, knowledge to assess writing, knowledge to facilitate the writing process, knowledge about different textual genres, and knowledge of different pedagogical strategies. Teachers indicated that the lack of knowledge in each of these areas can be a barrier to teaching writing in their classrooms and that their management served as a facilitator for their didactic practices. In global terms, and from the results of Study 1, we can say that teachers apply a number of evidence-based practices and pedagogical adaptations to teach writing. Similarly, those who reported being better prepared for teaching writing and more confident in their ability to teach writing applied a variety of evidence-based practices, writing tasks, and implemented a number of pedagogical adaptations for struggling writers. However, when in Study 2 they were asked directly about their pedagogical-disciplinary training and knowledge to teach writing, most of them expressed critical comments about their undergraduate preparation, since they consider that it is not enough to teach writing, valuing other formative spaces, such as in-service training, selftraining and/or years of experience teaching writing. Finally, regardless of the formative instances in which the teachers learned to teach writing, they emphasize that pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge is an important element to provide solid and systematic teaching programs. Based on these results, discussions, contributions, limitations, and recommendations for future studies in the area are presented. In conclusion, the knowledge generated through this doctoral research contributes to the advancement of studies in the area of teaching and learning of writing that are carried out in the current national curriculum, providing updated information on which didactic practices and adaptations are most frequently applied by teachers, as well as the pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge that teachers highlight as necessary for the teaching of writing. Thus, it is hoped that the results obtained, together with the discussions and conclusions of the project, will contribute to guide efforts and resources aimed at improving the teaching of writing, whether through public policies or continuing education programs for elementary school teachers, so that they acquire the necessary pedagogical-disciplinary knowledge to ensure that their students develop as competent writers. The latter is particularly relevant considering the new Pedagogical and Disciplinary Standards recently published (Ministerio de Educación-CPEIP, 2021a, 2021b) and the Teacher Professional Development System (Sistema de Desarrollo Profesional Docente).
Notas
Tesis (Doctor en Educación y Sociedad)
Incluye tres papers en inglés.
Incluye tres papers en inglés.
Palabras clave
Escritura, Enseñanza Básica, Metodología, Investigaciones, Chile