Ensino de História: entre análises e práticas em movimento

• Ano de defesa: 2015
• Autor(a) principal: Souza, Igor Silva de
• Orientador(a): Dias, Rosimeri de Oliveira
• Banca de defesa: Aguiar, Kátia Faria de , Ribetto, Anelice Astrid
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação - Processos Formativos e Desigualdades Sociais
• Departamento: Centro de Educação e Humanidades::Faculdade de Formação de Professores
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: Ensino de História; Cartografia; formação inventiva
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: History teaching; Cartography; inventive training
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::EDUCACAO
• Link de acesso: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/9941

The focus of this research is to discuss the teaching of history from the perspective of the invention. Therefore, we use the mapping method (PASSOS; KASTRUP; ESCÓSSIA, 2009) and intervention research (AGUIAR; ROCHA, 2007; LOURAU, 1993; PAULON, 2005). The idea is to put in analysis methods involving the teaching of history, using maps and forged lines through eight scenes created in the exercise of the teaching profession. To rely upon important intercessors in the composition of this work, Foucault (2010) , Rancière (2014; 2004) and Dias (2011, 2012), among others, to corroborate in moving thinking which involve pertinenet naturalizations regarding the mapped plan of this dissertation. There are issues that move these pages: how can an immanent writing may contain practices involving a teaching history? In what sense can an educational act be enrolled in a utilitarian and enabling a priori? What are the existing intersections between teaching History and inventive training? What are the conversations that the scenes set between the text and the conceptions guided by invention? The ignorant schoolmaster is an inventive master? The actual concept can emerge from another notion that is not binary or dichotomous? In that sense the complexity of a plan, in its countless forces and crossings, can assist in the analysis of practices concerning the historical approach in the classroom? The concern here is not to answer these questions objectively; it is related to forcing thought to think. But think what? Maybe a possible other, a path perhaps not very usual for the conjecture surrounding the teaching of history. However, it noted that there is here is a reference manual to help teachers, far from it, but the narrative of experiences forged between the school and this research. Something that is likely to explain a new visual and experiential field of teaching history