PEDAGOGICAL WORKSHEETS FOR EMERGENCY REMOTE EDUCATION IN MULTIGRADE SCHOOLS
Main Article Content
Abstract
During the emergency remote education caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ecuadorian Ministry of Education organized educational activities around pedagogical worksheets that included prioritized elements of the national curriculum. The objective is to analyse how the cards were put into action in the educational institutions, reviewing what kind of practices emerged around them. The praxeological method and the Actor-Network Theory toolbox are used based on ethnographic material collected in multigrade schools in the Gualaceo canton, in the Azuay province. The findings describe the socio-technical networks formed by the introduction of pedagogical worksheets, as well as how they evolved into a powerful token that orders educational processes. It is concluded that the power of translation of the network generated around the pedagogical worksheets made them referents for the control of the learning process and the teaching action from the administrative instances, reinforcing the technocratic role of the teachers and atomizing the didactic process in terms of activities that are little articulated and meaningful.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Responsibility of the authors:
The authors are responsible for the ideas and data collected in the manuscripts. They are additionally accountable for the fidelity of the information, the correction of the citations, the right to publish any material included in the text, and the presentation of the manuscript in the format required by the Journal (WORD template). A manuscript forwarded to CHAKIÑAN must not have been published before, nor must it have been submitted to another means of publication.
Copyright:
Published articles do not necessarily compromise the viewpoint of the CHAKIÑAN JOURNAL. The Journal is aligned to the policy of the licence de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No comercial 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC 4.0). Each author retains the right to the paper published in the Chakiñan journal.
Privacy statement
The personal data and email addresses entered in this magazine will be used exclusively for the purposes stated by the publication and will not be available for any other purpose or person.
How to Cite
Share
References
Almén, L. y Bagga-Gupta, S. (2019). Inscriptions and Digitalization Initiatives Across Time in the Nation-State of Sweden: The Relevance of Shifts and Continuities in Policy Accounts for Teachers’ Work. En S. Bagga-Gupta, G. Messina Dahlberg y Y. Lindberg (eds.), Virtual Sites as Learning Spaces: Critical Issues on Languaging Research in Changing Eduscapes (pp. 27-62). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26929-6_2
Appova, A., Lee, H. J. & Bucci, T. (2022). Technology in the Classroom: Banking Education or Opportunities to Learn? Theory Into Practice, 61(3), 254-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2096372
Byrd, D. (2019). Uncovering Hegemony in Higher Education: A Critical Appraisal of the Use of “Institutional Habitus” in Empirical Scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 89(2),171-210. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318812915
Callon, M. (1984). Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The Sociological Review, 32(1_suppl), 196-233. doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1984.tb00113.x
Edwards, R. (2012). Translating the Prescribed into the Enacted Curriculum. En T. Fenwick y R. Edwards (eds.), Researching Education Through Actor-Network Theory (pp. 23-39). Nueva Jersey, Estados Unidos: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hyysalo, S., Jensen, T. E. & Oudshoorn, N. (2016). Introduction to the New Production of Users. En S. Hyysalo, T. E. Jensen y N. Oudshoorn. The New Production of Users. Changing Innovation Collectives and Involvement Strategies (pp. 1-41). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315648088-1
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. y Nixon, R. (2014). Doing Critical Participatory Action Research: The ‘Planner’ Part. En S. Kemmis, R. McTaggart y R. Nixon (eds.), The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research (pp. 85-114). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2_5
Larrión, J. (2019). Teoría del Actor-Red. Síntesis y evaluación de la deriva postsocial de Bruno Latour. RES. Revista Española de Sociología, 28(2), 323-341. https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/res/article/view/71437
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford, Reino Unido: Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com.ec/books?id=AbQSDAAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Reassembling%20the%20Social%3A%20An%20Introduction%20to%20Actor-Network-Theory&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203481141
Law, J. (2008). Actor Network Theory and Material Semiotics. En B. S. Turner. The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory (pp. 141-158). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444304992.ch7
Law, J. y Singleton, V. (2005). Object Lessons. Organization, 12(3), 331-355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508405051270
Matthews, A. (2021). Blurring boundaries between humans and technology: Postdigital, postphenomenology and actor-network theory in qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13(1), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2020.1836508
Mifsud, D. (2020). A Critical Review of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and Its Use in Education Research. En E. C. Idemudia (ed.), Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Dynamics in the Digital Era (pp. 135-56). http://10.4018/978-1-5225-8933-4.ch007
Ministerio de Educación (2020a). Acuerdo nro. MINEDUC-MINEDUC-2020-00044-A. https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2020/09/MINEDUC-MINEDUC-2020-00044-A.pdf
Ministerio de Educación. (2020b). Aprendiendo desde casa. Guía para estudiantes y sus familias o acompañantes de Educación General Básica ordinaria y extraordinaria (NAP) Régimen Sierra-Amazonía. https://recursos2.educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Gui%CC%81a_EGB_ordinaria_extraordinaria_SIERRA_NAP.pdf
Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham, Estados Unidos: Duke University Press.
Nespor, J. (2004). Educational scale-making. Pedagogy, Culture y Society, 12(3), 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360400200205
Ribosa, J. (2020). El docente socioconstructivista: un héroe sin capa. Educar, 56(1), 77-90. http://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.1072
Royle, K. (2021). What’s Good What’s Bad? Conceptualising Teaching and Learning Methods as Technologies Using Actor Network Theory in the Context of Palestinian Higher Education. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(1), 120-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00138-z
Schatzki, T. (2018). On Practice Theory, or What’s Practices Got to Do (Got to Do) with It? En C. Edwards-Groves, P. Grootenboer y J. Wilkinson (Eds.), Education in an Era of Schooling: Critical perspectives of Educational Practice and Action Research. A Festschrift for Stephen Kemmis (pp. 151-165). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2053-8_11
Schmidt, R. (2016). The methodological challenges of practising praxeology. En G. Spaargaren, D. Weenink y M. Lamers (eds.), Practice Theory and Research (pp. 43-59). https://doi.org/10.4324/978131565690
Silseth, K., Hontvedt, M. & Mäkitalo, Å. (2022). Teachers’ enactment of policy in classrooms: Making students accountable through inscriptions from the curriculum in classroom interactions. European Journal of Psychology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00610-3
Stalph, F. (2019). Hybrids, materiality, and black boxes: Concepts of actor-network theory in data journalism research. Sociology Compass, 13(11), e12738. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12738
Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional Ecology, `Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001