Estado do conhecimento sobre formação de profissionais da educação: teses e dissertações do período 2003-2010

Authors

  • Iria Brzezinski PUC Goiás/UnB

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34624/id.v5i2.4368

Keywords:

Qualitative research, Policies of education, Formation of education professionals, State of knowledge

Abstract

The object of this research is the formation of education professionals. It sets out to draw up the state of knowledge, through a qualitative investigation of a bibliographical nature combined with an analysis of content. The empirical field consists of 774 studies in the form of dissertations and theses defended in Post-Graduate Education Programs in Brazil, accredited by Fundação de Capacitação de Pessoal de Ensino Superior. The period covered is from 2003 to 2010. These studies form a purposive sample. After reading all and making of extended abstracts and preparing an analytical matrix analysis, seven categories emerged, namely: a) Conceptions of Teaching and Teacher Formation; b) Policies and Proposals for Teacher Formation; c) Initial Formation; d) Ongoing Formation; e) Teaching Work; f) Teaching Identity and Professionalization; h) Literature Review. The results and conclusions indicate that in category a) there are 34 studies; in b) 97; in c) 150; in d) 103; in e) 215; in f) 163; and in g) 11. They also indicate that around 80% of the studies show the authors’ commitment to research, a solidly-based theoretical background and a well-defined research object and research problem. Approximately 15% of authors have difficulty in clearly describing the research method, the mode of inquiry, procedures and the tools for data collection used in their theses and dissertations and 5% do not even make reference to the type of research.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Published

2013-04-30

Issue

Section

Tecnologias da informação em educação

How to Cite

Estado do conhecimento sobre formação de profissionais da educação: teses e dissertações do período 2003-2010. (2013). Indagatio Didactica, 5(2), 335-354. https://doi.org/10.34624/id.v5i2.4368