Casos investigativos e estratégias enunciativas: um diálogo entre a argumentação e a aprendizagem química de estudantes em nível superior

Abstract

The argumentation in Science Teaching provides the debate, the presentation of ideas and points of view, as well as the possibility for students to produce statements of justification and causeeffect relationships. In this perspective, the objective of this work is to identify and emphasize the types of interactions and specific verbal actions in the statements of the students that benefited the argumentation and the discussion about the concepts of nucleophilic elimination and substitution reactions through a classroom activity, planned from an investigative case on the side of the intimate debate. The intimate debate is known as a structured debate that deals with controversial issues, which favors the network of interaction among students during their realization. This research is of the qualitative type and the production of data was done through the recording of the simulated jury in which participated six students enrolled in the discipline of Reactivity of Organic Compounds of the Federal University of Tocantins - Campus de Gurupi. All the recording was transcribed in its entirety and for the analysis a model was developed to correlate which verbal actions and discursive interactions favor the discursiveness on the subject. The results point to different levels of questionability due to the different types of questioning given and the levels of cognitive ability achieved by the students, showing by the time the conceptual appropriation during the activity. It was observed that questions that require a greater level of reflection and organization of concepts favor the argumentation and the construction of statements that evidence the student’s conceptual domain on the subject.