Challenges of qualitative constructivist research in university classrooms
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18050/esp.2014.v8i1.2722Keywords:
Challenges, Qualitative Research, Transformation, Academic Training, Design ThinkingAbstract
The transformations of the socio-legal sciences in the countries of Central America and Latin America in the last three or four decades have implied technological and generational dimensions and have occurred within the framework of greater incidences of openly productivist science and technology policies and positioning of the managerial model of the university-company. This research addresses constructivist epistemology as the guiding base of the research methodology based on design thinking, understanding that the human being is an active constructor of his reality in interaction with others; This position is complemented with related tools and instruments according to the contributions of Piaget, Vygotski and Ausubel, thus avoiding procrastination, that is, the postponement or postponement or habit of delaying activities or situations that must be addressed, replacing them with other more irrelevant situations, either out of fear. or laziness to face them; the reprocessing of poorly executed activities or, in the worst case, the abandonment of the effort already started, together with adequate planning that must be sufficient, in such a way that key activities are not neglected, that they are not underestimated the necessary resources (time, money and people) are not underestimated, that there are tools that allow the achievement of the objective, in affront to the phenomenon informally called Everything Less investigation (All But Dissertation or ABD). Ultimately, the application of the constructivist approach incorporates the exercise of creative processes strongly linked to personal motivation and the willingness to overcome obstacles, citing to say the least that of “How to do a thesis and not grow old trying”.
References
Araya, V., Alfaro, M., & Andonegui, M. (2007). Constructivismo: Orígenes y perspectivas. Laurus, 13(24),76-92. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=76111485004
Binimelis-Espinoza, H., & Roldán Tonioni, A. (2017). Sociedad, epistemología y metodología en Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Convergencia, 24(75), 215-235. http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/conver/v24n75/1405-1435-conver-24-75-00215.pdf
Casanova, P. G. (2004). Las nuevas ciencias y las humanidades: de la academia a la política (Vol. 37). Anthropos Editorial.
Cassuto, L. (2013). Doctor, desgaste, cuanto es demasiado. The Chronicle of higher education Berkeley.
Castillo, S. (2006). Formación constructivista. McGraw-Hill.
Coleman, J. (1990). La epistemología de la investigación social en América latina. Desarrollos en el siglo XXI.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of research in personality, 19(2), 109-134.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182.
Delanty, G. (2017). Challenging Knowledge: The University in the Knowledge Society. Convergencia, 24(75), 215-235.
Dunne, L., & Martin. (2006). Soñar la realidad: el constructivismo de Heinz von Foerster. Paidós.
Elola, N & Toransos, L. (2000). Evaluación educativa: una aproximación conceptual. Paidós.
Goff, W., & Getenet, S. (2017). Design-based research in doctoral studies: Adding a new dimension to doctoral research. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 107-121. https://doi.org/10.28945/3761
González, D. (2008). Psicología de la motivación. Editorial Ciencias Médicas
Hernández, R., Fernández, C., y Batista, P. (2016). Metodología de la Investigación. Interamericana editores.
Kaplan, M. (2017). Estado y globalización. Sistema: Revista de ciencias sociales, (164), 13-42
Maturana, H (1997) El pensamiento filosófico. La autopoiesis como fundamento de la ciencia The philosophical Thinking, 31 Ed. Santiago de Chile.
Portocarrero, C. & Ágreda. (2015). Evaluar es reflexionar. Narcea.
Schuck, P. (1992). Complejidad legal, causas, consecuencias y curas. Duke Law Journal.
Stavenhagen, R. (2016). El desarrollo a propósito del pensamiento. Estudios del Desarrollo Social, 4(3).
Stuart, H. (2010). Los enfoques didácticos. El constructivismo en el aula.
Ulibarri, N., Cravens, A. E., Cornelius, M., Royalty, A., & Nabergoj, A. S. (2014). Research as design: Developing creative confidence in doctoral students through design thinking. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 9, 249-270. https://doi.org/10.28945/2062
Universia (2008). Síndrome Todo Menos Tesis (TMT). http://www.spentamexico.org/v10-n2/A14.10(2)246-259.pdf
Universidad San Buenaventura. (2015). Las corrientes constructivistas y los modelos autoestructurantes. NN Los modelos pedagógicos, 143-185.
Wallerstein, I. M. (2004). Los dilemas del espacio abierto: el futuro del FSM. International Social Science Journal (ISSJ), (182), 13.
Zafra-Tanaka, J. H., & Castillo, S. (2016, April). Barreras percibidas por los estudiantes para la titulación por tesis, Lima, Perú. In Anales de la Facultad de Medicina (Vol. 77, No. 2). UNMSM. Facultad de Medicina. http://www.scielo.org.pe/scielo.php?pid=S1025-55832016000200008&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
Zapata, M. (2010). Evaluación de competencias en entornos virtuales de aprendizaje y docencia universitaria. Revista de educación a distancia (RED), (1), 2-34. https://revistas.um.es/red/article/download/243311/184661
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Gerardo Francisco Ludeña González, Violeta María De Piérola García
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.