CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Mello, Maria Aparecida
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Educação em Revista
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641
Resumo: This paper is part of titular thesis whose objective was identify the theorical diferences between “brincadeira” and “play” concepts, the role of both in the children learning and implications in pedagogical practices in Early Childhood Education. The Cultural-Historical Theory grounded the theorical research and the genetic-method in the methodology from the bibliographic survey in books and scientific articles about “brincadeira” and “play” and russian authors only about “play”. The results showed that the “brincadeira” is the children from zero to three years old’ main activity, unlike that is adopted in the área for every chindren in the Childhood Education in Brazil. The concept “play” discussed in the Cultural-Historical Theory, generally translated by “brincadeira”, unlikely appertain to “role play”, which was evidenced as the children from three to six years old’ main activity. The importance of this results for the childrens’ learning confirm the centrality of the ludic aspect in the contents of chidhood education but distinguishing them by their specificities, in other words, the “brincadeira” as main activity children from 0 to 3 years old’ children needs to evolve to children from 3 to sis years old’ role play, once both are essencials for their development from involuntaries activity to voluntary ones. The implications for the pedagogical practices foccus in the teachers’needs to know about de role play and includ it in the children form 3 to 6 years old’activity, helpping them to develop autonomy, volitional activity and selfcontrol of their atitude.
id UFMG-5_d4fc55b72b73bdb08cb8089a9e0553db
oai_identifier_str oai:periodicos.ufmg.br:article/36641
network_acronym_str UFMG-5
network_name_str Educação em Revista
repository_id_str
spelling CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZILDIFERENCIAS CONCEPTUALES Y PEDAGÓGICAS ENTRE LOS TÉRMINOS "BRINCADEIRA" Y "JUEGO" EN BRASILDIFERENÇAS CONCEITUAIS E PEDAGÓGICAS ENTRE OS TERMOS “BRINCADEIRA” E “JOGO” NO BRASILjogo, brincadeira, teoria histórico-cultural, jogo de papéis, educação infantil.play, brincadeira, cultural-historical theory, role play, childhood education.juego, brincadeira, teoría histórico-cultural, juego de roles, educación infantil.This paper is part of titular thesis whose objective was identify the theorical diferences between “brincadeira” and “play” concepts, the role of both in the children learning and implications in pedagogical practices in Early Childhood Education. The Cultural-Historical Theory grounded the theorical research and the genetic-method in the methodology from the bibliographic survey in books and scientific articles about “brincadeira” and “play” and russian authors only about “play”. The results showed that the “brincadeira” is the children from zero to three years old’ main activity, unlike that is adopted in the área for every chindren in the Childhood Education in Brazil. The concept “play” discussed in the Cultural-Historical Theory, generally translated by “brincadeira”, unlikely appertain to “role play”, which was evidenced as the children from three to six years old’ main activity. The importance of this results for the childrens’ learning confirm the centrality of the ludic aspect in the contents of chidhood education but distinguishing them by their specificities, in other words, the “brincadeira” as main activity children from 0 to 3 years old’ children needs to evolve to children from 3 to sis years old’ role play, once both are essencials for their development from involuntaries activity to voluntary ones. The implications for the pedagogical practices foccus in the teachers’needs to know about de role play and includ it in the children form 3 to 6 years old’activity, helpping them to develop autonomy, volitional activity and selfcontrol of their atitude.Este artículo forma parte de una tesis, cuyo objetivo fue identificar las diferencias teóricas entre los conceptos de juego y de “brincadeira”, el papel de cada uno de ellos en los aprendizajes de los niños y las implicaciones para las prácticas pedagógicas en la Educación Infantil. La Teoría Histórico-Cultural basó la investigación teórica y el método genético en la metodología, a partir del relevamiento bibliográfico en libros y artículos científicos. Los resultados indicaron que la “brincadeira” es la principal actividad de los niños de cero a tres años, diferente a la que se suele adoptar para todas las edades en la Educación Infantil. El juego, en el referencial Histórico-Cultural, generalmente traducido como “brincadeira”, por el contrario, se refiere al “juego de roles”, que se evidenció como la actividad principal de los niños de tres a seis años. Estos resultados corroboran la centralidad del aspecto lúdico en los contenidos de la Educación Infantil, diferenciándolos en sus especificidades para los aprendizajes de los niños. La “brincadeira” de los niños de 0 a 3 años necesita evolucionar para juegos de roles de niños de 3 a 6 años, ya que ambos son imprescindibles para que ellos evolucionen de actividades involuntarias a actividades voluntarias. Las implicaciones para las prácticas pedagógicas se centran en la necesidad de que el profesorado conozca y comience a incluir juegos de roles en las actividades de los niños de 3 a 6 años, ayudándoles a desarrollar la autonomía, las actividades volitivas y el autocontrol de sus actitudes.Este artigo é parte de tese titular, cujo objetivo foi identificar as diferenças teóricas entre os conceitos de jogo e brincadeira, o papel de cada um deles nas aprendizagens das crianças e implicações nas práticas pedagógicas na Educação Infantil. A Teoria Histórico-Cultural fundamentou a pesquisa teórica e o método genético na metodologia, a partir do levantamento bibliográfico em livros e artigos científicos sobre “brincadeira” e “jogo” e em autores russos apenas sobre o “jogo”. Os resultados indicaram que a brincadeira é atividade principal de crianças de zero a três anos, diferente do que é usualmente adotado na área para todas as faixas etárias da Educação Infantil. O jogo discutido no referencial Histórico-Cultural, normalmente traduzido por brincadeira, contrariamente, refere-se ao “jogo de papéis”, o qual foi evidenciado como atividade principal de crianças de três a seis anos. A importância desses resultados para as aprendizagens das crianças corrobora a centralidade do aspecto lúdico nos conteúdos da Educação Infantil, diferenciando-os em suas especificidades, ou seja, a brincadeira como atividade principal de crianças de 0 a 3 anos necessita evoluir para jogos de papéis de crianças de 3 a 6 anos, uma vez que ambos são essenciais para que elas evoluam de atividades involuntárias às atividades voluntárias. As implicações dessa pesquisa para as práticas pedagógicas centram-se na necessidade de o corpo docente conhecer e passar a incluir os jogos de papéis nas atividades das crianças de 3 a 6 anos, auxiliando-as no desenvolvimento da autonomia, de atividades volitivas e autocontrole de suas atitudes.Educação em Revista 2023-07-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionPeer reviewedRevisado por parestextoAvaliado por Parestextoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641Educação em Revista ; v. 39 (2023)1982-66210102-4698reponame:Educação em Revistainstname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)instacron:UFMGporhttps://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641/38141https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641/38142Copyright (c) 2023 Educação em Revista https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMello, Maria Aparecida2023-07-25T15:00:04Zoai:periodicos.ufmg.br:article/36641Revistahttps://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevistaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/oai||sergiocirino99@yahoo.com|| revista@fae.ufmg.br1982-66210102-4698opendoar:2023-07-25T15:00:04Educação em Revista - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
DIFERENCIAS CONCEPTUALES Y PEDAGÓGICAS ENTRE LOS TÉRMINOS "BRINCADEIRA" Y "JUEGO" EN BRASIL
DIFERENÇAS CONCEITUAIS E PEDAGÓGICAS ENTRE OS TERMOS “BRINCADEIRA” E “JOGO” NO BRASIL
title CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
spellingShingle CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
Mello, Maria Aparecida
jogo, brincadeira, teoria histórico-cultural, jogo de papéis, educação infantil.
play, brincadeira, cultural-historical theory, role play, childhood education.
juego, brincadeira, teoría histórico-cultural, juego de roles, educación infantil.
title_short CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
title_full CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
title_fullStr CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
title_full_unstemmed CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
title_sort CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
author Mello, Maria Aparecida
author_facet Mello, Maria Aparecida
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Mello, Maria Aparecida
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv jogo, brincadeira, teoria histórico-cultural, jogo de papéis, educação infantil.
play, brincadeira, cultural-historical theory, role play, childhood education.
juego, brincadeira, teoría histórico-cultural, juego de roles, educación infantil.
topic jogo, brincadeira, teoria histórico-cultural, jogo de papéis, educação infantil.
play, brincadeira, cultural-historical theory, role play, childhood education.
juego, brincadeira, teoría histórico-cultural, juego de roles, educación infantil.
description This paper is part of titular thesis whose objective was identify the theorical diferences between “brincadeira” and “play” concepts, the role of both in the children learning and implications in pedagogical practices in Early Childhood Education. The Cultural-Historical Theory grounded the theorical research and the genetic-method in the methodology from the bibliographic survey in books and scientific articles about “brincadeira” and “play” and russian authors only about “play”. The results showed that the “brincadeira” is the children from zero to three years old’ main activity, unlike that is adopted in the área for every chindren in the Childhood Education in Brazil. The concept “play” discussed in the Cultural-Historical Theory, generally translated by “brincadeira”, unlikely appertain to “role play”, which was evidenced as the children from three to six years old’ main activity. The importance of this results for the childrens’ learning confirm the centrality of the ludic aspect in the contents of chidhood education but distinguishing them by their specificities, in other words, the “brincadeira” as main activity children from 0 to 3 years old’ children needs to evolve to children from 3 to sis years old’ role play, once both are essencials for their development from involuntaries activity to voluntary ones. The implications for the pedagogical practices foccus in the teachers’needs to know about de role play and includ it in the children form 3 to 6 years old’activity, helpping them to develop autonomy, volitional activity and selfcontrol of their atitude.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-07-25
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Peer reviewed
Revisado por pares
texto
Avaliado por Pares
texto
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641
url https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641/38141
https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/edrevista/article/view/36641/38142
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Educação em Revista
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Educação em Revista
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Educação em Revista
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Educação em Revista
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Educação em Revista ; v. 39 (2023)
1982-6621
0102-4698
reponame:Educação em Revista
instname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)
instacron:UFMG
instname_str Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)
instacron_str UFMG
institution UFMG
reponame_str Educação em Revista
collection Educação em Revista
repository.name.fl_str_mv Educação em Revista - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||sergiocirino99@yahoo.com|| revista@fae.ufmg.br
_version_ 1799711123257163776