CONCEPTUALS AND PEDAGOGICALS DIFFERENCES BETWEN THE TERMS “BRINCADEIRA” AND “PLAY” IN BRAZIL
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
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 |