Abstract: The aim of the present research study is to describe professor beliefs and their role in the teaching of argumentative skills in higher education. An explorative-descriptive study with a qualitative approach is performed. The population surveyed is composed of 16 professors that taught the first two years of philosophy and law undergraduate degrees at a private Chilean university in 2019. Interviews are performed with thematic analysis. The results show high agreement between professors in their beliefs: argumentation is valued as a key competence, but it is suggested that argumentation should be taught once knowledge of the discipline is acquired. Although professors report to promote argumentative practices in their teachings, they do not do it to develop argumentative skills. Learning evaluations implies knowing how to argue, but no assessment argumentation guidelines are provided. It is concluded that surveyed philosophy and law professors do not differ radically in their beliefs about the value of argumentation in professional practice.

Resumen: El objetivo de este estudio es describir las creencias de docentes y su rol en la enseñanza de habilidades de argumentación en la formación universitaria. Se realiza un estudio exploratorio-descriptivo con enfoque cualitativo, en el que participaron 16 docentes que enseñaron los primeros dos años de carreras de filosofía y derecho de una universidad privada chilena en el año 2019. Se realizaron entrevistas en profundidad realizando codificación temática. Los resultados muestran alta coincidencia en las creencias docentes: se valora la argumentación como competencia clave, pero se plantea que debe enseñarse una vez se asienten conocimientos teóricos. Si bien los docentes reportan promover prácticas de argumentación en su enseñanza, no lo hacen para desarrollar argumentación. La evaluación de aprendizaje supone saber argumentar, pero no se entregan pautas que orienten esta línea. Se concluye que los docentes de carreras de filosofía y derecho no difieren radicalmente en sus creencias acerca del valor de la argumentación para el ejercicio profesional.

Abstract Psychology as a professional and scientific practice should and must not remain isolated from the contexts in which it develops. Considering the deep feelings of discomfort expressed by the Chilean people during social mobilizations since October 18th, 2019, in response to the implementation for decades of a neoliberal model devoid of social justice, as psychologists we feel summoned to raise the minimum requirements we think our discipline must assume about that matter. Under these assumptions, a Manifesto is presented. It includes 22 items, which have been elaborated by 13 psychologists from several institutions that, in a collective effort, propose them as an agenda to work on in the next months. Knowing that this list is not definitive or exhaustive, we offer it to the community as a point of departure for deliberation, discussion and debate within universities, research centers, scientific and professional societies, and the state apparatus, in order to strengthen the role of psychology in the problematization and reduction of inequities and injustices, as well as in promoting psychosocial well-being.

Resumen La psicología en tanto práctica profesional y de investigación científica no puede ni debe permanecer aislada de los contextos en los que se desarrolla. Frente a los profundos sentimientos de malestar expresados por el pueblo chileno en movilizaciones sociales desde el 18 de octubre de 2019, que responden directamente a la implementación de un modelo neoliberal desprovisto de justicia social, como psicólogas y psicólogos nos sentimos llamados a levantar los requerimientos mínimos que consideramos que nuestra disciplina debe asumir. Bajo este marco, se presenta un Manifiesto que contempla 22 puntos, construido de manera colaborativa por 13 psicólogas y psicólogos de diversas instituciones que, en una labor colectiva, lo proponen como agenda de trabajo para los próximos meses. Sabiendo que este listado no es definitivo ni exhaustivo, lo ofrecemos a la comunidad como un punto de partida para la deliberación, discusión y debate dentro de Universidades, centros de investigación, sociedades científicas y profesionales y al aparato estatal, de manera de fortalecer el rol de la psicología en la problematización y reducción las inequidades e injusticias, así como en el fomento del bienestar psicosocial.

RESUMO De acordo com Bakhtin, falar é responder, e as respostas não são nem conhecidas antecipadamente, já que são atos criativos irrepetíveis, nem são totalmente inéditas, uma vez que recriam a palavra dada. Assim, uma questão relevante é como um enunciado leva a uma específica resposta contingente, entre tantas outras possibilidades. A fim de contribuir para responder a esta pergunta, desenvolvemos a noção de campos discursivos, oferecendo uma explicação de sua natureza dinâmica, virtual e dialógica. Bergson, Simondon e Deleuze nos ajudam a entender melhor como a repetição de um signo, quando esta ocorre dentro de um campo de antecipação, tem o efeito de um turno irrepetível. Bakhtin e Volóchinov, nesta conexão, nos ajudam a explicar como este campo funciona como o contexto histórico em que os posicionamentos sociais e subjetivos introduzem novidade para a transformação contínua do conhecimento compartilhado entre os falantes.

ABSTRACT According to Bakhtin, to speak is to reply, and replies are neither known in advance, as they are unrepeatable creative acts, nor completely novel, as they recreate the given word. Thus, one relevant question is how a given utterance leads to a specific contingent contestation among many possible others. In order to contribute to answering this question, we elaborate on the notion of discursive fields, offering an integrative account of their dynamic, virtual and dialogical nature. Bergson, Simondon and Deleuze help us to better understand how it is that the repetition of a sign, when it takes place within a field of anticipation, has the effect of an unrepeatable turn. Bakhtin and Voloshinov, in this connection, help us to explain how this field works as the historical background against which social and subjective positionings introduce novelty to the ongoing transformation of the common ground among speakers.

Argumentation skills play an important role in higher education. Empirical evidence shows that higher education students have better argumentation skills than their peers without university studies. However, it is still unknown whether this is a product of higher education or self-selection. The goal of this study was to explore written argumentation skills development in chilean tertiary education, in order to contribute to the body of knowledge on the relationship between argumentation and higher education (university and vocational training). The written argumentation skills of 336 tertiary education students, from university and vocational training programs, were evaluated. The sample was comprised of five different programs from two chilean institutions, and of two cohorts, evaluated at the beginning and end of the school year. Descriptive, correlational and covariance analyses were run. Results show that the participants are less skilled at formulating counter-arguments that in general, they significantly improve in the sub-aspects of acceptability and soundness; and when controlled for age and academic performance, university students improve significantly more than technical students, over the course of one year. Finally, results show that university students’ improvement is greater for those that have below average performance on the standardized test required for university admission in Chile (PSU). The implications for chilean higher education is discussed.

Las habilidades de argumentación juegan un rol central en la formación universitaria. Evidencia disponible muestra que los estudiantes universitarios cuentan con mejores habilidades argumentativas que sus pares no universitarios. Sin embargo, no se sabe si esto se debe a su formación o si es un factor de autoselección. El objetivo de este estudio fue explorar el desarrollo de habilidades de argumentación en estudiantes de educación superior, de manera de contribuir al conocimiento acerca de la relación entre argumentación y educación superior (universitaria y técnico profesional) en Chile. Se evaluaron las habilidades de argumentación escrita de 336 estudiantes de educación universitaria y educación superior técnica, provenientes de cinco carreras diferentes de dos instituciones de educación superior de Santiago Chile, y dos cohortes distintas, al inicio y al final del año académico. Se realizaron análisis descriptivos, correlacionales y análisis de covarianza. Los resultados muestran que los participantes presentan debilidades relativas en la capacidad de formular contra-argumentos; que en general avanzan significativamente en los sub-aspectos de aceptabilidad y suficiencia argumental; y que si se los controla por edad y medidas de rendimiento, los estudiantes universitarios avanzan en un año significativamente más que los de educación técnica. Por último, los resultados muestran que los alumnos universitarios que más avanzan son los que están bajo el promedio en la Prueba de selección universitaria (PSU). Se discuten las implicancias de estos resultados para la educación superior en Chile.

The ability to argue is fundamental to be socially fit. However, evidence suggests that school systems show little capability to promote the development of these kinds of skills. In part, this is a consequence of the difficulty to measure and acknowledge progress. The objective of these study was to construct an instrument to measure written argumentation skills in fifth graders of municipal schools in the western metropolitan area of Santiago. 154 Chilean students participated, 77 of whom were girls. Findings supports the claim that the instrument is reliable and able to report the level of development along several dimensions of written argumentation skills. Consistent with expectations, most students were able to elaborate opinions and simple arguments and to understand counter-arguments. However, they clearly had difficulties providing counter-arguments.

La habilidad para argumentar es fundamental para la inserción en sociedad. Sin embargo, la evidencia sugiere que los sistemas escolares muestran poca capacidad para promover el desarrollo de estas habilidades. En parte, esto se debe a la dificultad para medirla y reconocer su progreso. El objetivo de este estudio fue construir un instrumento para medir habilidades de argumentación escrita en niños y niñas de quinto básico que asisten a establecimientos municipales del sector poniente de la Región Metropolitana de Santiago. Participaron 154 estudiantes chilenos (77 niñas). Se encontró evidencia que apoya la confiabilidad del instrumento y su capacidad de informar el nivel de desarrollo de distintas dimensiones de la habilidad de argumentación escrita. Con respecto al desempeño de los estudiantes, coherente a lo esperado, la mayoría de los estudiantes son capaces de elaborar opiniones y argumentos simples y comprender contra-argumentos. Sin embargo, presentan claras dificultades para elaborar contra-argumentos.

Since the 1990s, there has been consensus about the relevance of argumentation for science teaching. However, although many studies have sought to study argumentation in the science classroom, most of them have been small in scale. This article presents an exploratory video study that aims to identify key dimensions to understand argumentation in science teaching, which can be useful in future large-scale studies. Three teachers (one male) from two State-subsidized schools participated. Eight lessons were video-recorded and analysed (grades five and seven). Results show that in order to grasp argumentation in science teaching it is important to take three dimensions into account: conceptual level, argumentative structure, and type of interaction.

Desde los años noventa existe un consenso creciente acerca de la importancia de la argumentación para el aprendizaje de las ciencias. Sin embargo, aunque existen varios estudios sobre argumentación en la enseñanza de ciencias, la mayoría de los estudios son de pequeña escala. El estudio que se reporta en este artículo pretendió aportar en la identificación de dimensiones para aprehender la argumentación en la enseñanza de ciencias en futuros estudios a gran escala. El estudio fue de tipo exploratorio en base al análisis de videos. Se analizaron ocho clases (cuatro de quinto básico y cuatro de séptimo). Participaron dos establecimientos subvencionados y tres profesores (un varón). Se realizaron análisis descriptivos cualitativos y cuantitativos. Los resultados muestran que para aprehender la argumentación en el aula de ciencias es necesario tener en cuenta tres dimensiones: nivel conceptual, estructura argumentativa y tipo de interacción.

Desde os anos noventa há um consenso crescente acerca da importância da argumentação para a aprendizagem de ciências. Contudo, ainda que existam vários estudos sobre argumentação no ensino de ciências, a maioria dos estudos é de pequena escala. O estudo que se apresenta neste artigo pretendeu contribuir com a identificação de di-mensões para compreender a argumentação no ensino de ciências em futuros estudos de grande escala. O estudo foi do tipo exploratório em base à análise de vídeos. Analisaram-se oito aulas (quatro de quinta série e quatro de sétima série). Participaram dois estabelecimentos subvencionados e três professores (um homem). Realizaram-se análises descritivas qualitativas e quantitativas. Os resultados mostram que para apreender a argumentação na aula de ciências é necessário considerar três dimensões: nível conceitual, estrutura argumentativa e tipo de interação.

Background: The Postgraduate Hospital Education Environment Measure (PHEEM) questionnaire, is a valid and reliable instrument to measure the educational environment (EE) in postgraduate medical education. Aim: To evaluate the EE perceived by the residents of a postgraduate training program using the PHEEM. Material and Methods: The PHEEM was applied in 2010-2011 in 35 specialty programs. We calculated their individual results and compared means of both global and individual domain scores of the PHEEM, by gender, university of origin and nationality. Cronbach's alpha coefficients and D study (Generalizability theory) were performed for reliability. Results: Three hundred eighteen residents were surveyed (75.7% of the total universe). The mean score of the PHEEM was 105.09 ± 22.46 (65.7% of the maximal score) which is considered a positive EE. The instrument is highly reliable (Cronbach's alpha = 0.934). The D study found that 15 subjects are required to obtain reliable results (G coefficient = 0.813). There were no significant differences between gender and university of origin. Foreigners evaluated better the EE than Chileans and racism was not perceived. The programs showed a safe physical environment and teachers with good clinical skills. The negative aspects perceived were a lack of information about working hours, insufficient academic counseling, and scanty time left for extracurricular activities. Conclusions: This questionnaire allowed us to identify positive aspects of the EE, and areas to be improved in the specialty programs. The PHEEM is a useful instrument to evaluate the EE in Spanish-speaking participants of medical specialty programs.

The goal of this study was to explore the nature of the processes of mathematical thinking evidenced in the discourse of teachers working at Chilean middle-school level public schools. Seventy seven classroom videos filmed as a part of the Chilean Government National Teaching Assessment System were coded according to a rubric that distinguished 4 forms of mathematical thinking: mechanic problem solving, reasoned problem solving, mechanic information presentation, and reasoned information presentation. Descriptive analysis and multivariate analyses of variance were performed. The results evidence that teachers' mathematical thinking is focused on mechanic information presentation and mechanic problem solving. Teachers working in 5th and 6th grade classrooms significantly allocate less time to problem solving than teachers working in 7th and 8th grade classrooms. These results are coherent with previous evidence showing that Chilean teachers adhere to an intuitive pedagogy focused on the repeated practice of procedures.

Este estudio tuvo por objetivo explorar la naturaleza de los procesos de pensamiento matemático presentes en el discurso de profesoras y profesores que enseñan en el segundo ciclo de educación básica de escuelas públicas en Chile. Se codificaron 77 videos de clases de profesores participantes en el Sistema de Evaluación Nacional Docente del Gobierno de Chile, en base a una rúbrica que distinguía 4 formas de pensamiento matemático: resolución mecánica de problemas, resolución razonada de problemas, presentación mecánica de la información y presentación razonada de la información. Se realizaron análisis descriptivos y análisis multivariados de varianza. Los resultados evidencian que el pensamiento matemático docente está focalizado en la presentación mecánica de información y la resolución mecánica de problemas. Los profesores que enseñan en 5° y 6° grado dedican significativamente menos tiempo a resolución de problemas que los profesores que enseñan en 7° y 8° grado. Los resultados son coherentes con evidencia proveniente de otros estudios que muestran la adherencia de los profesores chilenos a una pedagogía intuitiva externalista, centrada en la práctica repetida de procedimientos.

This paper is aimed at presenting a method to analyse dialogically argumentative private speech. The method was developed in the context of a study whose aim was to evaluate the impact of rhetorical conditions in the emergence of argumentative inner speech events. In so doing, we articulate some theoretical-methodological ideas form different analytical traditions: French Dialogical Linguistics, Argumentative Conversational Analysis and Argumentative Semiotic Analysis. Considering that social research faces the complex challenge of studying a dynamic phenomenon which occurs in discourse, we argue for the importance of creating methodological procedures accordingly.

El objetivo del artículo es presentar un método de análisis dialógico de habla privada argumentativa. Este método fue desarrollado especialmente para responder la pregunta por las condiciones retóricas que caracterizan la aparición de ciertas figuras argumentativas en este tipo de discurso. Tomando elementos tanto de Análisis Argumentativo de la Conversación, de la primera generación de la Lingüística de la Enunciación Francesa y elementos de Análisis semiótico de la Argumentación, se generaron categorías que permitieron identificar las unidades argumentativas de interés. De esta manera, teniendo en cuenta que el objeto de estudio de la investigación social es siempre dinámico y ocurre principalmente en el discurso, se enfatiza la importancia de tomar como parte de la tarea creativa de la investigación el desarrollo de procedimientos metodológicos que permitan responder las preguntas en lugar de preguntarse sólo lo que se puede responder con los métodos disponibles.

Narrative comprehension is a fundamental ability for children's literacy development that has been largely ignored by researchers and educators, due to the difficulties in understanding and measuring it, particularly in the early ages. The results of a study, whose goal was to construct and validate an instrument to measure narrative comprehension in preschool age children, are presented. Participants were 117 Chilean children aged 3 years and 6 months to 5 years and 1 month. Evidence was found to support the reliability and concurrent validity of the instrument, which is simple and quick to administer and code. The implications of having an instrument to measure narrative comprehension that is adequate for the Chilean preschool population are discussed, as are future studies to improve the instrument.

La comprensión narrativa es una habilidad fundamental en la alfabetización infantil, poco atendida por investigadores y educadores por las dificultades para comprenderla y medirla, sobre todo a edades tempranas. Se reportan resultados de un estudio cuyo objetivo fue elaborar y validar un instrumento para la medición de la comprensión narrativa en niños en edad preescolar. Participaron 117 niños y niñas chilenos entre 3 años 6 meses y 5 años 1 mes de edad, pertenecientes a jardines infantiles de la Región Metropolitana. Se encontró evidencia que apoya la confiabilidad y la validez concurrente del instrumento, de fácil y rápida aplicación y codificación. Se discuten las implicancias de contar con un instrumento para medir comprensión narrativa que sea adecuado a la población preescolar chilena, así como estudios futuros necesarios para mejorar el instrumento.