In order to analyze the teacher and practicing students’ guidance differences in the teaching- learning process in the nursing practices, we elaborated observations and analysis of speech on a classroom of the nursing degree in the Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, with 30 second-semester nursing students (7 men, 23 women between 19 - 21 years old), 5 eight-semester practicing nursing students (1 man, 4 women between 21 - 22 years old), and a nursing teacher as participant. The recording, transcription and coding of what was observed in the recorded class, was later analyzed applying the SDIS-GSEQ software to generate sequential connections of the participants’ speech. By analyzing the flows of the speech, we found that the teacher and practicing students’ ways of instructing during class are differentially held due to the structures of speech used as well as the use of the model, making it possible for the students to have meaningful learning when acquiring professional and clinical attitudes. There is variability between practicing students and the teacher when developing the same category of educational action in learning. The practicing students motivate the student to acquire the theoretical knowledge while the teacher performs a guiding and accompanying role.
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. http://apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
Anguera, M. T., & Izquierdo, C. (2006). Methodological Approaches in Human Communication. From Complexity of Situation to Data Analysis. In G. Riva, M. T. Anguera, B. K. Wiederhold, & F. Mantovani (Eds.), From Communication to Presence. Cognition, Emotions and Culture towards the Ultimate Communicative Experience (pp. 207-225). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Anzaldúa, R. (2004). La subjetividad y la relación educativa, una cuestión eludida. Revistatramas, 22, 31-54.
Bakeman, R. (1978). Untangling Streams of Behavior: Sequential Analysis of Observation Data. In G. P. Sackett (Ed.), Observing Behavior: Data Collection and Analysis Methods (Vol. 2, pp. 63-78). Baltimore: University of Park Press.
Bakeman, R. (1991). Prólogo. In M. T. Anguera (Ed.), Metodología observacional en la investigación psicológica (Vol. 1, pp. 13-24). Barcelona: PPU.
Bakeman, R., Adamson, L. B., & Strisik, P. (1988). Lags and Logs: Statistic Approaches to Interaction. In M. H. Bornstein, & Y. J. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in Human Development (pp. 241-260). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bakeman, R., & Dabbs, J. M. (1976). Social Interaction Observed: Some Approaches to the Analysis of Behavior Streams. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 335-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014616727600200403
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observación de la interacción: Introducción al análisis secuencial. Madrid: Morata.
Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (1996). Análisis de la interacción: Análisis secuencial con SDIS y GSEQ. Madrid: Ra-Ma.
Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (2001). Using GSEQ with SPSS. Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento, 3, 195-214.
Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (2011). Sequential Analysis and Observational Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139017343
Candela, A. (1993). La construcción discursiva de la ciencia en el aula. Investigación en la Escuela, 21, 31-38.
Candela, A. (1996). La construcción discursiva de contextos argumentativos en la ense?anza de la ciencia. In C. Coll, & Y. D. Edwards (Eds.), Ense?anza, aprendizaje y discurso en el aula. Aproximaciones al estudio del discurso educacional (pp. 99-116). Madrid: Fundación Infancia y Aprendizaje.
Candela, A. (1999). Ciencia en el aula. Los alumnos entre la argumentación y el consenso. México: Paidós.
Cazden, C. B. (2001) Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Coll, C., Colomina, R., Onrubia, J., & Rochera, M. J. (1992). Actividad conjunta y habla: una aproximación al estudio de los mecanismos de influencia educativa. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 59-60, 189-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02103702.1992.10822356
Coll, C., & Onrubia, J. (2001). Estrategias discursivas y recursos semióticos en la construcción de significados compartidos entre profesores y alumnos. Investigaciónen la escuela, 45, 7-19.
Drew, P. (1995). Conversation Analysis. In A. Jonathan, R. H. Smith, & L. V. Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking Methods in Psychology (pp. 64-79). London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221792.n5
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
Edwards, D. (1990). El papel del profesor en la construcción social del conocimiento. Investigaciónen la Escuela, 10, 33-50.
Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1986). Context and Continuity: Classroom Discourse and the Development of Shared Knowledge. In K. Durkin (Ed.), Language Development in the School Years (pp. 172-202). London, UK: Croom Helm
Edwards, D., & Middleton, D. (1986). Joint Remembering: Constructing an Account of Shared Experience through Conversational Discourse. Discourse Processes, 9, 423-459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638538609544651
Edwards, D., & Westgate, D. (1994). Investigating Classroom Talk. London: The Falmer Press.
Hernández, J. L., & Díaz, R. (2012). Aprendizaje Situado: Transformar la realidad educando. México: Grupo Gráfico Editorial.
Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge. Talk amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. (2000). What’s the Use of “Triadic Dialogue”? An Investigation of Teacher-Student Interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21, 376-406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.376
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking. Cognitive Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pimienta, J. H. (2012). Estrategias de Ense?anza-Aprendizaje: docencia universitaria basada en competencias. México: Pearson Educación.
Potter, J. (1996). Representing Reality. Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. Londres: SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446222119
Quera, V. (1993). Análisis Secuencial. In M. T. Anguera (Ed.), Metodología observacional en la investigación psicológica (pp. 341-586). Barcelona: PPU.
Sackett, G. P. (1979). The Lag Sequential Analysis of Contingency and Cyclicity on Behavioral Interaction Research. In J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of Infant Development (pp. 623-649). New York: Wiley.
Sackett, G. P. (1980). An Initial Investigation of the Usability of Conversational Data for Doing Sociology. In D. Sudnow, (Ed.), Studies in Social Interactions (pp. 31-74). New York: Free Press.
Sackett, G. P. (1987). Analysis of Sequential Social Interaction Data: Some Issues, Recent Developments, and Causal Inference Model. In J. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of Infant Development (pp. 855-878). New York: Wiley.
Stierer, B., & Maybin, J. (1994). Language, Literacy and Learning in Educational Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x