Resumen La teoría del conflicto sociocognitivo del desarrollo cognitivo emerge en la psicología europea en la década de los 70, sobre todo a partir de investigaciones de la llamada Escuela de Psicología Social de Ginebra, que alcanzó notable difusión en las décadas siguientes. Representa una postura neopiagetiana crítica que pone el acento en el papel determinante de la interacción sociocognitiva entre iguales (y más específicamente de la confrontación de puntos de vista distintos) en el desarrollo de la inteligencia. En este artículo se analiza la especificidad del constructo que perimitirá determinar con claridad los elementos teóricos que lo definen y analizar las confusiones y malos entendidos a que dio lugar la notable difusión del paradigma en la psicología y la educación. En una segunda parte se reportan diversas ilustraciones experimentales sobre la temática, fruto de la labor de un equipo compacto de investigadores del IRICE (CONICET). Se trata de una selección en torno a tres ejes de extensión del paradigma: el conflicto como promotor del desarrollo de la operacionalidad formal, el microanálisis de los tipos y modalidades de conflicto sociocognitivo, y el papel de este en el aprendizaje de conocimientos y el cambio conceptual. Estas ilustraciones son solo un ejemplo de la vitalidad que el paradigma generó en el seno de este equipo de trabajo, y marcan una evolución que también se registra en el contexto científico global. El artículo también hace referencia a estos aportes, aunque el acento se pone en las investigaciones propias, entendido como una muestra de construcción colaborativa.

Abstract The theory of socio-cognitive conflict emerges in European Psychology in the 1970s, particularly from the research of the social psychology school of Geneve, that had a strong diffusion in the following years. This theory represents a neo-piagetian critical view of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, in the sense that the attention is focused on the role of peer socio-cognitive interaction (specifically in the social confrontations of different points of view) enhancing cognitive growth. The value of the socio-cognitive conflict promoting cognitive development lies in the decentration effect that it produces. According to this view, disturbance resulting from socio-cognitive conflicts gives way to a superior state of equilibrium. The first part of the article focuses on the theoretical and methodological analysis of the concept. In that way, two periods are distinguished in the evolution of the paradigm attending the inclusion of the communicational analysis of the verbal exchange between subjects. Also, this analysis refers to many confusions and misunderstandings in the larger application of the paradigm to psychology and education. The aim of the second part is to present some experimental illustrations produced by the IRICE (CONICET) research team’s work. These illustrations concern three conceptual axes: the application of the paradigm to the development of the formal-logical intelligence, the microanalysis of modalities and types of socio-cognitive conflict, and the extended application of the paradigm to the knowledge learning and conceptual change. The research reported in the first axis concerns the comparison of two experimental conditions: collaborative (dyads) and individual problem solving task (problems of Raven’s test), in a sample of 12-13 year old students. The comparison concerns to the performances both in the experimental treatment and in the individual post-test of equivalent problems applied to all participants. Results show, in both cases, the superiority of the collective condition. The second axis focuses on some studies concerning the modalities and types of socio-cognitive conflicts. Particularly, a system of categories for the analysis of the social behavior of children of different ages (4, 8 and 12 years old) in a block construction task (to build a house) is reported. This system differentiates many kinds of interactional behavior: dissociation, dominance-submission (both lower social coordination), cooperation (implicit and explicit) and collaboration (these three are modalities of higher social coordination). The third axis examines some illustrations referring to the extension of paradigm to the epistemic learning. After some references to the difficulty of this extension to the educational settings, two studies are reported. The first one concerns an experimental comparison between a collaborative learning condition (dyads) and an individual learning condition in university students of Psychology and Physics. Also, two kinds of collaborative learning are considered, one that assures alternating of participation, the incentive of argumentation and the reciprocal evaluation (in other words, the promotion of the socio-cognitive conflict), and one that is carried out without any intervention (spontaneous collaborative learning). Results show the superiority of the promoting socio-cognitive conflict condition upon the others, both in a written production and in individual learning post-tests. In a second research the comparison is between three instructional modalities to teach an epistemic topic: expositive, participative (with teacher’s scaffolding) and collaborative (only peers), in students of the first grade of secondary education (13 years old), in samples taken from two schools. Results for individual learning show that there are not great differences between the three modalities when the initial level (pre-test) of cognitive competence is high, but not if the cognitive level is low; here the collaborative condition (without scaffolding) has many difficulties. Finally, the article presents some general conclusions specifically concerning the socio-cognitive conflict.

Summary Two teaching resources are compared: the conceptual map and the summary, understood as external systems of cognitive representation. In the theoretical approach used, such external systems are not understood as mere outsourcing of thought, but, conversely, as types of representational activity that format the cognition itself. In this sense, maps and summaries would have different cognitive effects. But this research goes further: such differential effects would also be psychosocial, formating sociocognitive interaction when the activity is carried out in a collaborative way. The experimental design compares four conditions from two identical subsamples, in which both the task that 18 dyads of university students must perform (map and summary) and the two source-texts used are balanced. The analysis compares the individual productions with the collective of each dyad, focusing on the modalities of collective construction based on the individual productions. Thus, three basic modalities are distinguished: homogeneous, symmetrical heterogeneous and asymmetrical heterogeneous. The analysis differentiates between cognitive or content aspects, and specifically formal aspects. Descriptively, data shows a tendency in the sense of the hypothesis raised, showing that both external systems shape differently the sociocognitive interaction.

Resumen Se comparan dos recursos didácticos: el mapa conceptual y el resumen, entendidos como sistemas externos de representación cognitiva. En el enfoque teórico utilizado, tales sistemas externos no son entendidos como mera externalización del pensamiento, sino, inversamente, como tipos de actividad representacional que formatean a la propia cognición. En este sentido, los mapas y los resúmenes tendrían efectos cognitivos distintos. Pero esta investigación va más allá: tales efectos diferenciales serían también psicosociales, formateando la interacción sociocognitiva cuando la actividad se realiza colaborativamente. El diseño experimental compara cuatro condiciones de dos submuestras idénticas, en las que se balancea tanto la tarea que 18 díadas de alumnos universitarios deben realizar (mapa y resumen), como los dos textos-fuente empleados. El análisis compara las producciones individuales con la colectiva de cada díada, centrándose en las modalidades de la construcción colectiva a partir de las producciones individuales. Así, se distinguen tres modalidades básicas: homogénea, heterogénea simétrica y heterogénea asimétrica. El análisis diferencia entre aspectos cognitivos o de contenido, y aspectos específicamente formales. De manera descriptiva, los datos muestran una tendencia en el sentido de la hipótesis planteada, mostrando que ambos sistemas externos moldean de manera distinta la interacción sociocognitiva.

Abstract This study aimed to analyze academic achievement associated with characteristics of sociocognitive interaction in a virtual environment in a blended learning university course. We performed a multi-method design based on ecological observations challenging the traditional measures of academic performance. We analyzed the number of clicks in different environment areas, written messages in forums, responses to a questionnaire about habits and opinions, and grades in regular examinations. The three analyses performed were: (i) relationship between platform use and academic grades, opinions and habits; (ii) student profiles with class analysis in relation to the previous variables; (iii) characteristics of messages written by five students with high and low academic performance. The results showed: (1) significant differences in grades and the pleasure to use the platform; (2) three different classes of platform use – low, medium and high use – with different preferences regarding resources, pleasure to use, among others; (3) significant differences in the content of messages, especially in non-cognitive aspects.

Resumen El objetivo de este estudio fue el análisis del rendimiento académico vinculado con las características de interacción sociocognitiva en un entorno virtual, en un curso con diseño híbrido o blended learning de nivel universitario. El caso sostuvo un diseño multi-método basado en una estrategia ecológica observacional y un cuestionamiento a mediciones tradicionales de rendimiento académico. Se analizaron los clics –entradas en distintas zonas del entorno- realizados en la plataforma para navegar en el entorno, los mensajes escritos en foros, las respuestas a un cuestionario sobre hábitos y opiniones y las calificaciones obtenidas en exámenes regulares. Los tres ejes de análisis fueron: 1) relación entre uso de la plataforma con calificaciones académicas, opiniones y hábitos; 2) construcción de perfiles de sujetos a partir de análisis de clases en relación a las variables anteriores; 3) características de los mensajes escritos en foros de cinco sujetos con alto y bajo rendimiento académico general. Los resultados muestran que 1) hubo diferencias significativas en las calificaciones y el agrado por utilizar la plataforma; 2) se distinguieron tres clases: uso bajo, medio y alto de plataforma con preferencias distintas en recursos, agrado al utilizarla, entre otros; 3) hubo diferencias notables en el contenido de los mensajes, especialmente en lo no estrictamente cognitivo.

Objetivo. Realizar un estudio exploratorio y microanalítico de la interacción colaborativa infantil entre pares, en la realización de dibujos libres (tarea de final abierto). Analizar las características diferenciales de dicho proceso en función del grupo etario y del contexto socioeconómico. Método. Estudio evolutivo transversal en el que participaron 82 niños, agrupados en 41 díadas, de 4, 8 y 12 años, pertenecientes a contextos socioeconómicos favorecido y desfavorecido. Cada díada realizó un dibujo libre colaborativo. El instrumento utilizado fue la observación. La interacción fue analizada desde dos perspectivas: modalidad social de ejecución de la tarea y verbalización específica. En cada caso se aplicó un sistema de categorías diferente. Los datos resultantes se procesaron mediante técnicas de análisis factorial y de clasificación. Resultados. Se evidenciaron tres modalidades interactivas generales: disociativa (asociada mayormente a díadas de 4 años), mixta (colaborativa-asimétrica) y cooperativa (las dos últimas mayormente asociadas a díadas de 8 y 12 años). También se detectaron asociaciones específicas entre modalidad mixta-contexto desfavorecido y modalidad cooperativa-contexto favorecido. Conclusión. El trabajo aporta nueva evidencia empírica respecto a dos tendencias que actualmente confluyen en las investigaciones sobre colaboración entre pares: (a) el énfasis puesto en el microanálisis de la interacción y (b) el creciente interés en tareas colaborativas expresivas o libres, diferentes a las tareas tradicionalmente estudiadas (resolución de problemas y aprendizaje de nociones científicas y matemáticas). También, el trabajo aborda la interacción colaborativa a partir de la consideración integrada de acción y palabra, generalmente analizadas por separado.

Objective. This paper presents an exploratory and micro-analytical study of peer collaboration among children in a free drawing task. The characteristics of this process were also analyzed according to age group and socioeconomic context. Method. Cross-sectional research in which 82 children were grouped into 41 dyads. They were 4-, 8- and 12-years-old, belonging to advantaged and disadvantaged socioeconomic contexts. Each dyad performed a collaborative free drawing task. The main instrument was observation. The interaction was analyzed from two approaches: social modality of execution, and specific verbalization. Each approach was coded by a different system of categories. The data was processed by factorial and cluster analysis. Results. Data showed three global interactive modalities: dissociative (mainly associated with 4-years-old dyads), mixed (collaborative-asymmetrical) and cooperative (the last two mainly associated with 8- and 12-years-old dyads). Also detected were specific associations between mixed modality - disadvantaged context and cooperative modality - advantaged contexts. Conclusion. The study offers new evidence on two main issues in recent studies on peer collaboration: a) the focus on the micro-analysis of interaction; b) the growing interest on more open-ended tasks compared to traditionally addressed tasks (problem solving and tasks in science or mathematics). Also, the current paper allows analyzing action and language jointly in collaborative interaction, considering that they were studied separately in most of investigations.

Escopo. Fazer um estudo exploratório e microanalítico da interação colaborativa infantil entre pares, na realização de desenhos livres (tarefa de final aberto). Analisar as características diferenciais de dito processo em função do grupo etário e do contexto socioeconómico. Metodologia. Estudo evolutivo transversal donde participaram 82 crianças agrupadas em 41 díades, de 4, 8 e 12 anos de idade e pertencentes a contextos socioeconómicos favorecido e desfavorecido. Cada uma das díades fez um desenho livre colaborativo. O instrumento utilizado foi a observação. A interação foi analisada desde duas perspectivas: modalidade social de execução da tarefa e verbalização específica. Em cada caso foi aplicado um sistema de categoria diferente. Os dados resultantes foram processados mediante técnicas de análise fatorial e de classificação. Resultados. Foram evidenciadas três modalidades interativas gerais: dissociativa (associada maiormente a díades de 4 anos de idade), mista (colaborativa-assimétrica) e cooperativa (as duas últimas maiormente associadas a díades de 8 e 12 anos de idade). Também foram detectados associações específicas entre modalidade mista -contexto desfavorecido e modalidade cooperativa- contexto favorecido. Conclusão. O trabalho aporta nova evidencia empírica respeito a duas tendências que atualmente confluem nas pesquisas sobre colaboração entre pares: a) o ênfase posto no microanálise da interação; b)o crescente interesse em tarefas colaborativas expressivas ou livres, diferente das tarefas tradicionalmente estudadas (resolução de problemas e aprendizagem de noções científicas e matemáticas). Também, o trabalho aborda a interação colaborativa a partir da consideração integrada de ação e palavra, geralmente analisadas por separado.

O objetivo deste estudo foi relacionar a experiência dos docentes com a apresentação dos conteúdos e a aprendizagem de estudantes no nível universitário. É de se esperar que professores com mais experiência educacional sejam adaptáveis a novos contextos e que não apenas ensinem conteúdos a serem avaliados posteriormente. Metodologicamente, o projeto teve esquema quase-experimental tipo pré-teste/pós-teste. Foram escolhidos três professores de Ciências Exatas: professor experiente, auxiliar com nível superior e auxiliar estudante. Um texto-fonte lhes foi entregue com os conteúdos que deveriam ser ensinados a dez estudantes. As características do ensino foram analisadas quanto ao ajuste das aulas ao texto-fonte e avaliadas por juízes externos à pesquisa e pelos próprios estudantes. A aprendizagem dos conceitos foi avaliada por um pós-teste e uma autoavaliação dos estudantes, ambos de múltipla escolha. Apresentaram-se diferenças nos aspectos analisados nas aulas estudadas. A análise realizada permite evidenciar diferenças nos papéis, possibilitando fortalecer, assim, aspetos diferentes das aprendizagens dos estudantes em futuras aulas que venham a ministrar.

This experimental study approaches characteristics of three university teachers' classes with different levels of experience. According to the literature, experienced teachers more often than not are adaptable to different contexts. However, novice teachers are usually focused on specific class contents to be evaluated. Three teachers were selected, a Professor, and two Assistants (a university level one and an undergraduate). We gave them a source text to teach 10 students each one. After that, students' knowledge was evaluated with a post-test and a self-evaluation. The characteristics of the three classes were evaluated by external judges and the students themselves. Moreover, theme and sequential submission analyses following the source text were made. Results show differences in each of the analyzed aspects according to the literature.

Socio-cognitive conflict (SCC) has been defined as the exchange of different points of view when two or more people are working in a task together. It is cognitive because the points of view are intellectually supported and social because it takes place during an interaction. The concept of SCC was developed in the Geneva School of Educational Social Psychology and has been traditionally studied as an important factor in children development. These original studies were made using an experimental methodology, with samples of children between 6 and 7 years old. The basic learning tasks evaluated were piagetian tasks of conservation, for example, with liquids, length, quantity, etc. Nowadays, there is a new research field which takes this approach to study the SCC concept in formal learning contexts. This gave place to more varied designs. However, not many designs take SCC as their central aspect. The present study focuses on developing the SCC in pairs of university students using a pretest / post test experimental design. The collaborative learning environment is particularly critical for SCC to take place. This scenario is appropriate for the development of SCC because when pairs are working together sharing the same goal, the interaction increases. In this study the intervention focused on three signs of SCC: symmetry, peer evaluation and the cognitive differences between students. Researchers regulated a ‘symmetrical’ participation encouraging both students to participate in a similar amount of times and tasks. ‘Peer evaluation’ takes place when both students express their agreement or disagreement with the other one’s speech. Researchers also asked students to express their disagreements even if they were shown as non-verbal expressions to increase the cognitive differences between them. In other words, the intervention was not focused on teaching concepts (as professors usually do in their classes); the goal was to guarantee the interaction between the students themselves. In order to evaluate the effect of the intervention on learning and on the interaction processes, three groups of students were constituted. One of them was the experimental group which was constituted by pairs who received the intervention of a researcher. The other two groups were control groups: one of them was integrated by pairs of students who worked independently, and the other one, by participants who worked alone. The sample had 120 participants, 60 students of an exact science career and 60 of a social science career. All students were in the first year of university. Post test evaluations show that encouraging SCC is effective in academic learning. In the experimental group there was more symmetry in participation and homogeneity in the learning process. In addition the written productions in this group were more complete, coherent, and logically structured than the control groups’ productions. Educational implications for university level are discussed. These kinds of results are important because they could be used as an instrument for the classroom organization. It is also important as an example to consider ways to develop (especially with the university students), skills like dialogue, mutual understanding, team work, cognitive explanation, peer evaluation, self-evaluation, and respect for peers’ points of view. All these skills can be developed with teachers who are interested in increasing SCC in collaborative learning environments.

El conflicto sociocognitivo (CSC) ha sido tradicionalmente estudiado por medio de diseños experimentales de investigación como promotor del desarrollo en niños pequeños. En la actualidad, existe una línea de investigación que continúa esta orientación llevando el concepto al contexto del aprendizaje formal, dando lugar a diseños más variados. Sin embargo, muy pocas investigaciones hacen del CSC el eje de sus trabajos. El estudio que se informa buscó incentivar en díadas de estudiantes universitarios el CSC en el aprendizaje colaborativo de conceptos. Con el objetivo de evaluar las producciones escritas que los alumnos realizaban durante el aprendizaje y el efecto de aprendizaje logrado, se constituyeron tres grupos: uno experimental, formado por díadas colaborativas que fueron intervenidas por el investigador y dos grupos control (uno constituido por díadas que también trabajaron colaborativamente pero sin intervención y otro, por sujetos que trabajaron solos y que tampoco fueron intervenidos). La muestra estuvo constituida por 120 sujetos, 60 alumnos de ciencias exactas (Física) y 60 alumnos de ciencias sociales (Psicología). Todos ellos eran estudiantes de primer año. Se elaboraron cuestionarios y textos y se trabajó con un diseño de tipo experimental ‘pre-test individual / intervención sobre la colaboración sociocognitiva / pos-test individual’, estando el incentivo del CSC a cargo de un investigador que garantizaba la simetría de la participación, la evaluación mutua y la explicitación de las diferencias cognitivas. Los resultados muestran que el incentivo del CSC es altamente eficaz en relación a las dos variables dependientes estudiadas: el aprendizaje logrado y la producción escrita; un efecto no esperado fue la mayor homogeneidad de los aprendizajes en las díadas intervenidas.