Approach the theme “solid waste” in textbooks of sciences of the sixth year of elementary education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130810383Keywords:
Environmental education, Textbook analysis, WasteAbstract
In this paper, we analyze two science textbooks, the sixth year of elementary school, as the presentation of the approach to the subject solid waste. For it has been observed values, conceptions, images and activities portrayed as the theoretical framework Critical Environmental Education. It is an empirical research, qualitative type, with data collection in textbooks. As a result, we found that the content covered in the textbooks examined need to be written and portrayed more critically, considering that the topics to be meaningful, must be related to the social, political and economic of the students and presented dynamically promoting dialogue and thinking about attitudes healthy environmental.Downloads
References
ABÍLIO, F. J. P. et al. Meio Ambiente e educação ambiental: uma análise crítica dos livros didáticos de ciências do ensino fundamental. In: SIMPÓSIO INTERNACIONAL PROCESSO CIVILIZADOR, HISTÓRIA E EDUCAÇÃO, 8., 2004, João Pessoa. Anais... João Pessoa, 2004.
BRASIL. Parâmetros curriculares nacionais: meio ambiente, saúde .Brasília: Secretaria de Educação Fundamental, 1997.
BARROS, C.; PAULINO, W. R. Ciências o meio ambiente. São Paulo: Ática, 2011.
CARVALHO, I. C. M. Educação ambiental: a formação do sujeito ecológico. 4. ed. São Paulo: Cortez, 2008.
CANTO, E. L. Ciências naturais: aprendendo com o cotidiano. São Paulo: Moderna, 2009.
DIAS, G. F. Educação ambiental: princípios e práticas. São Paulo: Gaia, 1993.
FRANCO, M. L. P. B. O livro didático e o Estado. ANDE, ano I, n 5, 1992.
GUIMARÃES, M. A Formação de Educadores Ambientais. Campinas: Papirus, 2004.
LAJOLO, M. Livro didático: um (quase) manual do usuário. Em aberto, Brasília, ano 16, n. 69, p.03-09, jan.-mar. 1996.
LAYARGUES, P. P. O cinismo da reciclagem: o significado ideológico da reciclagem da lata de alumínio e suas implicações para a educação ambiental.
LOUREIRO, F.; LAYARGUES, P. P.; CASTRO, R. (orgs.) Educação ambiental: repensando o espaço da cidadania. São Paulo: Cortez, p. 149-220, 2002.
_____.; LIMA, G. F. C. Mapeando as macro-tendências político-pedagógicas da educação ambiental contemporânea no Brasil. In: Encontro Pesquisa em Educação Ambiental, 6., 2011, Ribeirão Preto. Anais... Ribeirão Preto: USP, 2011. 1 CD-ROM.
LOUREIRO, C. F. B. Premissas teóricas para uma educação ambiental transformadora. Ambiente e educação, Rio Grande, n. 08, p. 37-54, 2003.
MEGID NETO, J.; FRACALANZA, H. O livro didático de ciências: problemas e soluções. Ciência e Educação, Bauru, v. 9, n. 2, p. 147-157, 2003.
MINAYO, M. C. S. (Org.). Pesquisa social: teoria, método e criatividade. 21. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2002.
REIGOTA, M. Desafios à educação ambiental escolar. In: JACOBI, P. et al. (orgs.). Educação, meio ambiente e cidadania: reflexões e experiências. São Paulo: SMA, 1998.
_____. O que é educação ambiental. Brasiliense, São Paulo, Brasil.1991.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
