Formação Contínua – Aconselhamento parental : Saber lidar com os filhos

Dezembro 22, 2015 às 8:00 pm | Publicado em Divulgação | Deixe um comentário
Etiquetas: , , , , ,

ispa

Destinatários 

Educadores de infância, professores, psicólogos, enfermeiros, técnicos de reabilitação e inserção social, técnicos de desenvolvimento comunitário, terapeutas ocupacionais e assistentes sociais

Finalistas do mestrado integrado de Psicologia e das outras áreas

Finalistas de 2ºs ciclos de Psicologia (desde que habilitados com 1º ciclo em Ciências Psicológicas ou Psicologia)

Objectivos 

Conhecer modelos e princípios de aconselhamento  parental

Desenvolver competências de aconselhamento a pais numa perspectiva de intervenção em situações de crise

Competências 

Conhecer modelos e princípios de aconselhamento  parental

Desenvolver competências de aconselhamento a pais numa perspectiva de intervenção em situações de crise

Programa

O aconselhamento psicológico (definição, objectivos, habilidades fundamentais) Educação Parental e Aconselhamento parental (definições) O aconselhamento parental (princípios, objectivos, fases) Aconselhamento a pais de crianças e aconselhamento a pais de adolescentes (especificidades) Estilos educativos, práticas parentais, aliança parental , ligação parental (definição e avaliação) Aconselhamento relativo a problemáticas específicas das crianças e dos adolescentes (birras, luto, divórcio, alimentação, sono, novas tecnologias, controlo dos esfíncteres, mentira, roubo/furto, rivalidade entre irmãos, saídas à noite)

Calendarização

Janeiro 23, 2016 – Fevereiro 20, 2016

mais informações:

http://fa.ispa.pt/formacao/aconselhamento-parental

Bilingual kids have multiple advantages, no matter what the languages are

Dezembro 22, 2015 às 8:00 pm | Publicado em A criança na comunicação social | Deixe um comentário
Etiquetas: , , , , , ,

Texto do site http://qz.com de 7 de novembro de 2015.

spanish-english-chinese-language-map-global-influence-wikipedia-twitter

Reuters/Lucy Nicholson

Written by

Teresa Parodi

Lecturer of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics,

University of Cambridge

We live in a world of great linguistic diversity. More than half of the world’s population grows up with more than one language. There are, on the other hand, language communities that are monolingual, typically some parts of the English-speaking world.

In this case, bilingualism or multilingualism can be seen as an extraordinary situation—a source of admiration and worry at the same time. But there are communities where bilingualism or multilingualism are the norm—for example in regions of Africa. A Cameroonian, for example, could speak Limbum and Sari, both indigenous languages, plus Ewondo, a lingua franca, plus English or French, the official languages, plus Camfranglais, a further lingua franca used between anglophone and francophone Cameroonians.

On a smaller scale, we all know families where bilingualism or multilingualism are the norm, because the parents speak different languages or because the family uses a language different from that of the community around them.

How difficult is it for a child to grow up in such an environment? And what are bilingual children capable of? Well, they are capable of quite a lot, even at a very young age. They can understand and produce expressions in more than one language, they know who to address in which language, they are able to switch very fast from one language to the other.

Noses for grammar

Clearly we are talking here of a range of different skills: social, linguistic and cognitive. Social skills are the most known: bilingual children are able to interact with speakers of (at least) two languages and thus have direct access to two different cultures.

But they also have linguistic skills, some very obvious, such as understanding and using words and expressions in different languages. A less obvious aspect is that bilingual children have a raised awareness for how language “works.” For example, bilinguals are better than monolinguals of the same age at pinpointing that the sentence “apples growed on trees” is bad, and “apples grow on noses” is fine, but doesn’t make sense.

Less known are the cognitive skills developed by bilinguals, an issue of great interest for research at the moment, as seen, for example, in work by Ellen Bialystok and colleagues. Probably due to the practice of switching languages, bilinguals are very good at taking different perspectives, dealing with conflicting cues and ignoring irrelevant information. This skill can be applied to domains other than language, making it an added value of bilingualism.

Is it worth it?

What if one of the languages is not a “useful” one because, for example, it does not have many speakers (for example, Cornish)? Is it worth exposing the child to it? The linguistic, social and cognitive advantages mentioned above hold, independently of the specific languages. Any combination of languages has the same effect.

A common worry is that trying to speak two (or more) languages could be too strenuous for the child. But there is no need for concern: learning to speak is more similar to learning to walk than it is to learning a school subject. Learning to speak is genetically programmed. The brain is certainly able to cope with more than one language, as research and experience shows.

There could be a practical problem, though, in providing enough exposure to the languages. The stress is then on the parents to ensure the opportunity to interact with speakers of the languages in question. Bilingualism is not genetic: having parents who speak different language does not guarantee a bilingual child.

Code-switching is cool

Another frequent worry is that of the child learning two half languages, short of the “proper” version of either of them. One may, for example, hear bilinguals—children and adults—using words or expressions from two or more of the languages in their linguistic repertoire in a single sentence or text, a phenomenon known as code-switching.

Often people assume that the main reason for doing this is a lack of sufficient proficiency in one of the languages, such that the speaker cannot continue in the language they started in. They also often assume that the choice of the words from one language or the other is random. Far from it. Code-switching is common among bilinguals and, contrary to popular belief, it follows grammatical rules.

Research has shown regular patterns in code-switching, influenced by the languages concerned, by community norms and by which language(s) people learn first or use more frequently. Very often, code-switchers are very highly proficient in the languages concerned. Code-switching also follows social rules: bilingual children only use it if they know the interlocutor knows the “other” language.

Additionally, if asked for clarification, they know if they have spoken too quietly or used the wrong language, and only switch in the latter case. Both bilingual children and adults have a range of reasons, including sociolinguistic reasons to code-switch. Code-switching can be cool!

All typically developing children will learn one language. To learn more than one they need the opportunity and the motivation. Growing up with more than one language is an asset well worth the investment.

This post originally appeared at The Conversation. Follow @US_conversation on Twitter.

 

 

 

Red de amigos en Facebook estaría asociada con nivel de estrés en adolescentes

Dezembro 22, 2015 às 12:00 pm | Publicado em Estudos sobre a Criança | Deixe um comentário
Etiquetas: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Notícia do site http://news.yahoo.com de 3 de dezembro de 2015.

O estudo mencionado na notícia é o seguinte:

Facebook behaviors associated with diurnal cortisol in adolescents: Is befriending stressful?

Por Kathryn Doyle

(Reuters Health) – Un estudio pequeño sugiere que la cantidad de amigos de Facebook de los adolescentes estaria asociada con sus niveles de estrés: más de 300 amigos ya estaria relacionado con un aumento de los valores de cortisol en el organismo que es la hormona del estrés. Los autores estudiaron a 88 participantes en un punto en el tiempo, por lo que los resultados no indican si las variaciones de las métricas de Facebook elevaron el estrés o viceversa.

Otros factores externos importantes también son responsables de los niveles de cortisol, pero Facebook tendría su próprio efecto, dijo la autora principal, Sonia Lupien, del Instituto de Salud Mental de la Universidad de Montreal.

“Pudimos demostrar que con más de 300 amigos de Facebook, los adolescentes tenían niveles elevados de cortisol; por lo tanto, podemos imaginar que los que tienen 1.000 o 2.000 amigos en Facebook estarían expuestos a mucho más estrés”, indicó.

Los 88 adolescentes del estudio, de entre 12 y 17 años, respondieron sobre la frecuencia de uso de Facebook, la cantidad de amigos, las conductas de autopromoción y el apoyo de sus amigos. Los autores analizaron los valores de cortisol de los adolescentes cuatro veces por día, durante tres días.

Los niños con más de 300 amigos de Facebook tendían a tener niveles de cortisol más altos que aquellos con menos amigos, según publica el equipo en Psychoneuroendocrinology.

Pero a mayor interacción de pares en Facebook, menores valores de cortisol. Ni la depresión ni la autoestima estuvieron asociadas con los niveles de la hormona del estrés.

Los autores aclaran que esos niveles en los primeros años de la adolescencia influyen en el riesgo de desarrollar depresión varios años más tarde.

Wenhong Chen, del Departamento de Radio-TV-Cine y del Departamento de Sociología de University of Texas, Austin, y que no participó del estudio, señaló que la investigación se concentró en Facebook, de modo que los resultados no podrían generalizarse al uso de otras redes sociales ni a otros grupos etarios.

“La naturaleza preliminar de nuestros resultados demandará una evaluación refinada de las conductas en Facebook associadas con la psicología y tendremos que hacer más estudios para determinar si esos efectos existen en los niños y los adultos”, finalizó Lupien.

Aclaró que el tamaño de la red de amigos fuera de internet también influyó en los niveles de cortisol.

FUENTE: Psychoneuroendocrinology, online 9 de octubre del 2015

 

 

Natal em Segurança – Lista de verificação para famílias

Dezembro 22, 2015 às 10:00 am | Publicado em Divulgação | Deixe um comentário
Etiquetas: , , ,

APSI_Lista_Natal_2015

http://www.apsi.org.pt/index.php/pt/noticias/70-natal-em-seguranca-lista-de-verificacao-para-familias

Children need conversation, not iPads, in school

Dezembro 22, 2015 às 6:00 am | Publicado em A criança na comunicação social | Deixe um comentário
Etiquetas: , , , ,

texto do http://www.chicagotribune.com de 7 de dezembro de 2015.

Morry Gash  AP

Launa Hall

The Washington Post

I placed an iPad into the outstretched hands of each of my third-grade students, and a reverent, tech-induced hush descended on our classroom. We were circled together on our gathering rug, just finished with a conversation about “digital citizenship” and “online safety” and “our school district bought us these iPads to help us learn, so we are using them for learning purposes.” They’d nodded vigorously, thrilled by the thought of their very own iPads to take home every night and bring to school every day. Some of them had never touched a tablet before, and I watched them cradle the sleek devices in their arms. They flashed their gap-toothed grins — not at each other but at their shining screens.

That was the first of many moments when I wished I could send the iPads back.

Some adult ears might welcome a room of hushed 8-year-olds, but teachers of young children know that the chatter in a typical elementary classroom is what makes it a good place to learn. Yes, it’s sometimes too loud. These young humans are not great conversationalists. They are often hurting someone’s feelings or getting hurt, misunderstanding or overreacting or completely missing the point. They need time to learn communication skills — how to hold your own and how to get along with others. They need to talk and listen and talk some more at school, both with peers and with adults who can model conversation skills.

The iPads subtly undermined that important work. My lively little kids stopped talking and adopted the bent-neck, plugged-in posture of tap, tap, swipe.

My colleagues and I had tried to anticipate all sorts of issues before the new one-to-one tablet initiative rolled into our classrooms last year. What happens if the children lose them? Break them? Forget their passwords? How will we clean the screens? Charge them all at once? Which lessons lend themselves well to iPads, and which ones don’t? We had meetings, made plans and did our best to embrace the new — both because we had a sense of the potential and because asking questions about the efficacy of one-to-one classrooms (with a computing device for each child), or wondering aloud whether more tech for little kids was supported by research, was not only unwelcome, it was illogical. The money was spent (more than $100,000 for each grade), and the iPads were happening.

Our planning helped, but there was so much we didn’t anticipate: alarms going off randomly throughout the day, bandwidth issues that slowed our lessons to a crawl, user name issues followed by password issues followed by hundreds of selfies. All these things sucked instructional time. This at a school serving many students new to English or otherwise behind in their communication skills. They couldn’t afford to lose a single minute of learning. So I wrote lessons two ways: one in case enough iPads were working and one if too many weren’t. I tried to harness the benefits and overcome the avalanche of distracting minutiae the devices brought.

Rollout problems

Veteran teachers of tablet-friendly classrooms will tell you that these were simply rollout problems. They may mention how tablets can help teachers tailor lessons to each child, or how they can provide an instant snapshot into whether a child understood a concept. They talk about apps that connect classmates to one another — and to students across the globe — that foster creativity and a sense of newness that makes over a stale classroom.

Those early-adopter teachers are right: Tablets are portals to a million possibilities. Even with my rookie stumbles, my students did wonderful things. They made faux commercials that aired on our school’s morning news; they recorded themselves explaining math problems; they produced movies about explorers, complete with soundtracks. I recorded mini-lessons for my students to watch at home, so we could “flip our classroom” and discuss the information in small groups the next day. And I knew we were just getting started.

But did the benefits offset what was lost?

Sherry Turkle, the author of “Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age,” writes about how we are sacrificing connections, one quick check of our screens at a time. Her research finds that college students, with their ubiquitous phones, “are having a hard time with the give-and-take of face-to-face conversation.” Eight-year-olds with iPads have the same struggles, minus any filters or perspective people might gain as they age. At the same time I was trying to encourage my students to appreciate the subtleties of human interaction, the iPads I gave them threatened to overwhelm their understanding.

Turkle writes that just the presence of a phone, even one turned off or flipped over on the table between speakers, gets in the way of conversations — we only bother with discussions we don’t mind interrupting. Switch the setting to a classroom, and we may only engage in learning that we don’t mind interrupting. And it can be hard for kids to sustain their attention in a small group discussion when their own personal portal beckons from the back of the room.

iPads over Legos

One of my saddest days in my digital classroom was when the children rushed in from the lunchroom one rainy recess and dashed for their iPads. Wait, I implored, we play with Legos on rainy days! I dumped out the huge container of Legos that had been pure magic just a couple of weeks ago, that had prompted so much collaboration and conversation, but the delight was gone. My students looked at me with disdain, and some crossed their arms and pouted. We aren’t kids who just play anymore, their crossed arms implied. We’re iPad users. We’re tech-savvy. Later, when I allowed their devices to hum to glowing life, conversation shut down altogether.

I knew that the lure of the screen would continue at home each night. Many of the students had screens at home already, but this one was different: It was their very own, it was portable, and it carried the stamp of approval of teacher, school and district. Do the adults in their homes still feel the authority to tell them to put that screen away and go outside and play?

Districts all over the country are buying into one-to-one initiatives, and for younger and younger students. These screens have been rebranded “digital learning devices,” carrying the promise of education success for millions of our communities’ education dollars. Yet there is some evidence that tablets can be detrimental to learning.

A study released in September by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development looked at school tech initiatives in more than three dozen countries (although not the United States) and found that while students who use computers moderately show modest gains over those who rarely do, heavy technology use has a negative impact. “Students who use computers very frequently at school do a lot worse in most learning outcomes, even after accounting for social background and student demographics,” the report concluded.

We have also known for years — at least since the 2012 report “Facing the Screen Dilemma” from the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood — that screen time for younger children in particular comes with a huge opportunity cost, depriving them of hands-on learning, time outdoors and “face-to-face interactions with caring adults.” Digital-savvy parents in Silicon Valley made news way back in 2011 for enrolling their children in steadfastly screen-free schools. They knew that their kids would be swiping and clicking soon enough, but there are only a limited number of childhood years when it’s not only really fun to build with Legos, it’s also really good for you.

Social skills

Some proponents of one-to-one initiatives portray “analog classrooms” as gray spaces where bored teachers hand worksheets to uninspired kids — and tablets are the energizing cure. The One-to-One Institute, a nonprofit that helps school districts go digital, says on its website: “Research is clear that to ensure student success, education must move from a teacher-centric to a learner-centric approach. One-to-one programs create the opportunity for authentic personalization of teaching and learning for each student.”

But jumping from the “sage on the stage” teaching model to a screen for each kid skips over critical territory in between, where children learn from, and build their social skills with, one another. Classrooms run by worksheets won’t be magically transformed with tablets, and classrooms where teachers skillfully engage their students don’t need screens — and the extra baggage they introduce — to get great results.

Teachers striving to preserve precious space for conversation are not lazy, or afraid of change, or obstructionist. They believe that if our dining tables should be protected for in-depth discussion and focused attention, so, too, should our classrooms. They know that their young students live in the digital age, but the way children learn has not evolved so very fast. Kids still have to use their five senses, and, most of all, they have to talk to each other.

My students already had so many challenges and so much ground to cover. We put tablets in their hands and made their loads that much heavier.

Washington Post

Launa Hall lives in Northern Virginia and is working on a book of essays about teaching.

Copyright © 2015, Chicago Tribune

 

 


Entries e comentários feeds.