Overall objectives:

1 - Recognize the urgency and importance of the incorporation of ICT in school and the role that its exploitation can play in innovation in education;
2 - Assess the potential of the software to create the context (s) of learning;
3 - Use of computer tools in an innovative way (as support for the creation of "new" learning contexts);
4 - To deepen the importance of constructivism / constructionism as the foundation of a pedagogical intervention project;
5 - To deepen the role of social environment and interaction in the acquisition, construction and sharing of knowledge;
6 - Understand the importance of collaborative learning and the role that ICT can play in creating contexts that provide or facilitate it;
7 - Design classes as learning communities in which learners are the protagonists;
8 - To conceive the function of the teacher as organizer of the contexts of learning, activity dynamizer and metacognitive agent.

Syllabus:

1 - The factory paradigm: characterization and causes of its "aging";
2 - Innovation: seeking a new paradigm for the school;
3 - Elements that can support the construction of a new paradigm: the technology o the constructivism / constructionism (from Piaget to Papert); or Vygotsky's historical-cultural theory; the collaborative (synchronous and asynchronous) learning systems.
4 - The incorporation of technology as a factor of innovation (to the extent that this incorporation can support new school contexts based on constructivism / constructivism and historical-cultural theory, and potentiate collaborative learning mechanisms);
5 - The effectiveness of technology in education: a look at research;
6 - The different ways to imagine using computers in education: from teaching-assisted-by-computer to collaborative learning;
7 - The Logo/Scratch language;
8 - Logo/Scratch at the beginning of schooling and its relationship with psychomotor education;
9 - Software as an element of the learning context;
10 - Assumptions of software evaluation (educational);
11 - The educational potential of commonly used software: text, image, multimedia presentation, e-mail Internet browsing programs;
12 - E-learning versus e-teaching;
13 - Tasks of a practical nature: o Use of search engines to locate resources (texts, images, sounds, videos, programs); o Scratch programming; o Develop multimedia artifacts.

Literature/Sources:

C. Fino , 2001 , Um novo paradigma (para a escola) precisa-se , FORUMA
Carlos Fino , 2001 , Vygotsky e a Zona de Desenvolvimento Proximal (ZDP): três implicações pedagógicas , Revista Portuguesa de educação
FINO, C. N. & SOUSA, J. M. , 2005 , As TIC redesenhando as fronteiras do currículo , Educação & Cultura Contemporânea
Jonassen, D. , 2007 , Computadores, Ferramentas Cognitivas , Porto: Porto Editora
Papert S. , 1997 , A família em rede , Lisboa: Relógio d?Água, Editores
Fino, C. N. , 2000 , Novas tecnologias, cognição e cultura: um estudo no primeiro ciclo do ensino básico , Lisboa: Faculdade de Ciências da Univ de Lisboa
Papert S. , 1980 , Mindstorms - Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas , New York: Basic Books, Inc..
Prensky, M. , 2012 , From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom , Thousand Oaks California: A SAGE Company
Toffler, A. , 2001 , O choque do futuro. , Lisboa: Livros do Brasil
Turkle, S. , 1989 , O Segundo Eu - Os computadores e o espírito humano , Lisboa: Editorial Presença.
Kuhn, T. , 1970 , A Estrutura das Revoluções Científicas , S. Paulo: Editorial Perspectiva
Correia, F. , 2011 , Internet-sala de estudo virtual , Universidade da Madeira

Assesssment methods and criteria:

Classification Type: Quantitativa (0-20)

Evaluation Methodology:
Students develop research, construction, reflection and knowledge sharing in small / large group. As evaluation are: 1. Individually o Individual written work - frequency o Oral presentation 2. In group the elaboration of a multimedia artifact. 3. The responsibility for the evaluation will be shared, according to criteria to be negotiated, between the teacher of the subject and the students, who are invited to the exercise of the self-assessment, and the hetero-evaluation with regard to the work developed in group. 4. Thus, the subject approval corresponds to the arithmetic average of 3 partial marks: Attendance - 10%; Group work - 40%; Frequency - 50%.