-
social representations; higher education; IT; biological sciences; remote teaching.
This research focuses on teaching in higher education and falls under the study area of Education, Pedagogical Practices, and Curriculum. It's linked to the Graduate Program in Education at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte. We used Serge Moscovici's Theory of Social Representations (1961) as the theoretical-methodological approach, which examines how knowledge is constructed and shared among a group of individuals in their everyday life and its impact on their interactions based on interpersonal communications, and translation of reality and understanding of social phenomena. We chose to engage with professors of the Biological Sciences Bachelor's degree course at the Federal University of Campina Grande (UFCG). The course is offered at three campuses: Cajazeiras, Cuite, and Patos. Our premise is the social representation of digital technologies and their contribution to the educational process for these professors. This led to our research question: “How are the social representations of digital technologies constituted for the professors of the Biological Sciences Bachelor's degree course at UFCG?” Our general objective was to analyze how these social representations of digital technologies are constituted by the UFCG Biological Science Degree professors at the three UFCG campuses. Specifically, we aimed to understand the professors’ views on digital technologies, categorize the contents of their social representations linked to digital technologies, and identify the most commonly used digital technologies as methodological tools. Our research, conducted with a qualitative approach, involved fieldwork. We collected information through profile questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, analyzing the data using Arruda's Contextualization Spiral approach (2005) within the Theory of Social Representations framework. The findings revealed three dimensions of social representations of digital technologies: 1) devices with internet and tools, 2) distance learning, and 3) technology as a didactic resource. We noted that while professors acknowledged their limitations in using digital technologies as a tool in their classes, their social representations are shaped by their personal and professional learning experiences, influenced by recent technological innovations in this decade. Interestingly, despite the expectation that professors would have a deep understanding of digital technologies, their social representations often reverted to the image of a computer. Furthermore, post-pandemic, professors reported continued use of some technological tools in their classes, primarily messaging apps and Google tools, to support their largely expository teaching styles. Thus, they tend to reproduce existing practices using new technological means.