摘要：This article analyzes and compares the overall content and internal structure of the social representations of a “good student” among teachers of municipal schools in Recife (PE). The authors assumed that new educational practices ere infl uencing these representations. The survey had the participation of 200 teachers who taught in the initial years of elementary education. The sample was divided into two subgroups on the basis of the age variable. The Theory of the Central Nucleus was the main reference for the study. We applied the technique of free association of words. We performed the analysis through the framework of four houses with the support of the EVOC software. The results showed as hypotheses of the central system of both subgroups the words “curious”, “questioning” and “participatory”. This fi nding reinforced our initial assumption, since such elements are closely related to the discourses present in the pedagogical literature and current educational policies. We did not fi nd differences in representations of the two subgroups. Key words: “good student”, social representations, teachers.
其他摘要：This article analyzes and compares the overall content and internal structure of the social representations of a “good student” among teachers of municipal schools in Recife (PE).The authors assumed that new educational practices ere infl uencing these representations. The survey had the participation of 200 teachers who taught in the initial years of elementaryeducation. The sample was divided into two subgroups on the basis of the age variable. The Theory of the Central Nucleus was the main reference for the study. We applied the techniqueof free association of words. We performed the analysis through the framework of four houses with the support of the EVOC software. The results showed as hypotheses of the central system of both subgroups the words “curious”, “questioning” and “participatory”. This fi nding reinforced our initial assumption, since such elements are closely related to the discourses present in the pedagogical literature and current educational policies. We did not fi nd differences in representations of the two subgroups.Key words: “good student”, social representations, teachers.
