Advertisement

Learning in and from Change Laboratory Interventions for Developing Workers’ Health in Brazil

  • Rodolfo Andrade de Gouveia VilelaEmail author
  • Marco Antonio Pereira Querol
  • Amanda Aparecida Silva-Macaia
  • Sandra Lorena Beltran Hurtado
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter summarizes the main results of the ten formative interventions presented in this book. We discuss the strategies used by our research group to support the learning process of the key theoretical and methodological tools used in the Change Laboratory method. We continue describing the role of demand, negotiation, the process of data collection, and the setting of the sessions. We summarize the hypothesis of contradictions and main results achieved so far in the ten interventions. We also reflect about the main learning challenges, the key innovations, and what were the key learning aspects in our research group. We argue that the CL method allowed not only the expansion of the work activities under intervention presented in this book but also the expansion of our research-interventionist activity, contributing to a broader understanding of who and how should be involved in interventions for developing workers’ health and safety. The method contributed toward a more systemic and historical approach in which interventions should be collaboratively constructed rather than imposed by an expert. Moreover, thanks to the theoretical tools used in the method, the findings could be generalized to other cases, allowing the new locally produced concepts to be applied in different settings.

Keywords

Expansive learning Formative interventions Occupational health and safety 

References

  1. Ahonen, H., & Virkkunen, J. (2003). Shared challenge for learning: Dialogue between management and front-line workers in knowledge management. International Journal of Information Technology and Management, 2(1–2), 59–84.  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJITM.2003.002449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alves, S. M. P. (2007). Freire e Vigotski: Um diálogo entre a pedagogia freireana e a psicologia histórico-cultural [these]. São Paulo; Universidade de São Paulo.  https://doi.org/10.11606/T.48.2008.tde-16062008-133010.
  3. Alves, S. M. (2012). Freire e Vigotski: Um diálogo entre a pedagogia freireana e a psicologia histórico-cultural. Chapecó: Argos.Google Scholar
  4. Almeida, I.M., & Vilela, R.A.G. (2010). Modelo de Análise e Prevenção de Acidentes de Trabalho - MAPA. Piracicaba: CEREST.Google Scholar
  5. Almeida, I.M., Vilela, R.A.G., Silva, A.J.N., & Beltran, S.L. (2014). Modelo de Análise e Prevenção de Acidentes - MAPA: Ferramenta para a vigilância em saúde do trabalhador. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 19(12), 4679–4688. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320141912.12982014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Béguin, P. (2003). Design as a mutual learning process between users and designers. Interacting with Computers, 15(5), 709–730.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0953-5438(03)00060-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dias, A. V. C., & Lima, F. P. A. (2014). Work organization and occupational health in the contemporary capitalism. In M. G. Ribeiro (Ed.), Frontiers in occupational health and safety (pp. 3–31). Sharjah: Bentham Science.Google Scholar
  8. Donatelli, S. (2019). Metodologias formativas: Contribuição para o desenvolvimento colaborativo da cadeia de semijoias de Limeira [these]. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo. https//:doi:10.11606/T.6.2019.tde-25042019-095410.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, A. (2007). Revealing relational work. In Working relational in across practices: A cultural-historical approach to collaboration (pp. 1–24). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.Google Scholar
  11. Engeström, Y. (2006). Development, movement and agency: Breaking away into mycorrhizae activities. In K. Yamazumi (Ed.), Building activity theory in practice: Toward the next generation (pp. 1–43). Osaka: Center for Human Activity Theory. Kansai University.Google Scholar
  12. Engeström, Y. (2007). In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. M. Wertsch (Eds.), Putting Vygotsky to work: The Change Laboratory as an application of double stimulation (pp. 363–425). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Engeström, Y. (2009). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. Gutierrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 303–328). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. New York: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  15. Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Engeström, Y., Virkkunen, J., Helle, M., Pihlaja, J., & Poikela, R. (1996). The Change Laboratory as a tool for transforming work. Lifelong Learning in Europe., 1(2), 10–17.Google Scholar
  17. Falzon, P. (2014). Constructive ergonomics. Boca raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferreira, L. L. (2015). Análise coletiva do trabalho: Quer ver? Escuta. Revista Ciências do Trabalho., 4, 125–137.Google Scholar
  19. Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Texas: Continuum.Google Scholar
  20. Feitosa, S. C. S. (1999). Método Paulo Freire: Princípios e práticas de uma concepção popular de educação [dissertation]. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.   Google Scholar
  21. Guérin, F., Laville, A., Daniellou, F., Duraffourg, J., & Kerguelen, A. (1997). Comprendre le travail pour le transformer – La pratique de l’ergonomie. Lyon: ANACT.Google Scholar
  22. Haapasaari, A., Engeström, Y., & Kerosuo, H. (2016). The emergence of learners’ transformative agency in a Change Laboratory intervention. Journal of Education and Work, 29(2), 232–262.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.900168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heikkila, H., & Seppänen, L. (2014). Examining developmental dialogue: The emergence of transformative agency outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 15(2), 5–30.Google Scholar
  24. Jackson Filho, J. M., Vilela, R. A. G., Fischer, F. M., & Simonelli, A. P. (2016). Desafios pedagógicos do ensino da ergonomia da atividade na pósgraduação em saúde pública. Ação ergonômica, 12(2), 120–125.Google Scholar
  25. Lopes, M. G. R., Vilela, R. A. G., & Seppänen, L. (2016). O papel da dupla estimulação e da agência para entender as contradições em obras de construção de um aeroporto. In 18° Congresso Brasileiro de Ergonomia; 2016 May 23–26; Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: ABERGO. Google Scholar
  26. Lopes, M. G. R., Vilela, R. A. G., & Querol, M. A. P. (2018). Agency for a systemic comprehension of work accidents and organizational anomalies. Trabalho, Educação e Saúde, 2, 1–26.  https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-7746-sol00128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Llory, M., & Montmayeul, R. (2010). L’accident et l’organisation. Bordeaux: Préventique.Google Scholar
  28. Marx, K. (2011). Grundrisse: Manuscritos econômicos de 1857–1858: esboços da crítica da economia política. São Paulo: Boitempo. Google Scholar
  29. Metzger, J., Maugeri, S., & Benedetto-Meyer, M. (2012). Predomínio da gestão e violência simbólica. Revista Brasileira de Saúde Ocupacional, 37(126), 225–242.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0303-76572012000200005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miettinen, R. (2009). Contradictions of high-technology capitalism and the emergence of new forms of work. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. D. Gutierrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 160–175). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Scribner, S. (1997). 1925 - Vygostsky’s uses of history. In E. Tobach, R. J. Falmagne, B. Parlee Mary, L. M. W. Martin, & A. S. Kapelman (Eds.), Mind and social practice. Select writings of Sylvia Scribner (pp. 241–265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Sannino, A. Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M. (2016) Formative interventions for expansive learning and transformative agency. Journal of Learning Sciences, 25(4), 599–633. http://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2016.1204547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vänninen, I., Pereira-Querol, M., & Engeström, Y. (2015). Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming integrated pest management. Agricultural Systems, 139, 38–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.06.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Virkkunen, J., & Newnham, D. S. (2013). The Change Laboratory: A tool for collaborative development of work and education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The psychology of higher mental functions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodolfo Andrade de Gouveia Vilela
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marco Antonio Pereira Querol
    • 2
  • Amanda Aparecida Silva-Macaia
    • 1
  • Sandra Lorena Beltran Hurtado
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental HealthSchool of Public Health, University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Agronomic EngineeringFederal University of SergipeSão CristóvãoBrazil

Personalised recommendations