Collaborative groups are those in which the
components share the decisions made and are equally
responsible for the quality of what is produced
together.
However, the mere existence of collaboration does
not mean that there is, in fact, a culture of
collaboration, says Damiani (Damiani, 2008). That is
because alternative ways of collaboration may not
constitute collaborative cultures, although they
involve working together. After all, they present
competing subgroups or only occasional jointactions.
The model (Fuks, Hugo, Pimentel, 2011)
classifies the systems that support group work into
three dimensions: communication, coordination, and
collaboration. This classification gave rise to the 3C
Collaboration model, which was later formulated. In
this model, cooperation strictly refers to operating
together, while collaboration refers to doing all the
work together, which involves communication,
coordination, and cooperation.
The benefits of collaborative work among
students have been presented by several researchers
(Colaço, 2004). Among the significant gains of the
implementation of these works in the educational
process is the socialisation among students - which
includes the learning of communicational modalities
and coexistence -,the control of aggressive impulses,
the adaptation to the established norms - including the
learning related to the performance of social roles -,
the overcoming of self-centeredness - through the
progressive relativisation of the own point of view -,
the acquisition of aptitudes and abilities - including
improvements in school performance -, and the
increase in the level of school aspiration.
The network concept can be recognised through
its effectiveness, both from the static and dynamic use
points. The fixed point of use exploits the network's
structure, while the dynamic point exploits the system
that constitutes the network. The analysis of social
networks establishes a new paradigm since the study
of the behaviour or opinions of individuals depends
on the structures in which they are inserted. Thus the
unit of analysis is not individual - sex, class, age,
gender, between others. - but the whole is built
through the interpellation ofthen whole. (Deroy-
Pineau, 1994). This structure is illustrated and
apprehended concretely by the network of
relationships and limitations that weigh on
individuals' choices, orientations, behaviours, and
opinions, as (Bezerra et al., 2014) explains.
Social networks are an essential part of humanity
(Delbem et al., 2014) (Moura et al., 2020). These
networks are based on the interrelationships between
humans seeking a common goal, between entities
and can be mediated and metrified using technologies
(Silva et al., 2018). The observation and research to
raise patterns of connection between social groups
and how connections are established between
individuals are already found in current research.
However, no metric can see how social interactions
within specific networks interfere with academic
development.
The basic premise of information technology is
management through the epistemic- ethical posture of
the individual in the exercise of his autonomy in social
media (Delbem et al., 2014). Its starting point is the
'Inter-relationship' as a marker of cognitive
development. Thus, interaction precedes and
determines knowledge. Therefore, it is investigated
what to do, live together, collaborate, produce, know,
get to know each other, and reciprocate. In short, the
interrelationship.
Therefore, the operations of academic subjects
carried out in virtual spaces by adolescents maintain
the concreteness of proprioception coming from the
instantiated functioning in 'somesthesia.' The virtual
space aggregates the conceptual data, but without
losing the corporal reality, it only changes the state
from real to virtual, preserving the experience of
contact with the actual object (Fuks, Hugo; Pimentel,
2011).
4 PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
We analyse the built social networks from the data
collection to identify patterns and characteristics that
can be metric, proven, and altered. From the
verification of these patterns, the computational
ingenuity succeeds, which, assembled on the relevant
topics that were mathematised in the empirical phase,
serve as an instrument for mapping and automatic
analysis of social networks and behavioural patterns
of participation.
In the first instance, the mediators of data
collection and analysis are the researcher and the
teachers trained to monitor and collect data directly.
In the second instance, using experiments for data
collection is done by the teachers of the network and
their respective coordinators. However, the
researcher's sole responsibility is the data analysis and
mapping of social networks. Moreover, in the third
instance - after the development of the computational
engine - the teachers and pedagogical teams of each
school are responsible for the collection of digital data,
which should be placed directly on the developed
platform that should map and make the analysis of
social networks and the patterns of participation