Revista Brasileira de Educação do Campo

The Brazilian Scientific Journal of Rural Education

THEMATIC DOSSIER / ARTIGO/ARTICLE/ARTÍCULO

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20873/uft.2525-4863.2018v3n4p1294

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1294

Este conteúdo utiliza a Licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Open Access. This content is licensed under a Creative Commons attribution-type BY

Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings

of pedagogical practice in countryside schools

Elisvania Nunes Braz

1

, Nilsa Brito Ribeiro

2

1

Instituto Federal do Pará- IFPA. Setor Pedagógico/Ensino. Avenida Brasília s/n. Vila Permanente. Tucuruí - PA. Brasil.

2

Universidade Federal do Sul e Sudeste do Pará - UNIFESSPA.

Author for correspondence: elisvaniabraz@yahoo.com.br

ABSTRACT: This article aims at understating in Internship

Reports written by female students during the Degree in

Countryside Education, the different social voices (discourses)

that percolate these women’s representation of the pedagogical

practices in countryside schools. The working hypothesis is that

these representations implicate the relation between the course’s

objectives to other social spheres that potentialize or challenge

the theorical, methodological and political configuration of the

degree itself if taken as object of enquiry. Analyses of excerpts

from the reports were theoretically grounded on the social

historical conception of language by Bakhtin and the Circle as

well as on the theoretical knowledge produced in the

Countryside Education studies. Analytical Results are identified

in the internship reports written by female students as the

remarkable presence of discourses turned to i) the pedagogical

“how to” of educators in the countryside; ii) the conflicting

relation between school-knowledge and the knowledge from

experiences lived by the learning subjects. That discursive

regularity present in the students’ reports from a teaching degree

leads us to the provisory conclusion that discourses by

undergraduate subjects produced in the alternance of educational

times point to both challenges and potentialities of an

educational proposition open to multiple voices present in the

very conception of the degree.

Keywords: Amazon, Women, Undergraduate Education,

Countryside Education.

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1295

A escrita de educandas do campo sobre sentidos da prática

pedagógica em escolas do campo

RESUMO. Este artigo tem por objetivo apreender, em

relatórios de Estágio escritos por mulheres estudantes de um

curso de Licenciatura em Educação do Campo, diferentes vozes

sociais (discursos) que permeiam as representações dessas

mulheres sobre o fazer pedagógico em escolas do campo. A

hipótese de trabalho é que estas representações evidenciam a

relação da proposta do curso com outras esferas sociais que

potencializam ou desafiam a configuração teórica, metodológica

e política do próprio curso, se tomadas como objeto de

problematizações. Para a análise de excertos extraídos dos

relatórios nos fundamentamos teoricamente na perspectiva

sócio-histórica de linguagem formulada por Bakhtin e seu

Círculo, além de fundamentos teóricos produzidos no domínio

dos estudos da Educação do Campo. Como resultados analíticos,

identificamos nos relatórios das educandas em situações de

Estágio, uma forte presença de discursos que se voltam: i) para o

"como fazer” pedagógico dos educadores das escolas do campo;

ii) para a relação conflituosa entre os saberes escolarizados e os

saberes do vivido no cotidiano dos sujeitos da aprendizagem.

Essa regularidade discursiva presente nos relatórios das

estudantes da licenciatura nos leva a concluir provisoriamente

que os discursos dos sujeitos em formação produzidos na

alternância dos tempos formativos indiciam desafios e

potencialidades de uma proposta educativa aberta à

multiplicidade de vozes presentes na própria proposta do curso.

Palavras-chave: Amazônia, Mulheres, Formação, Educação do

Campo.

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1296

La escritura de las estudiantes del campo sobre los

sentidos de la práctica pedagógica en las escuelas del

campo

RESUMEN. El objetivo de este artículo es analizar, en

Informes de Prácticas hecho por mujeres estudiantes de un curso

en Licenciatura en Educación del Campo, distintas voces en el

hacer pedagógico en escuelas campesinas. La hipótesis de

trabajo es que las representaciones evidencian la relación de la

propuesta del curso con otras esferas sociales que potencializan

o desafían la configuración teórica, metodológica y política del

propio curso, si se toman como objeto de estudio fragmentos

extraídos de los informes de prácticas. Nos basamos

teóricamente en la perspectiva sociointeracionista de Bakhtin y

su círculo, además de estudios teóricos en la Educación

Campesina. Como resultados, identificamos en los informes de

prácticas una fuerte presencia de discursos que se vuelven: i)

para el “cómo hacer” pedagógico de los educadores de las

escuelas campesinas; ii) para la relación de conflicto entre los

saberes de la institución escolar y los saberes vividos en el

cotidiano de los sujetos del aprendizaje. Esa regularidad

discursiva se nos lleva a la conclusión, provisional, de que los

discursos de los sujetos en formación construidos en la

alternancia de los tiempos formativos indican desafíos y

potencialidades de una propuesta educativa abierta a la

multiplicidad de voces que están en la base de la propia

propuesta del curso.

Palabras-clave: Amazonia, Mujeres, Formación, Educación

campesina.

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1297

Introduction

Mikhail Bakhtin and the Circle

understand language as a symbolic

universe in which we are born and move in

a way that all spheres of human activity are

bound by its use. We share the Bakhtinian

assumption that it is in the human

interactive processes in the different life

spheres of production that we are

constituted through the mediation of

language. Therefore, the signs internalized

in interactional processes are not univocal

in meaning but filled with plurivocal

meanings from the different spheres in

which we interact to one another. In

Bakhtin’s words

i

:

At any given moment, languages of

various epochs and periods od socio-

ideological life cohabit with one

another. Even languages of the day

exist: one could say that today’s and

yesterday’s socio-ideological and

political “day” do not, in a certain

sense share the same language; every

day represents another socio-

ideological semantic “state of

affairs”, another vocabulary, another

accentual system with its own

slogans, its own ways of assigning

blame and praise. Poetry

depersonalizes “days” in language,

while prose, as we shall see, often

deliberately intensifies the difference

between them, gives them embodied

representation and dialogically

opposes them to one another in

unresolvable dialogues.

(Bakhtin/Voloshinov

ii

, 2006, p. 291).

It is that notion of language always

marked by historical processes in which it

is produced, that guides the analysis of

reports written by female students from

two major Countryside Education

(henceforth LPEC) [Licenciatura em

Educação do Campo] classes at Federal

University in the South and Southeast of

Pará (Unifesspa) [Universidade Federal do

Sul e Sudeste do Pará], to comprehend

how these students dialogue in their

written reports with other social voices that

constitute their subjectivities in the

undergraduate context. Therefore, it the

article’s main objective to learn from the

written reports by female students how

they produce in their discourse

representations of the educational work in

countryside schools and which other voices

intersect in the dialogical or interdiscursive

process.

Reports were produced in the

educational praxis on which the

undergraduate course is based which

implicates two educational contexts:

university time-space and local time-space.

By binding both these time-spaces to social

reality and to the conditions of the material

(re)production of subjects in the

countryside, LPEC seeks to overcome

classroom limitations and to foster a real

possibility of understanding the social

contradictions that move it. Regarding

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1298

countryside educators, it is important to

understand how feminine subjectivities

experience their undergraduate degree in

the relationship between these educational

times.

Methodology

The theoretical framework of the

dialogic relationship that holds as founding

principle the understanding of the others’

discourse anchored the steps taken from

corpus selection to their analysis.

1. The first contact with the Dean of

the Countryside Education Degree

[Faculdade de Educação do

Campo] at Unifesspa allowed

access to files from LPEC, where

reports written by undergraduates

throughout the course are

organized.

2. Selecting the 2009 and 2011

classes and respective reports to

compose the research corpus.

Reports by the 2009 class were

chosen as this was the first class of

LPEC/UNIFESSPA, and it was

expected that those reports

provided us with characteristic

features of the educational history

for the first undergraduate

experience with supervised register

of local time-space. Furthermore,

since the 2009 class had already

finished the program, the set of

written reports would contain the

register of all steps of local time-

space thus providing a wider

insight on the process. Choosing

the 2011 class is justified by the

reasonable chronological distance

from the 2009 class which would

allow observations of possible

variations of research decisions

and the subsequent effects on both

production and register of the

research work. Another reason for

having chosen the latter was the

fact that the Pedagogical Project to

which it was bound was a

modified version of the 2009

pioneer project.

3. By accessing the archives, the

reports were gathered using as

organization criterion students

register, class years, research steps

and guiding axes.

The present investigation develops

from a socio-historical perspective

characterized by the aspects listed by

Freitas (2003, p. 27-28):

1. Data source is the text (context) in

which the event rises, focusing on

the particular as instance of social

totality…

2. Research questions are not

established by the

operationalization of variables

rather they are oriented towards

understanding phenomena in all

their complexity and historical

development. This prevents the

creation of artificial situation for

investigation and meets the

situation as it is happening in its

development.

In addition, research subjects (LPEC

female students) are seen in its singularity

“but situated in relation to the historical-

social context, therefore, what happens in

the research is not the gathering of

individual psyches but a relation of texts to

context”

iii

(Freitas, 2003, p. 29).

From this theoretical-methodological

perspective, reports written by female

students were taken as discourses which

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1299

allowed multiple readings since words are

symbolic elements and not translucid: “the

enunciation does not communicate it all,

the researcher must search for the effects

of meanings which demands leaving the

enunciation and getting to the enunciable

through interpretation”

iv

. (Caregnato &

Mutti, 2006, p. 681). Therefore, reports

taken as discourse are connected to the

historical conditions in which they are

produced. An important data that is part of

students’ writing constraints is that their

reports integrate the knowledge activated

during the university time-space as well as

the knowledge that is constructed through

experiences developed in the local time-

space be it schools or another place of

human activity in their communities. The

focus of our analysis befalls on the

meanings that rise from the articulation

between these two forms of knowledge:

historically produced knowledge

systematized in the scientific sphere and

knowledge from experience produced in

the subjects’ daily lives.

In the present article, nine reports

produced in the confluence of times and

spaces in the LPEC degree at Unifesspa

were analyzed. Several themes emerged

from the discursive analysis of these

reports, from which two were chosen:

Teaching knowledge centered on the “how

to” and tensions between school-

knowledge and lived knowledge.

According to Bakhtin/Voloshinov (2006),

the theme (something individual and

reiterable) is not taken merely as content,

subject, topic or main title of a

text/discourse. Consequently, it does not

become an isolated word exactly because

“The theme of an utterance is concrete-as

concrete as the historical instant to which

the utterance belongs”

v

.

(Bakhtin/Voloshinov, 1973, p. 100).

Threading considerations on the Degree

Countryside education according to

Caldart (2009) is a new concept and can

only be understood in its original

materiality, strongly bound to the historical

movement that first originated it.

Understanding countryside education

demands locating it in the triad countryside

– public policies – education. These

dimensions according to Caldart (2009) are

indissociable in the comprehension of

Countryside Education as a project

originated from social and union

movements in the fight for agrarian reform

and, most importantly, in the defense of

life and of survival in the countryside.

Caldart (2009, p. 40) argues that

Countryside Education emerged in a

given moment and historical context

and cannot be understood in itself or

merely in the educational world or in

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1300

the theoretical parameters of

pedagogy. It is a real movement of

fight against the current state of

affairs: a practical movement with

practical purposes or objectives and

practical tools, that expresses and

produces theoretical conceptions,

criticism to certain notions of

education, of education policies, of

projects for both the countryside and

the country but that are

interpretations of reality constructed

to guide concrete actions/fights

vi

.

After the consolidation of several

academic experiences supported by the

National Program of Education in Agrarian

Reform [Programa Nacional de Educação

na Reforma Agrária] (Pronera) as well as

by countryside social and union

movements and the yet existent in 2007

association of Federal University of Pará

[Universidade Federal do Pará] (UFPA

vii

)

to the Federal Government Sponsoring

Program to Plans for Restructuring and

Expanding Brazilian Federal Universities

[Programa do Governo Federal de Apoio a

Planos de Reestruturação e Expansão das

Universidades Federais Brasileiras]

(REUNI)

viii

, UFPA/Marabá started offering

the first Degree in Countryside Education

in the South and Southeast of Pará in 2009.

In the initial notes in the book Counter-

hegemonic practices in educational

degrees: reflections from the degree in

Countryside Education in the South and

Southeast of Pará [Práticas contra-

hegemônicas na formação de educadores:

reflexões a partir do curso de Licenciatura

em Educação do Campo do Sul e Sudeste

do Pará] (2014), the editors allude to the

experiences of educating countryside

educators and highlight:

The total conquered by this historical

construction has enabled the

conception of the Teacher Degree in

Countryside Education [Licenciatura

Plena em Educação o Campo]

(LPEC) that since 2009 has offered

one class per year. Albeit the

institutionalization of degrees for

Unifesspa represent the convergence

of a national policy for Countryside

Education, it answers more

concretely to demands by movements

in Countryside Education in the

region, especially as part of the fight

for Agrarian Reform. (Santigo, Souza

& Ribeiro, 2014, p. 11)

ix

.

More than the offer of a new teacher

degree, LPEC is a proposal born from/with

countryside subjects (Caldart, 2011)

similar to other regions in the country. In

the South and Southeast regions in Pará,

the degree is presented as part of a wider

fight in which the counter-hegemonic

project of graduating countryside educators

is inserted. Underlying the mission of the

degree regarding social struggle, its

required courses are structured in four

knowledge areas “sustaining the exercise

and search for interdisciplinarity as a

principle for future educators”. (Unifesspa,

2014, p. 15)

x

. They are Human and Social

Sciences [Ciências Humanas e Sociais]

(CHS), Agrarian and Natural Sciences

[Ciências Agrárias e da Natureza] (CAN),

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1301

Literature and Languages (LL) and

Mathematics (MAT).

Choosing areas of knowledge is an

important strategy for teaching degrees to

expand the offer of final years of primary

education and high school in the

countryside because in many places

schooling is yet limited to the initial years

of primary school. It is highlighted in

respect to the expansion of access to

education that “the main intention is to

contribute to the construction of processes

capable of triggering changes in the

reasoning of use and production of

knowledge in the countryside”. (Molina,

2015, p. 153)

xi

.

This reasoning is related to the

“process of destabilization of a given order

and the denaturalization of a (disciplinary)

curriculum that is historic, but begins to be

taken as the only possible in working with

knowledge” (Caldart, 2011, p.141)

xii

.

Criticism to this reasoning promotes

rethinking of both the education of future

educators and their teaching activities in

various localities. Molina and Sá (2012, p.

471-472) claim that:

As respects the proposal of educating

in areas, disciplines are not the main

objective of the pedagogic work with

knowledge. This work is directed

towards questions of reality as

objects of study based on the

appropriation of scientific knowledge

already stored. Epistemological

questions are thus made about the

very conception of knowledge,

science and research. It is questioned

how the pedagogical work can

guarantee the movement between

appropriation of knowledge and its

production and the articulation of

knowledge and educational process

as a permanent whole between the

knowledge sciences helps producing

and current life issues. Phenomena

from real life need to be studied in

their complexity, such as they exist in

reality, by means of an approach that

comprehends totalities in their

contradictions, their historical

movement. (Molina & Sá, 2012, p.

471-472)

xiii

.

The choice of working with

knowledge areas in LPEC is based on the

pedagogy of praxis and the appreciation of

the subjects’ experiences as concrete forms

of producing and generating knowledge to

transform reality (Unifesspa, 2014). Due to

the understanding of praxis as reflexive

action of constructed knowledge and the

association of theory-practice in the

teaching practice, the degree assumes as

ethical and pedagogical principles:

contextualized higher education; the reality

and experiences of countryside

communities as object of study and

knowledge source; research as educational

principle; the indivisibility of theory-

practice; planning and educational act

integrated to the knowledge areas; learners

as subjects of knowledge and; academic

production to transform reality.

It is announced in the curricular

guidelines of the Pedagogical Project

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1302

designed for the LPEC/Unifesspa the

articulation of various knowledge in the

context of countryside populations without

neglecting the theories and methods from

the academic sphere. It is believed that

through these guidelines, the degree

achieves its mission.

The bond between education to the

space of rural life is materialized and

organized in LPEC through the alternance

of two times in the graduation that

complement each other dialectically to

promote the pedagogical education of

countryside educators. They are: the

University Time-Space [Tempo-Espaço

Universidade] (TEU) and the Local Time-

Space [Tempo-espaço Localidade]

(TEL)

xiv

. These time-spaces are

comprehended as “territories of knowledge

characterized by disputes, conflicts, power

relations inherent to the historical

construction of the social being”. (Costa &

Monteiro, 2014, p. 117).

The organization of times and spaces

in alternance (School Time and

Community Time) is based on the

principle that school and community

are times/spaces to construct and

evaluate knowledge and therefore it

is necessary to overcome the

understanding of school as a place of

theory and the community as the

place of application/transformation.

During the graduation, the student

develops a time to study at university

and another one at home/work.

Hence, there are no distances during

the graduation but different

spaces/times to produce and socialize

knowledge. (Antunes-Rocha, 2010,

p. 02).

University Time-space embraces

Seminars of socialization of Local Time-

Space and “studies on pedagogical

knowledge and countryside education

centered on teacher’s education”.

(Unifesspa, 2014, p. 29), materialized in

studies throughout the Common Core

Requirements and Specific Requirements

Core.

Local Time-space is the moment in

which learners are immersed in their places

of origin to practice local research and to

learn the social, educational, political and

cultural context through investigative

practice. Such time-space gathers different

activities in its educational itinerary.

According to the Pedagogical Project (PP),

these activities are divided into: Socio-

Educational Research and Teaching

Internship. According to the curricular

project, Local Times-space is:

The time of practices of social and

educational research, configuring a

moment of academic investigation on

the pedagogical day-today of rural

schools and the communities where

they are located. It is the moment to

collect data and go through socio-

educational experiences along with

the school and the community to

foster reflections on the reality and

pedagogical processes that are

developed in the countryside.

(Unifesspa, 2014, p. 30).

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1303

Educational times for LPEC – TEU

and TEL – are composed of five thematic

axes: (Society, State, Social Movements,

and Agrarian Questions; Countryside

Education; Knowledge, Culture and

Identity; Familiar systems of production;

Countryside, territoriality and

sustainability) distributed in eight stages.

According to this proposal, the axis model

breaks with the disciplinary tradition to

articulate different knowledge areas. Three

distinct and interrelated cores – core

foundation, specific requirement core and

free or complementary core – consolidate

the educational trajectory in the eight

stages of time-spaces oriented by the

theme axes.

Internship reports, the corpus of the

present paper, are produced in the

movement of alternance between both

these times (TEU and TEL) and are always

guided by the reflections produced in each

axis. Therefore, the interpretation of

meanings from the students’ reports must

take into account the context fostered by

the reflections in each axis. Next, the

analysis of the enunciations extracted from

the reports follows a dialogical conception

of language as it enables the mobilization

of different voices present in a given

discourse and the social struggle there

produced. Before analysis, nonetheless,

brief notes on the Bakhtinian dialogical

theory that supports analysis have to be

shared.

In the discourse of women educators,

other voices rehearse dialogue

The effective organization and

development of analysis involved

collecting the enunciations around themes

as the meaning/theme constitute the unit of

a complex whole in the discursive chain

circulating in the society. Theme for

Bakhtin has no correspondence to the

random gathering of subjects to debate as it

is traditionally done in writing classes at

school. Bakhtin argues that the theme

emerges from the subjects’ discourses in

their relation to history, in a given sphere

of human activity, therefore it is not an a

priori data to discourses because it can

only be comprehended in the relationship

between the researcher to what is said in a

given conjuncture.

In the current investigation, what is

written/said in the reports is taken as

discourses/enunciations mobilized by

representations that undergraduate students

produce about the world, about themselves,

about the other from the social and

ideological place they occupy in the world.

Writing by these female students,

discursively understood, composes the

enunciative chain of the endless production

of their knowledge throughout the

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1304

graduation, even before they get to the

school. Meanings conveyed by the reports

are always interpreted in their dialogic

relationship because no discourse

circulates in the world without carrying the

echoes of alterities, no discourse is

indifferent to the social voices with which

it dialogues in the form of response,

adherence, rebuttal, complement,

questioning, refusal etc.

Following the method proposed by

Bakhtin (1973) for working with language,

the first approximation concerns the socio-

historical conditions in which the Project

of Countryside Education is materialized

and the political, educational and cultural

context of the subjects involved in the

project as previously discussed. The

second approximation involves the spheres

in which the reports were produced,

considering the scientific/university

sphere, the research environment in the

community as well as the students’ work

spaces; finally, the materiality of the

enunciation is achieved to comprehend the

movement of discourses.

A dialogical process with the

academic knowledge is realized when the

students recollect knowledge from the

community, granting it research status and

objectifying it in both the learning process

and the construction of new knowledge.

Consequently, a complex discursive

movement guided by the constitutive

dialogic principle of that articulation that

transits from systematized knowledge

(TEU) and social/local knowledge (TEL).

Each one of these time-spaces is

constituted by its inherent ideologies that

reveal their tensions and conflicts.

In this regard, we share the

Bakhtinian notion that words once they are

said are inevitably inhabited by other

voices in such a way that every discourse

in recollecting the already said is open to

the incorporation of new voices in an

interactive process between the discourse

that precedes the saying and the discourse

to come. Therefore, it is assumed that

words enunciated by students in their

reports dispute different meanings thus

allowing the observation of signs of

ideological struggle.

Enunciations under analysis were

divided into two themes that appeared

more frequently in the students reports,

characterizing their relation with the

educational practice in the countryside

schools. These themes were: teacher

knowledge centered on the “how to”;

tensions between school knowledge and

lived knowledge.

Teacher knowledge centered on the

“how to”

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1305

Enunciations collected under this

theme refer to the close attention paid by

students in LPEC to the issue of teaching

methods in countryside schools. At times,

the attention to that dimension of teaching

at times holds a positive nature, at other

times, a negative one. Focusing on these

discourses helps understanding the

conception of education underlying a

discourse in which the teaching method,

that is, the how to, juxtaposes the what do

to do, why to do it, whom to do it with.

What histories of education are at the basis

of such discourses?

E1

xv

:

Even though content is the the

teacher’s basic instrument, it is

interesting to highlight that its

socialization occurs under a careful

thinking of the subjects’ day-to-day

so students can reflect critically

following the theoretical frame

necessary for thinking the reality in

which they are involved. In other

words, the teacher makes an effort to

contextualize content by bringing

examples from the media, daily

examples from the students’ lives

especially when it concerns youth,

thus dialoguing with their lived

experiences and previous knowledge

in an interdisciplinary manner using

elements of other disciplines to

construct the philosophical thinking

(I. S. S. S. / VI TEL, 2014

xvi

)

xvii

.

E2:

Although the teacher used just the

textbook in her classes, in three

moments she brought examples from

the activities to the students’ reality,

which caused greater participation by

the students in giving examples, also

these examples were in the number

of two or three, soon the teacher

asked students to answer two

questions from the textbook, when

she ended the interactive dialogue in

the classroom (M. E. C. G./ IV TEL,

2011)

xviii

.

E3:

Following the content and the lesson

plan, the teacher when working with

texts starts by orally reading it,

introducing reflexive questions, then

moving to the interpretation

questions in the book, that is when

students sit together and copy and

answer, mostly it happens like this.

Grammar studies follows the almost

same method, studying concepts

from the content after explanation by

examples, doing the exercises,

individual activity in class where

students copy the questions from the

book onto their notebooks and

answer them afterwards. There are

times when the textbook questions

are replaced by questions written by

the teacher. While students are

silently answering the questions, the

teacher prepares something for later

and when the time is up, questions

are corrected or left for the next

class. Generally, this is how classes

occur three days a week (A. C. S. D. /

IV TEL, 2011)

xix

.

E4:

Watching the students’ classroom

routine, I noted that the in one class

teacher was using as the main

support materials the textbook, the

board and chalk. Usually, teachers

write the content on the board,

explain it, students write it down and

answer activities and afterwards

return it for the teachers to correct.

(M. R. J./III TEL, 2009).

The curricular activity that generated

the reports from which enunciations 1 to 4

were extracted is named Teaching

Internship for Systematic Observational

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1306

Research. That activity consists of

observing and registering school

knowledge and methods developed in

countryside schools. In spite of the

diversity of aspects to be observed by

LPEC students during the observation and

registering stage in the internship, the

reports show that their emphasis most

frequently lies on the teaching method

used by the school teacher. The sustained

attention to teaching methodology

produces the effect of searching for related

meanings, in other words, it is necessary to

investigate the historical conditions that

guide students to choose as center of their

observations the methods used by the

teacher in the classroom.

Focusing on the materiality of

enunciations 1, 2, 3 and 4, it is seen that

future teachers watch the teaching practice

questioning, confronting and evaluating it

according to what they consider to be a

transformative and coherent to the specific

needs of countryside subjects.

In their representations, the teacher

in primary countryside schools is

characterized as the one who 1) is limited

to the use of the board, chalk and the

textbook as exclusive pedagogical

support to teaching (I noted that the in

one class teacher was using as the main

support materials the textbook, the board

and chalk.); 2) seldom uses examples

from students’ daily lives or resorts to

research to produce knowledge

(Although content is the only instrument

used by the teacher, who little stimulates

investigation or research, at first I do not

see the activities involving projects or

group actions, I also did not noted the

exploration of local knowledge such as

oral stories, local knowledge or popular

tales); 3) follows a linear application of

didactic activities (Usually, teachers write

the content on the board, explain it,

students write it down and answer

activities and afterwards return it for the

teachers to correct).

These negative representations are

found in many writings by LPEC students.

At the same time, these evaluations

delineate representations by the students

concerning the “good educator” in the

countryside such as in enunciation 1: “it is

interesting to highlight that its

socialization occurs under a careful

thinking of the subjects’ day-to-day so

students can reflect critically following the

theoretical frame necessary for thinking

the reality in which they are involved”. The

same positive observation is seen in

enunciation 2: “she brought examples from

the activities to the students’ reality”.

The excerpts show that the

methodological practice is the main aspect

observed by students. That relevance is

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1307

permeated with meanings that at times

attribute the choice of this or that method

to the success or failure of the teaching-

learning process. By placing in the

enunciative scene proposals that aim to

improve the educational process they are

analyzing, students seem to distance

themselves from the negative image of the

observed teacher, while they also

(re)construct for themselves the image of

an educator aware of the life stories of the

subjects in the countryside.

Enunciations centered on the

discourse of action (the teacher did that or

did not do that) rather than on the

understanding of why theses actions were

realized, promotes the debate on the

Pedagogy of Competences (Ramos, 2012)

as a strong tendency in the field of teacher

education and well discussed in the official

documents that guide education in Brazil.

Revisiting the discourse of the other, that

of the competences, is necessary in a

degree that aims to overcoming discourses

of pedagogic competences, since analyzing

discourses means considering the social

and historical dimensions of the texts in

order to examine the process of discursive

constitution as well as emerging

representations.

The notion of competence became

very popular in the 1990s especially after

the educational reforms occurred in Brazil

to attend the demands of the process of

productive restructuring of capital. In that

pragmatic conception of teaching,

emphasis is placed on the valorization of

subjectivities and individual

differentiation. Thus, the emphasis

students’ discourse place on the “how to”

as the main dimension of teacher’s

education might implicate the logic of

competences, specially if those

enunciations are not taken throughout their

degree as objects of reflection. Therefore,

dialogue between the many voices that

sustain the discourse enabled by LPEC

students’ reflections allow insight into

conceptions and pedagogical

representations upon which the educational

processes started in primary school are

based.

Naturally, these students’ discourses

dialogue with LPEC academic discourse

which has been fiercely criticizing

conceptions of teaching that take the

textbook as the exclusive source of

information for the primary school teacher.

This dialogical relation enables the

observation in the students’ discourse of

the textbook as a “villain” in the teaching-

learning process by either stripping the

teacher of their autonomy or preventing a

wider approach on the historic, political,

and social context, precisely because they

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1308

do not embrace the themes of the concrete

life of the subjects.

Therefore, LPEC students are

anchored on their academic education to

elaborate their perceptions of the other and,

in that, they show that countryside

education has a very long path to trace

towards problematizing the construction of

new teaching identities in countryside

schools. Therefore, discourses converge to

another theme which we named tensions

between school knowledge and lived

knowledge, to show in the discourses, the

expectations of LPEC students regarding

the transformation of the school and

educational processes lived and practiced

locally.

Tensions between school-knowledge and

lived knowledge

The focus of this session is the

tension denounced by students in their

discourses in respect to the silencing of

subjects’ knowledge regardless of their

school knowledge. Thus, it is seen the

presence of interdiscursive relations

between LPEC students and the project

Countryside Education in the defense of an

indissociable link of University-

systematized content and the subjects’

daily knowledge that are brought into the

school system.

Enunciations 5 and 6 although

produced by students from different classes

belong to the same knowledge axis:

Knowledge, Culture and Identity. Research

from both classes were themes “school

knowledge in teaching practice and school

curriculum aimed at: observing school

knowledge for countryside education,

focusing educational relations and

curricular content practiced…” (Unifesspa,

2014, p. 42).

E5:

In the pedagogic process of the

school I could note the difficulties of

the teachers in planning the teaching,

they follow textbooks to select and

organize knowledge used to educate

students without looking at the

curricular implications of that

attitude, as the didactic material is far

from the reality of these students (C.

M. da C./ III TEL, 2009).

E6:

The knowledge the school presents to

students is exclusively that of the

textbooks, there is not a crossing of

texts with the students’ reality, the

valorization of each student’s culture

and their empiric knowledge is not

taken into consideration in the

classroom. During classes, the

educator used just the textbook and

the notebooks to copy and answer

activities, the evaluations are of a

single type, students answer all

questions and get good grades, if they

cannot answer the questions

according to the educator’s

corrections, they either did not learn

anything or are not capable of

moving onto the next year/grade (L.

S. S. / IV TEL, 2011).

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1309

The textbook is recognized as a

resource that teachers can use in the

process of teaching-learning. However, it

is known that textbooks production from

its origins has been questioned for

attending editorial demands that disagree

with the various pedagogical orientations

concerning educational and cultural

diversity.

Silva (2012) discusses the

fetishization of the textbook and highlights

the overestimation of that didactic resource

in the Brazilian school culture. He argues

that “the status textbooks achieved in

social representations is the result of a

complex history, significant economic

value and ideological and political

implications, especially in the times of the

Brazilian Republic”. (Silva, 2012, p. 803).

Using the textbook as a single

resource “without looking at the curricular

implications of that attitude” as registered

by the student in Enunciation 5, imposes

limitations on the educational process that

prevent learning subjects from

problematizing their local realities and

interfering with them. Limiting the

construction of knowledge to a single

orientation already present in a textbook,

for a homogenized and unified content,

becomes an obstacle for the development

of educational projects turned to local

realities. Taking the textbook as the only

trigger for knowledge is dooming

countryside schools to precariousness.

Hence, it ought not to be ignored that

limitations in the material conditions of

countryside schools “point to the

contradiction between the discourse of law,

juridical framework and specific

educational policy”. (Silva, 2009, p. 348).

In addition to featuring the textbook

as exclusive trigger for learning, the

enunciations also denote the educational

conception predominant in the

methodological practices observed in the

countryside schools researched by the

students, in which the teacher is the central

figure.

E7:

The educator teaches based

exclusively on the textbook, there is

no bibliographic research, nor

approximation of content to the

reality of the subjects, students do not

discuss the texts that are read in

class, do not speak, they just listen to

what the teacher reads or says.

Content systematization happens

through writing activities and

correcting them, students do not

speak, do not have active voice in the

socializations of the activities

particularly because it is harder to

understand texts without something

concrete.

During the in-class observation for

History it was possible to notice the

lack of dialogue between educator-

learner, the methodology consists of

always coming into the classroom,

warning learners of the content to be

studied, ordering students to open the

textbook in the appointed pages and

reading individually and lowly to

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1310

answer the activity because the

educator will correct it next class and

“mark” it, not minding whether it is

correct or not. (L. S. S./III TEL,

2011).

As observed, Enunciation 7 brings

representational marks of a discourse that

portrays the permanence of the teacher as

the sole holder of knowledge. Teaching by

the book is thus characterized as silencer of

the school-work relation mediated by

research. It prevails in this form of

teaching and learning:

a) The teacher as sole holder of

knowledge: …students do not

discuss the texts that are read in

class, do not speak, they just listen to

what the teacher reads or says…

b) Mechanic and by the book

teaching: …The educator teaches

based exclusively on the textbook…

c) Application of

learning/evaluation as the purpose

of the educational process: ... the

educator will correct it next class

and “mark” it, not minding whether

it is correct or not…

Discursive sequences highlighted in

Enunciation 7 point to pedagogical

practices centered in a conception of

teaching that focuses on the teacher as sole

holder of knowledge while student, at the

other end of the process, are positioned as

receivers and reproducers of the

knowledge supposedly “deposited” by

their teacher. Therefore, “students do not

discuss the texts that are read in class, do

not speak, they just listen to what the

teacher reads or says”. This seems to be

the state of affairs Countryside Education

wants to overcome in order to develop

another educational logic. Contrary to the

traditional school, discourses suggest a

new educational project in which the

method is aligned with a humanizing

education and part of a wider political

project.

Undergraduate students anchored by

their academic readings expand their

analytical horizon by resorting to academia

discourses to corroborate their reflections

in a dialogical reflation between the world

of knowledge and the lived world without

losing sight of the association of academic

knowledge to the students’ social life and

to the pedagogical representations that are

at the basis of the discursive chain.

There are other marks in that

enunciation that denote the inefficiency of

the mere transmission of knowledge based

on the unilateral and authoritative teaching:

“the methodology consists of always

coming into the classroom, warning

learners of the content to be studied,

ordering students to open the textbook in

the appointed pages and reading

individually and lowly to answer the

activity because the educator will correct it

next class and ‘mark’ it”. It is important to

highlight the silencing of alterity: “students

do not speak, do not have active voice in

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1311

the socializations of the activities

particularly because it is harder to

understand texts without something

concrete”. In that scenario, both teacher

and students miss the opportunity to

dialogically share knowledge. That seems

to be the issue appointed and discussed by

students in their reports. According to

Freire, dialoguing is a necessary practice

for the teacher mediator, as it articulates

the learners’ experiences to their world and

existence.

Dialogue is thus an existential

necessity. And since dialogue is the

encounter in which the united

reflection and action of the

dialoguers are addressed to the world

which is to be transformed and

humanized, this dialogue cannot be

reduced to the act of one persons

"depositing" ideas in another, nor can

it become a simple exchange of ideas

to be "consumed" by the discussants.

(Freire, 2005, p. 89)

xx

.

Due to the complexity of the

educational process strongly marked by

pedagogical and social variables that

involve it, LPEC students understand that

it cannot be conducted outside the

dialogical interaction of school and life,

school and society as demanded by an

emancipatory project.

Final Considerations

Based on the Bakhtinian thought

specially on discursive dialogism, that is,

the correspondence of one discourse to

another, reports analyses made possible to

learn themes that are translated in voices

that participate in the students’ educational

processes, pointing at the life that comes

into university, reclaiming new educational

objects as well as academic relations that

suggest new barriers to be transgressed.

Assuming the notion of dialogism as

structuring part of the process of

knowledge construction, it was possible to

discern in the students’ discourse their

relation with the theoretical-

methodological bases of their graduation

which provide them in the evaluation of

the other, with the awareness that

countryside schools still hold strong ties to

the hegemonic and homogenizing

pedagogic tradition. The evaluation present

in the LPEC reports suggest that as a

domain that requires further investigation

and enquiry by an emancipatory

educational project.

Although students’ observations

cause important shifts in the image of

school teachers to an image aligned with

principles of Countryside Education there

are contradictions that must be brought up

in the educational debate. For instance, the

attention students dedicated almost

exclusively to the teachers’ methodologies

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1312

as a fixed point in the educational process

needs to be problematized since

countryside schools are much more than

the school itself, which demands that other

dimensions of the process must also

occupy the discursive scene to prevent the

mere and simple instrumentalization of

teachers’ actions in countryside schools.

Two complementary paths of

investigation are thus opened by the

students’ reports: the homogenizing school

tradition present in countryside schools and

the educational history of LPEC students

centered on the how to of the school. Both

point to the necessity of further

problematization of the degree.

References

Antunes-Rocha, M. I. (2010). Licenciatura

em educação do campo. In Oliveira, D. A.,

Duarte, A. M. C., & Vieira, L. M. F.

(Orgs.) Dicionário: trabalho, profissão e

condição docente. Belo Horizonte:

UFMG/Faculdade de Educação. CDROM.

Arroyo, M. G. (1999). A educação básica e

o movimento social do campo. In _____,

Fernandes, B. M. (Org.). A Educação

Básica e o Movimento Social do Campo

(pp. 10-38). Brasília, DF: Articulação

Nacional Por Uma Educação Básica do

Campo.

Bakhtin, M. (V. N. Volochínov). (2006).

Marxismo e Filosofia da Linguagem. 12.

Ed. São Paulo: Hucitec.

Caldart, R. S. (2011). Licenciatura em

Educação do Campo e projeto formativo:

qual o lugar da docência por área. In ____

(Org.). Caminhos para transformação da

escola: reflexões desde práticas da

Licenciatura em Educação do Campo (pp.

127-154). São Paulo: Expressão Popular.

_____. (2009). Educação do Campo: notas

para uma análise de percurso. Trabalho,

Educação e Saúde, (7), 35-64.

Caregnato, R. C. A., & Mutti, R. (2006).

Pesquisa qualitativa: análise de discurso

versus análise de conteúdo. Texto Contexto

Enferm, 679-684. Recuperado de:

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/tce/v15n4/v15n4a

17 Acesso em 03 de março de 2017.

Costa, E. M., & Monteiro, A. L. (2012).

Procampo: uma política de formação

inicial para o docente do campo. In Anais

XVI ENDIPE - Encontro Nacional de

Didática e Práticas de Ensino. UNICAMP

- Campinas.

Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogia do Oprimido.

17. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.

_____. (1981). Ação Cultural para a

liberdade e outros escritos. Rio de Janeiro:

Paz e Terra.

Freitas, M. T. (2003). A perspectiva sócio-

histórica: uma visão humana da construção

do conhecimento. In Freitas, M. T., Jobim,

S. S., & Kramer, S. (Orgs.) Ciências

humanas e pesquisa: leitura de Mikhail

Bakhtin (pp. 26-38). São Paulo, Cortez.

Molina, M. C., & Sá, L. M. (2010). A

Licenciatura em Educação do Campo da

Universidade de Brasília: Estratégias

Político-Pedagógicas na Formação de

Educadores do Campo. In Molina, M. C.,

& Sá, L. M. S. (Orgs.). Licenciaturas em

Educação do campo: Registros e reflexões

a partir das experiências Piloto (pp. 35-

62). Belo Horizonte: Autêntica Editora.

_____. (2015). A educação do campo e o

enfrentamento das tendências das atuais

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1313

políticas públicas. Educação em

Perspectiva, (6) 2, 378-400.

Ramos, M. (2012). Escola Unitária. In

Caldart, R. S., et. al. (Orgs.). Dicionário da

Educação do Campo (pp. 343-349). São

Paulo: Escola Politécnica de Saúde

Joaquim Venâncio, Expressão Popular.

Silva, I. S., Souza, H., & Ribeiro, N. B.

(2014). Apresentação. In _____. (Orgs.).

Práticas contra-hegemônicas na formação

de educadores: reflexões a partir do curso

de Licenciatura em Educação do Campo

do Sul e sudeste do Pará (pp. 11-19).

Brasília: MDA.

Silva, M. A. (2012). A fetichização do

livro didático no Brasil. Educ. Real., 37(3),

803-821, Recuperado

de: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/edreal/v37n3/

06.pdf. Acesso em: 07 de julho de 2017

Unifesspa. (2014). Projeto Pedagógico do

Curso de Licenciatura em Educação do

Campo, Marabá.

i

Bakhtin, M. (1981) Discourse in the Novel. The

dialogic imagination: four essays. Ed. Michael

Houlquist. p. 291.

ii

The first Brazilian edition of Marxism and the

Philosophy of Language dates back to 1929. The

cited edition is from 2006. Due to the debate on the

authorship of this work, the double reference

Bakhtin/Voloshinov was chosen.

iii

In the original: “mas situado em sua relação com

o contexto histórico-social, portanto, na pesquisa, o

que acontece não é um encontro de psiqués

individuais, mas uma relação de textos com o

contexto”.

iv

In the original: “o enunciado não diz tudo,

devendo o analista buscar os efeitos dos sentidos e,

para isso, precisa sair do enunciado e chegar ao

enunciável através da interpretação”.

v

Bakhtin, M., & Voloshinov, V. (1973). Marxism

and the Philosophy of Language. NY: Seminars

Press.

vi

In the original: A Educação do Campo surgiu em

um determinado momento e contexto histórico e

não pode ser compreendida em si mesma, ou

apenas desde o mundo da educação ou desde os

parâmetros teóricos da pedagogia. Ela é um

movimento real de combate ao atual estado de

coisas: movimento prático, de objetivos ou fins

práticos, de ferramentas práticas, que expressa e

produz concepções teóricas, críticas a determinadas

visões de educação, de política de educação, de

projetos de campo e de país, mas que são

interpretações da realidade construídas em vista de

orientar ações/lutas concretas.

vii

Until June 2013, the Marabá University Campus

[Campus Universitário de Marabá] presently

Unifesspa, was part of UFPA.

viii

REUNI was instituted by the Presidential Decree

6,096, 24 April 2007 and integrates the group of

actions by the Federal Government for the Plan for

Educational Development, through the Ministry of

Education and Culture.

ix

In the original: “O acúmulo conquistado por essa

construção histórica possibilitou a concepção do

curso de Licenciatura Plena em Educação o Campo

(LPEC), que, desde 2009, tem ofertado uma turma-

ano. Ainda que a institucionalização do curso no

interior da Unifesspa represente a convergência a

uma política nacional de Educação do Campo, ela

responde, mais concretamente, às demandas do

movimento de Educação do Campo na região,

especialmente como parte da luta pela Reforma

Agrária”.

x

In the original: “tendo o exercício e a busca da

interdisciplinaridade como princípio pautado para a

formação dos educandos”.

xi

In the original: “... a intencionalidade maior é a de

contribuir com a construção de processos capazes

de desencadear mudanças na lógica de utilização e

de produção de conhecimento no campo”.

xii

In the original: “processo de desestabilização de

uma ordem dada e de desnaturalização de uma

forma curricular (a disciplinar) que é histórica, mas

passa a ser assumida como a única possível no

trabalho com o conhecimento”.

xiii

In the original: “no caso da proposta de formação

por áreas, não são as disciplinas o objetivo central

do trabalho pedagógico com o conhecimento. Este

trabalho se dirige a questões da realidade como

objeto de estudo, tendo como base a apropriação do

conhecimento científico já acumulado. Colocam-se,

então, indagações epistemológicas sobre a própria

concepção de conhecimento, de ciência e de

Braz, E. N., & Ribeiro, N. B. (2018). Writings by countryside female educators on the meanings of pedagogical practice in countryside

schools…

Rev. Bras. Educ. Camp.

Tocantinópolis

v. 3

n. 4

p. 1294-1315

sep./dec.

2018

ISSN: 2525-4863

1314

pesquisa. Indaga-se de que forma o trabalho

pedagógico pode garantir o movimento entre

apropriação e produção do conhecimento e a

articulação entre conhecimento e processo

formativo como um todo permanente entre o

conhecimento que a ciência ajuda a produzir e as

questões atuais da vida. Os fenômenos da realidade

atual precisam ser estudados em toda a sua

complexidade, tal como existem na realidade, por

meio de uma abordagem que dê conta de

compreender totalidades nas suas contradições, no

seu movimento histórico”.

xiv

Some institutions adopt Time-school and time-

community. In spite of the appearance of such

terms in some excerpts in the Pedagogical Project

for LPEC/Unifesspa, university time-space and

local time-space were presently chosen as they are