A concepção de sociologia nas reformas do ensino médio: das Orientações Curriculares Nacionais de 2006 à Base Nacional Comum Curricular de 2018
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2023-03-23
Autores
Papim, Angelo Antonio Puzipe
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Esta pesquisa trata da análise e comparação de dois documentos do currículo nacional elaborados após 1996, as OCNEM de Sociologia de 2006 e a BNCC-EM de 2018. O exame de ambos os documentos curriculares permite estabelecer os parâmetros de como o conhecimento de Sociologia é selecionado, classificado e transmitido, no currículo do Ensino Médio, refletindo tanto a distribuição de poder quanto os princípios de controle simbólico, no discurso pedagógico. Desse ponto de vista, a análise da dimensão macro e micro da estrutura educacional possibilita perguntar: qual concepção de Sociologia está registrada nos documentos, isto é, quais conhecimentos e propostas pedagógicas estão incluídos nos documentos citados? Como eles abordam e organizam seus conhecimentos: como disciplinas ou por áreas de conhecimento? Como os princípios neoliberais capturaram e institucionalizaram certa compreensão da pedagogia do desempenho? E, por fim, como esses princípios afetam a compreensão da ciência nas escolas? Levanta-se, como hipótese de pesquisa, a ideia de que tanto a Reforma do Ensino Médio (REM) quanto a BNCC-EM representam, para o currículo da educação pública, um retrocesso em face das conquistas obtidas nas OCN-EM de Sociologia, ao abandonar o modelo científico no ensino dessa disciplina, em foco neste trabalho, para assumir um modelo curricular instrumental e voltado para o mercado. Assim, a presente pesquisa, ao comparar o discurso pedagógico das duas propostas curriculares, tem por objetivo compreender a concepção e a caracterização do ensino de Sociologia, na BNCC-EM, com vistas a entender como as Ciências Sociais se inserem no cenário educacional, a partir da REM. A lacuna nas pesquisas subjacentes ao código pedagógico que orienta tanto o currículo quanto a prática pedagógica permite identificar os princípios de classificação e de enquadramento do conhecimento e da prática pedagógica, bem com as relações de poder e controle simbólico que refletem no currículo. Assim, a identificação dos códigos pedagógicos fornece excelentes indicativos para se verificar o impacto no sistema educacional de cada proposta curricular. Como resultado, verifica-se que cada documento analisado apresenta uma estrutura de códigos pedagógicos distintos: as OCN-EM de Sociologia exibem um código elaborado, voltado ao ensino científico da Sociologia, que valoriza o professor especializado e seu papel de mediador dos conceitos, temas e teorias sociológicas, concebendo os estudantes como sujeitos ativos na prática pedagógica, enquanto a BNCC-EM difunde um código restrito, o qual impõe ao conhecimento, aos sujeitos e aos espaços o que e como fazer. Nessa perspectiva, a primeira proporciona ao campo educacional um discurso vertical, voltado ao conhecimento científico, enquanto a segunda, por sua vez, um discurso horizontal, que reforça a experiência local e o conhecimento cotidiano do estudante, o qual passa a ser avaliado de acordo com seu desempenho. Assim, o retrocesso da REM e da BNCC-EM, frente ao avanço da OCN-EM de Sociologia, está na retomada das políticas educacionais de orientação neoliberal e do modelo educacional voltado ao mercado, que restringe o acesso da classe trabalhadora ao código elaborado, submetendo a educação escolar à lógica da pedagogia do desempenho.
This research focuses on the analysis and comparison of two national curriculum documents developed after 1996, the 2006 OCNEM for Sociology and the 2018 BNCC-EM. Examining both curricular documents allows for the establishment of parameters on how Sociology knowledge is selected, classified, and transmitted in the high school curriculum, reflecting both the distribution of power and the principles of symbolic control in the pedagogical discourse. From this standpoint, analyzing the macro and micro dimensions of the educational structure enables the question: what conception of Sociology is recorded in the documents, that is, what knowledge and pedagogical proposals are included in the cited documents? How do they approach and organize their knowledge: as disciplines or by areas of knowledge? How have neoliberal principles captured and institutionalized a certain understanding of performance pedagogy? And finally, how do these principles affect the comprehension of science in schools? The research hypothesis suggests that both the High School Reform (REM) and the BNCC-EM represent a setback for the public education curriculum compared to the achievements obtained in the OCN-EM for Sociology, as they abandon the scientific model in teaching this subject, which is the focus of this study, to adopt an instrumental, market-oriented curricular model. Thus, this research aims to compare the pedagogical discourse of the two curricular proposals in order to understand the conception and characterization of Sociology teaching in the BNCCEM and to comprehend how the Social Sciences are integrated into the educational landscape based on the REM. The gap in research underlying the pedagogical code that guides both the curriculum and the pedagogical practice allows for the identification of the principles of classification and framing of knowledge and pedagogical practice, as well as the relations of power and symbolic control that are reflected in the curriculum. Thus, the identification of pedagogical codes provides excellent indicators for assessing the impact on the educational system of each curricular proposal. As a result, it is found that each analyzed document presents a distinct structure of pedagogical codes: the OCN-EM for Sociology displays an elaborated code, focused on the scientific teaching of Sociology, which values specialized teachers and their role as mediators of sociological concepts, themes, and theories, conceiving students as active subjects in the pedagogical practice. In contrast, the BNCC-EM disseminates a restricted code, which imposes on knowledge, subjects, and spaces what and how to do things. From this perspective, the first provides the educational field with a vertical discourse, focused on scientific knowledge, while the second, in turn, offers a horizontal discourse, which reinforces the local experience and the everyday knowledge of the student, who is then assessed based on their performance. Thus, the setback of the REM and the BNCC-EM, in contrast to the progress of the OCN-EM in Sociology, lies in the resurgence of neoliberal-oriented educational policies and the market-driven educational model, which restricts the working class's access to the elaborated code, subjecting school education to the logic of performance-based pedagogy.
This research focuses on the analysis and comparison of two national curriculum documents developed after 1996, the 2006 OCNEM for Sociology and the 2018 BNCC-EM. Examining both curricular documents allows for the establishment of parameters on how Sociology knowledge is selected, classified, and transmitted in the high school curriculum, reflecting both the distribution of power and the principles of symbolic control in the pedagogical discourse. From this standpoint, analyzing the macro and micro dimensions of the educational structure enables the question: what conception of Sociology is recorded in the documents, that is, what knowledge and pedagogical proposals are included in the cited documents? How do they approach and organize their knowledge: as disciplines or by areas of knowledge? How have neoliberal principles captured and institutionalized a certain understanding of performance pedagogy? And finally, how do these principles affect the comprehension of science in schools? The research hypothesis suggests that both the High School Reform (REM) and the BNCC-EM represent a setback for the public education curriculum compared to the achievements obtained in the OCN-EM for Sociology, as they abandon the scientific model in teaching this subject, which is the focus of this study, to adopt an instrumental, market-oriented curricular model. Thus, this research aims to compare the pedagogical discourse of the two curricular proposals in order to understand the conception and characterization of Sociology teaching in the BNCCEM and to comprehend how the Social Sciences are integrated into the educational landscape based on the REM. The gap in research underlying the pedagogical code that guides both the curriculum and the pedagogical practice allows for the identification of the principles of classification and framing of knowledge and pedagogical practice, as well as the relations of power and symbolic control that are reflected in the curriculum. Thus, the identification of pedagogical codes provides excellent indicators for assessing the impact on the educational system of each curricular proposal. As a result, it is found that each analyzed document presents a distinct structure of pedagogical codes: the OCN-EM for Sociology displays an elaborated code, focused on the scientific teaching of Sociology, which values specialized teachers and their role as mediators of sociological concepts, themes, and theories, conceiving students as active subjects in the pedagogical practice. In contrast, the BNCC-EM disseminates a restricted code, which imposes on knowledge, subjects, and spaces what and how to do things. From this perspective, the first provides the educational field with a vertical discourse, focused on scientific knowledge, while the second, in turn, offers a horizontal discourse, which reinforces the local experience and the everyday knowledge of the student, who is then assessed based on their performance. Thus, the setback of the REM and the BNCC-EM, in contrast to the progress of the OCN-EM in Sociology, lies in the resurgence of neoliberal-oriented educational policies and the market-driven educational model, which restricts the working class's access to the elaborated code, subjecting school education to the logic of performance-based pedagogy.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Sociologia e ensino médio, Currículo, Orientações Curriculares Nacionais, Base Nacional Comum Curricular, Princípios de classificação e enquadramento, Discurso vertical e horizontal, Sociology and high school, Curriculum, National Curricular Guidelines, National Common Core Curriculum, Classification and framing principles, Vertical and horizontal discourse
Como citar
PAPIM, Angelo Antonio Puzipe. A concepção de sociologia nas reformas do ensino médio: das Orientações Curriculares Nacionais de 2006 à Base Nacional Comum Curricular de 2018. Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), 2023.