Educação Integral: a unidade que contém o múltiplo e revela contradições

• Ano de defesa: 2018
• Autor(a) principal: Dietz, Karin Gerlach
• Orientador(a): Ronca, Antonio Carlos Caruso
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Educação: Psicologia da Educação
• Departamento: Faculdade de Educação
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Educação integral; Educação e Estado; Movimentos sociais
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Integral education; Education and State; Social movements
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA DO ENSINO E DA APRENDIZAGEM
• Link de acesso: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/21107

The present study intends to approximate the meanings made by educators who work in basic education schools and/or militate in social movements in relation to Integral Education. The specific objectives are: to identify if and how the Integral Education materializes in the daily life of the school; analyze how educators mean the activities developed in the context of Integral Education; to reimpose the concept of Integral Education, considering the initial conceptions adopted by the researcher in articulation with the interviewed educators. It is thought that this work is relevant, since it makes possible the discussion on the theme of Integral Education and, as a result, stimulates the development of pedagogical practices that overcome current fragmented conceptions and orient the educator to the realization of an integrative praxis (theory-practice, subject-society, cognitive-affective). The theoretical perspective adopted in the study is that of socio-historical psychology. The information was collected through interviews with ten educators, being: pedagogical coordinators, director, deputy director, teachers and activists of social movements. The material was (audio) recorded, transcribed, systematized and analyzed according to the proposal of Aguiar and Ozella´s (2006, 2013), proposal, aiming to build several nuclei of meaning, in order to achieve, gradually, more specific areas of meaning. Through the analysis, it was noticed that moments lived by each educator surrounded their lines and subsidized the answers given in relation to the questions made during the interview. Thus, the subject and his / her history must be considered in order to value the subjective aspect that, imbricated to the objective, constitutes the studied phenomenon. It is emphasized that it is necessary, first of all, to avoid the dichotomization between subject and society to understand Integral Education in its unity, in its contradiction, in its movement, so that public educational policies can be made feasible. It is emphasized that initial training does not prepare for political debate, and it is necessary to attend other collective spaces so that the educational problem is also a political problem. It is necessary, in view of the above, to highlight essential action to realize Integral Education: consider (and not reject) inequalities in the country, understanding that they are constitutive of being and educational phenomenon. It is necessary, before considering what is and how to carry out Integral Education, to ask: in what society do we live? What are the multiple determinations that encompass my own constitution and the constitution of education? Do we do just one education? For what and for whom does this education serve? Only with the questioning and approximations of answers to these questions can we enter into what we conceptualize Integral Education