Teorias do Currículo - Currículo: história e concepções (LIBRAS)

Hello everyone, this is the discipline "Curricular Theories" and the topic of this video is "History and Concepts Curriculum". This discipline, as you know, has as objectives to know the Curriculum Theories,

identify the social transformations that impacted the curricular theories, identify the characteristics of the traditional, critical and post-critical theories of the curriculum, understand how curricular policies operate, and understand the various aspects covered by the pedagogical-political project.

These are the objectives of the discipline and each video lesson, as you have already noticed in the previous video lesson, these objectives are fragmented, broken. The objectives of today's video lesson are: to know the curriculum concepts and to know the history of the curriculum concept.

It is obvious that from the consulted literature, and I highlight two important books, the book "Documents of Identity: An Introduction to the Theories of the Curriculum", by Tomás Tadeu da Silva, and another book called "Theories of the Curriculum", by Alice Casimiro Lopes and Elizabeth Macedo, from this literature,

We work with the curriculum concepts, from this literature we also work with the curriculum concept and history. So many other concepts may exist and many other stories may be told.

Specifically, in the matter of conceptions, another important work is a more recent work by Professor José Jimeno Sacristán, a student of the Spanish curriculum, who also contributes, who is present here in this discussion. We are also very influenced by the ideas of this researcher, this professor, this student of the curriculum. Well, it is important

retomar algo que está presente em muitas obras que introduzem os estudantes, introduzem as estudantes, os leitores e leitoras nessa discussão a ideia de currículo como percurso, como curso, como trajetória, como programa, como pista de corrida. Sempre que nós usarmos o itálico aqui na nossa disciplina, vocês verão que ou são expressões em

a language, as in the case of Greek or Latin, always expressions in another language other than the Portuguese language, or also concepts, expressions, phrases of certain authors. So the idea of a "race track" follows the notion of the curriculum from its origins.

The curriculum was always taken as a teaching program. At the beginning, thinking about the curriculum was something you conceived, registered, something that you, as a teacher, would develop. During the Middle Ages, especially in Jesuit schools, the curriculum, called "Ratio Studiorum", was divided into two parts:

A Trivium moment, with grammar, rhetoric and dialectic, were disciplines of instrumental order. And the Quadrivium, astronomy, geometry, arithmetic and music, which were application disciplines. So the basic idea for those who were starting and then the development or application or use for those who had already surpassed that initial stage of the race track, that initial stage of the course.

The curriculum always had, in its first works, the idea of organization and unification. You imagine,

an educational system that is expanding, giving more and more access to people, how to unify this, how to organize this, how to ensure that people access the same knowledge, how to "standardize" the work done through a path that becomes common, through a program that becomes adopted as an official program, as a program that needs to be realized.

And then, since this technology called curriculum, this technology has become increasingly sophisticated, it starts to be organized and distributed over the years, in contents and also with certain methods. So, the idea of student distribution over the years, it didn't always exist,

As the curriculum gets more complex, it also proposes a distribution of knowledge, that is, of the content to be taught over the years.

And finally, at the beginning, there is a notion of an external sequenced order, that is, as if the curriculum was thought outside the school to be applied in the school. This is also due to an influence of the planning process of the fabril world, ideas that were imported from the industry into the school.

These notions, although they refer us to the beginning of curricular studies, in the 17th and 18th centuries, there was no idea of curricular studies yet, but the term "curriculum" appears for the first time in the 17th century as a teaching program. So, although these ideas followed the origin of the expression "curriculum",

You must have noticed that they also accompany teachers to this day. Many of us conceive the curriculum as something that was written outside the school, something that was elaborated and will be applied, will be put into practice by other people. This is a concept that is still present.

However, this conception has as a parallel certain notions of knowledge. But today, in 2019, we already have a more elaborate idea of what contents are.

what happens at school, what follows the school experience can be called content. So, the content, in fact, today is taken as a social construction. Content is not, as it has been thought, something

that could not be transformed, that could not be modified, that should be applied, should be taught. Today we already take content as, yes, what happens in school, but it is the result of a social construction. In fact, the content is not the knowledge developed outside the school, the knowledge developed, for example, in the centers of knowledge production in the area of mathematics, biology, science, Portuguese language.

The content is something different from that knowledge. That's why literature, in this respect, will say that, in fact, the content is nothing more, nothing less than a curricularized culture. That is, the content that is present in the classroom is a knowledge that has been transformed. It is not the same knowledge, the exact knowledge, the copied knowledge of what is on the outside.

Although many of us think that what is being taught at school happens in that way on the outside, in the broader social life.

Well, it is no wonder that some authors will defend the idea of didactic intermediation. Between the knowledge produced outside the school and the knowledge effectively taught, what happens is a transformation of this knowledge through an intermediation and has as main mediators the teacher and the didactic materials, with emphasis on the didactic book.

So, let's imagine someone produces a history knowledge, research results carried out within the university or in museums or in centers of knowledge production of this subject, of this discipline of historical knowledge.

When this knowledge goes to the teaching library, when this knowledge happens in the classroom, in the fifth year, in the seventh year, in the second year of elementary school, this knowledge is already different, it is not the same knowledge, that is, this knowledge has gone through a process of transformations.

It is very important that you, teacher, teacher, future teacher, future teacher, take into consideration that what is being worked on in the classroom is not the same thing, it is not the same result obtained by the researcher in their moments of knowledge production.

Well, it's good to remember, and here we are taking up a concept from an important author who studies the history of the curriculum, the idea that the curriculum is therefore an invented tradition.

As we go through the pedagogical experience, whether at the university or in basic education, we have the false impression that it has to be that way, that those knowledge are indispensable, that those knowledge are mandatory.

But when studying the science curricula, for example, the science curricula as this author did, he realized that the science curricula throughout history have been transforming and contemplating different knowledge. You may be thinking: "Ah, but it's obvious, right? Because science was also, right?

the scientific knowledge has also been increasing, therefore the science taught in the classroom is changing. No, this may be an explanation, but it is not the explanation presented by this author. This author has as a hypothesis, he will defend the hypothesis that knowledge is also the result of clashes.

are also the result of political struggles and at each time the school privileges certain knowledge trying to form a certain type of subject, a certain type of citizen and citizen. So the idea, therefore, that the knowledge, that the curriculum, better said,

It is an invented tradition that the curriculum is modified, that we tend to think that the curriculum is the same, but in fact the curriculum is also a social construction, also a production of people from the points of view that they have. Thus, the curriculum cannot be, it is not neutral, nor universal, nor immobile.

And we sometimes deal with it this way, right? That is, as we learn certain things at school, we think, in basic education, it is obvious, we think that these are the same things that need to be taught.

Maybe you're thinking: "But the school doesn't teach the alphabet either?" Yes, and we don't give up on a school that teaches the alphabet. Now, the way we teach the alphabet, at what moment of the school journey, with what intensity, with what level of demand, this also changes.

So, it is obvious that the domain of written language, whether in reading or in production, needs to be a knowledge taught by the school. But there are many other knowledge that are now present in curricular documents and that were not there until a short time ago, and many knowledge that were already there are not there now. Well, the examples are many, very varied, it is not convenient to stay here detailing.

In this work by Tomás Sade da Silva, there is another interesting notion of curriculum, which is the idea of curriculum as contested territory. And this is the issue that needs to be emphasized. If the curriculum is an invented tradition, if it is neither neutral, nor universal, nor immobile, what is there is the result of clashes.

The curricular document and the curriculum effectively implemented, the curriculum put into action in schools, is the result of this shock of disputes, of valuations, and we have at each time certain events that generate changes in what the teachers think, in the way they develop and in the knowledge they work with. So, we can't think that the definition of the curriculum is something smooth.

The curriculum, therefore, will always be a political option. And then, politics in the sense that it is the result of social relations. You understand that any social action is also a political action and the curriculum, as a social action, as a production of

subjects in the midst of combats, conflicts and tensions can only be a political option. The curriculum will always be a project, a bet, it has as its objective to generate changes. The curriculum, especially the curricular documents, especially the curricular policies, they are always inductive.

If the curricular document is the absolute mirror of what happens in the classroom, it doesn't make sense that it exists. If the teacher already does everything that is there, it doesn't make sense that there is a curricular document, an official curriculum. So the official curriculum generates, it tensions, it pushes, maybe not in all components, maybe not in all segments of basic education, maybe not at all times,

But in several situations, the curriculum, the curricular document, brings something that generates some kind of change there. That's why it's worth it, you, teacher, you, teacher, or future teacher, future teacher, always think about who the curriculum is for.

Any curricular proposal, any curricular document, any curriculum in action, I'm here expanding the conceptions, it will always be at the service of someone. What matters to us, teachers, is to do this analysis to see who is the citizen and the citizen that this curriculum wants to form and who is interested in this citizen project.

Well, Basil Bernstein brings some important contributions for us to expand a little the notion of curriculum. He will say that everything that occupies school time is curriculum. And then, everything that occupies school time, in fact, is an organization more or less like this, in a very synthetic, very summarized way.

There are a series of objectives, like our discipline here, right? Our discipline has objectives, then there are two objectives for this video lesson. There are objectives, there are activities, so we will recommend readings, you will participate in the forum, you will do evaluative activities, you will watch the video lessons, and what we expect is that those objectives will be achieved.

But, understanding the curriculum as a process, which is an idea of the Spanish teacher, Jimeno Secristán, the curriculum is actually a text. The curriculum is actually a text of culture, a production of language. And therefore, the curriculum will always be an interpretation of the teacher, of the teacher, together with their students.

The curriculum has its own dimension of practice, that is, what happens in the classroom, effectively, or in the classroom, or in the school yard, or activities that are done in other spaces, in the library, in the reading room, at home, in the garden, in the park, as the teacher is the teacher to organize his action.

The curriculum brings real effects that we don't always know or can't measure. What we can measure, what we can evaluate are the verifiable effects.

So we have here two very interesting curricula concepts, an idea of curriculum as everything that occupies school time and an idea of curriculum as a process, curriculum as what happens, curriculum as what is changing, transforming, with these characteristics. And this perspective, or rather, both, put the teacher in the center. That's where our discipline gains more importance, because we tend to think that we are

mere executors, mere applicators of what someone produced elsewhere. Our idea here is not that, our idea is a little different. From what is known today in the field of curricular theories, the teacher and the teacher are authors and authors

of the curriculum. They are the ones who select the practices that will be effectively realized, they are the ones who interpret that from their training, from their experience, they interpret what is proposed, they are the ones who

take direct contact with the real effects, but only a part of these effects they can verify. So, unlike what the curriculum circulates, in fact, the main subject is the teacher.

With that, we conclude our meeting today. And reminding you to do the readings, the importance of doing the suggested readings and watch the videos that we also put available for this week.