Formação PIBID - 2ª Formação - 28/02/2025

Okay,

so now, goodnight everyone.

I hope you are well.

We're going to start the presentation

on

the text you read,

which was proposed by the

administration, by the

institutional coordination at the university's main office,

as a

text for study, right? So, we're

going to alternate between some studies

organized at the university administration building and some of our

own studies here in the group,

as well as the activities you're already

doing with the professors.

So, this activity specifically

will deal

with the text. I tried to add some

more explanations to, you know,

clarify things a bit for those who aren't

familiar,

but I didn't stray too far from the text. So,

if you have any questions

that weren't clear,

you can let me know, and

we'll try to

clarify them,

OK? One thing that would be important is for

you to take notes on what we're saying

here so you can

better understand and

study

historical-critical pedagogy, as we've already

discussed in your presentations, right?

This is the pedagogy adopted by the IF (Federal Institute), and

therefore, the PIBID project falls within

this pedagogy. That is why we,

as participants, will

delve into the study of this pedagogy

to understand

how it can be

integrated into science education.

OK?

So, if you have any questions, you can

interrupt me, okay? I tried to follow

the order of the questions,

so you can also follow along by

what you did, right? If you

remember the assignment you

submitted.

So, the first question was, right,

a very simple question:

what is

education?

So, as a pedagogical theory,

historical-critical pedagogy will try to

explain this process of what

education is and what is linked to the

educational process of the

human being, okay?

So, the first thing that

these theories linked

to historical-cultural psychology

bring is this understanding, right,

that education is a phenomenon unique to

human beings.

What do you understand this to

mean? What does it mean to say that

education is a phenomenon

unique to human beings? What did

you understand from that

almost first sentence that appears

in the text? He

can talk.

Well, from what I understand, just from that

sentence there,

education is only for

human beings, that, for example,

irrational animals, they have,

let's say, their learning through

instincts that come from, let

's say, the mother, the father, but it's more

instinctual, and human beings are

more part of that education. What

I understand from this

phrase is... Uh-huh

. that only human beings

can create education and learn

from education. It is the only and

exclusive trait of human beings, not of

other irrational animals such as

dogs, lions, and others.

Right?

Who else raised their hand? It would

n't be tied primarily to

our ability to communicate. Uh-huh

. Anyone else?

S Jefferson.

So, the text suggests that

human beings need to acquire certain

knowledge related to culture and

everything else in order to be humanized,

so that they can act

effectively in society. One thing

I understood there was the

need to understand culture and

certain aspects through education. Uh-huh

.

So here we have Joel, you can

speak,

okay? Well, adding to what Jefferson

said, I understand it this way: education is

a tool for validating the

existence of human beings. I don't know if I

understood correctly or incorrectly, but I

believe that's what I understood from

this question about the phenomenon unique to

human beings, which is a way for them to

validate, for human beings to validate

their own existence. Could that be it? Uh-huh

.

So here we have several answers,

right? Several answers, right? Lots of

comments, right? It's not necessarily a question

,

but they will all move towards

complementing each other.

So, the phrase itself, which refers to a

phenomenon unique to human beings,

implies, or rather, it means that

of all living beings, of all

categories of living beings,

only human beings

carry out this phenomenon, this

process, which is the process of education,

right? So,

if everyone agrees with this,

we can just kill her right there. So, other

living beings, especially other

animals, they don't organize themselves

through education, they don't have an

educational process,

okay?

But it's not exactly in that sentence, but

it implies that

education is a phenomenon

that makes us

human beings. I

think that's what J meant,

right? He

grants us an existence as

human beings.

And then we might have some

issues that could become more confusing.

For example,

a human being is not simply a

biological being, right? Someone who is born,

right? After gestation, is he no longer

a human being,

or does he need to go through the process of

education to become a human being?

You can speak, Andreila. The

thing is, if he's not literate, if he

's not educated, he'll act on

instinct just like all the other

animals. So,

in my opinion, based on my interpretation, education really does give him that human character. Uh-huh

. Atheists.

Well, I think if we're going to take that

literally, there are many adults who have

n't had access to education. So,

we're going to say that those adults there

aren't human beings. I think that's a

rather complex question to

answer. There's no single right answer,

but I think that from the moment

you're born,

you're already a human being. Ah,

education only serves to refine him

during his evolutionary process.

But from the moment he is born,

he is already a human being. Uh-huh

. Joel. Okay

? Well, starting from that point that

Mateus raised, that issue, he

said that adults don't have

manners, but they shouldn't say, from

what I understand, they aren't human,

no. Well, I think that

human beings are capable of acquiring

knowledge in various ways, right? This

validates the idea of ​​producing knowledge, because

in some way he will produce

knowledge, he will

use this educational tool

because he learns from living with

the society in which he is

involved. Even though he may not have

a traditional education, he will have

a popular education, because it is

a type of education, it

's not traditional education as it exists,

right? Finally, I think that based on the point

Mateus raised, I was able to arrive at that

hypothesis. Uh-huh

. Andreila.

It's like, complementing what Joel

said in relation to what Mateus said,

education isn't just what we

learn in school, right? It's not just

formal education. We learn things

every day from our parents. We

learn how to behave, how to

eat. If I need to, like, I live

in the countryside and I don't buy food, they

learn how to hunt. Basically, education

isn't just what you learn in school; it's

all the common learning you

acquire daily, passed down from

parent to child, from person to

person. Uh-huh

.

Had Daisy raised her hand?

Yes. Uh, I think that human beings,

like, they're always

learning and teaching from the moment they're born, because

nowadays there's a study, you know, of

baby development, that shows that from the

first months of a human being's life,

they're already learning and teaching too,

like, from crawling to

talking, everything, human beings are already

learning from the moment they're born

. Uh-huh

.

Mateus,

uh, I agree so much with Joel against

Andreila. I think I put it

somewhat wrong. Yes, but

I completely agree with Daisy

and what she said, that

from the moment a

child is born,

well,

nowadays, even though in the past you

saw children not being born with their eyes

open, today they are born looking and

from these interactions they already

begin to learn something.

Well, then I can ask a question, and that

's education itself. Uh-huh

.

Only through observation.

Well,

I still maintain that from

the moment a person is

born, they are a human being,

regardless. Does

Andreira want to talk more?

I believe, in reference to

Mateus's question, that yes, observation

is a form of learning, because it is

natural for human beings to reproduce what

they learn. Even if we were to

do research on this,

generally, for example, when

we work at a school, a

family where the father hits the mother,

usually the child is a

more aggressive child who hits classmates. And

this has been the case since very early on. She's been learning

this since she was born,

practically watching her father hit her mother.

A child who grows up without this

violence will find violence

absurd because it's not part of

their reality. She learns from what she

observes around her. Uh-huh

. So here we also have

lines of dialogue that complement each other, right? I

understand. So, the question I

posed, I posed it on purpose,

to provoke thought: is a

human being born already

human, or does he become

human as he

learns to

interact in society, for example?

So this

historical-cultural psychology theory understands

that the process of becoming human

also occurs while we

exist, right? So, we are individuals

of the human species when we are born, right?

We all are,

but we have a

social developmental process that makes

us more and more human.

This is what's called the process of

humanization, to get ahead of myself a

little. So, these are issues that

we need to keep in mind to

understand what Vygotsky,

the main author of

socio-cultural psychology, was trying to say:

that obviously we are all

human beings, but there is still a

development

through education, through this process that

we are calling education, which is

exclusive to human beings. That's what happens

throughout

human development in society,

right?

And I'll put another question there, right?

What characterizes us as individuals

of the species, right? Not the

species name, but rather, as individuals

who identify as human beings? What

is the characteristic—

I'll use the more difficult term now—the

ontological characteristic

of a human being, that is, the

characteristic

that says that the individual, that

specimen, is a human being?

Remember that we're following a

theory, so I want to know what that

theory says,

right? This is the most important question. You

can speak, Matthew.

I don't remember seeing that part

in the theory, but would it be the act of being

able to communicate, to interact

within

a given environment?

Yes, the communication issue is a good one.

Thaago, ah, I cut you off. It can end now.

No, you can, you can continue.

My train of thought has just escaped me.

Thiago had mentioned it, right? But

other living beings also communicate

and interact, right? That's why they have

societies, you know, communities, I don't know,

some insects there have the

right names for that, biologists know. But it

's not just about communication.

Robert wrote it there, right? According to

this theory, which is based on

Marxism, right? What makes us human is

the capacity, or rather, our

ability to perform what is

called work.

And here we're never going to classify

work as a service, right, or as an

occupation.

Work is a category that we

call, an explanation, a concept that we

will try to define

. Uh-huh. Gabriel, this activity here is

still summarized; we'll add more details

later, but in principle, the

work is an activity of transforming

nature.

Therefore, humans are the species

that, in order to reproduce their existence,

transform nature. And the other

species don't do that.

Sure, we might think: "Ah, but the

potter wasp builds its house, right? The

dog there, it's going to try to make a

suitable place for itself to survive." But

comparing that to how humans

have transformed the planet is a bit

disproportionate, isn't it? Think about it: now we

're,

for example, me, right? I'm in a building, I'm

well above the ground, no, but I'm

above the surface, right? So, we

managed to verticalize so we could

crowd even more, right, on the

planet.

We can move around, right, in

a very efficient way in terms of

speed, right,

compared to other

animals, for example, although we don't

have the same capacity in our bodies to

do that, but we transformed

nature in such a way that we

take minerals and transform them into other

things.

So, the human species is

characterized by this ability to

transform nature, but

as representatives of

natural science, we have to understand that

this word nature doesn't only mean the

biotic and abiotic components

of... The biosphere...

there's also the social nature that

shapes us as humans, and we also

transform this nature. So,

basically, what makes us human

is the capacity to perform these

activities of transforming nature.

But to be able to do these

activities,

we need to go through an

educational process.

And that's why human beings need

education

to develop as human beings,

okay?

If you disagree, you can

comment here. So, other

living beings act according to a logic of

adaptation. They manage to make

local transformations,

right? But in the sense of being able to

survive.

Human beings can project this

activity into the future,

and sometimes a very distant future, right? Which

is the case with schooling, right?

We enter there at 6 years old and leave

at 17 years old, right?

We project this activity that you

will see, that a human being will perform for

11 years. Other animals don't even have

this notion of time that we have, right?

So, all of this involves things that will

characterize us as humans and will

be related to that

word "work." So, I'm going to open a... (

Parenthetically, this needs to

be very clear to everyone what

this "work" thing means,

okay?

So, opening a parenthesis here, what do

we understand by work, what is

understood by work within this

perspective of historical

dialectical materialism, which is what we are

studying now?

So, first, work is a

teleological activity. This term

isn't in the text, but it will probably appear in

some other texts. Does

anyone know what this

word

or "teleological" means?

No.

So,

teleological activity is an activity that is

directed.

Say, Andre,

from what I remember, I've seen it a few times,

but from what I remember it was something that

was a process, that was long-term,

thinking ahead, basically

what you said before, that it's

something that is thought about in the long term.

That's it. So, it's always directed towards

a specific end. I, as an individual,

will plan

the activity

that will be carried out, because I want to

reach a goal. So, it's a

process, as André said,

activity is always a process, it's something

that will...) It involves the planning and

execution of this activity, right?

So, this teleological activity—not theological, teleological—will always be directed toward

an end,

and it will be anticipated and

mentally planned.

This is another characteristic

that we can understand as being

unique to human beings as well, although

we perceive that other animals

are capable of a certain anticipation, it

's more linked

to stimuli and responses than to

intentional planning, right? So, what does

work mean here? It means that

we anticipate, plan

something, some action or several

actions to reach an end.

The example that Vygotsky gives to

try to explain this is how

human beings in ancient tribes satisfied their

need to

feed themselves.

So, if you think about it—if I say something

wrong, biologists can correct me—but

if you think about

a species of other animals, the

relationship, right, of the actions they take

to feed themselves, is much more

direct; they hunt, right, or they

gather, it's something more... It's simple. But

not for humans, right? Even thinking

back a long, long time, it's

possible to understand that humans

created, for example, tools that

made it possible

in the future for them to kill an animal, for

example, to hunt.

Humans were the species that

managed to develop

a way to cultivate their own

food,

including outside the

specific seasons of

plant development, in much larger quantities

. So, this wasn't done by

chance, like, "Let's take this

square and plant," probably, right?

This was attempted, but reflected upon. "Look, if

you do this, it might give a result," right?

So, activity, this capacity

we have to plan what we're

going to do, is what allows us to carry out

this work

directed towards what I want to do, right?

So, work is always

intentional;

you have to know what you're

doing. That's why we ask

you to plan a lot, to

have an understanding of what you're

doing,

because through this transformation it

's possible to produce

what we call the world of

culture, in the text.

So, the human being... He lives, right, in the

duality between the natural world and this

cultural world that is unique to

human beings. But this cultural world does

n't exist naturally. It had to

be produced

by human beings and is constantly

reproduced by human beings through

work. Work is the general term.

There are various types of work, okay?

Another important thing,

work, right, the development of

work, human development,

depends

on the natural world. We're going to call

this material dependence on the

natural world.

So, we, as individuals who

survive, right, as organisms, we

need

components that sustain our

lives, right, water, mineral salts,

right, the soil we need to be

on, gravity itself, everything that

exists naturally sustains our

existence as individuals of a

species.

And, right, we're going to call this the

material base.

But we, specifically, in addition to

using this world to survive,

we have the capacity as human beings

to produce new materials,

right? So, we use this

natural world to guarantee our existence

and produce new things,

okay? And these things produced are natural

and sustain us. Also, the

cultural development of the human being, okay?

And besides that, this work, this

activity, will be based

on human modes

of production and reproduction of culture.

And then we begin to understand what

you were commenting on at the

beginning, right, about

child development. If you think of work

as salaried work, for

example, right? Children don't work,

children aren't human beings, right?

But that's not it.

While the child is developing

as a human being, even if not so

intentionally

at the beginning, they learn human modes of

producing life, in this case. So, they

copy

their surroundings, as you put it.

This is also a form of

developmental work. It

's no less complex than what

we're doing now, but it's appropriate

for that organism at that stage,

okay? So when we talk about

human modes, uh, it's the things we

do, the processes we go through.

So, writing, speaking,

moving around, dressing,

communicating, in short, all of that is

human modes. We can advance to

human modes of... Solving

quadratic equations, naming

molecules, understanding the process of

hormonal communication—all of

these are human processes, okay?

And we translate this, in this relationship,

as knowledge.

So, we have knowledge

about these processes,

and this makes us increasingly

belong to the human race as something

generic, as something that

represents everyone beyond the

individuality of each one.

Okay, so far so

good with this part of what

we understand by work,

right? So, when we talk about

education,

education is a form of work, so

it will always be directed towards an end, it

will involve specific ways of

carrying out this process

and will be based on, it will have as a

reference the material base, it stores

this information.

So, the process of work, of

reproducing human life,

becomes increasingly complex as

society

develops historically.

So, life as we live it today,

we individuals of the 20th century, is not the

same as that

of our ancestors,

right?

The way of reproducing life, of

continuing to exist, is different. I'm not...

Saying it's better or worse is

saying it's different.

And these differences will bring up

important issues. For example, it

's undeniable today

that a person, a human being, an

individual who is illiterate

has difficulty accessing

many things necessary for the

reproduction of life.

Although, right, they may know things that

we don't know, which is probable, this makes

their existence

more difficult than my difficulty, for

example, in not knowing how to plant

food, right? Not knowing, I don't know because

I've never planted, but in practice I don't

know.

The same goes for the use of technology, right? The

technological mode of communication

is prevalent today, right? But we have

people who have difficulty performing

this type of task, and this can

harm that person's life in some

way or make it more difficult for them to

need assistance, and

so on. So, the more

complex our life process has

become, the more

we need a stage in

our lives, which is

institutional education,

which is an institutional process of

saying, look, when you get there, right,

what do we... Understand that as an adult,

you need to

know all these human ways of

reproducing life in order to

effectively participate in society. And then the

educational process starts to fill up,

right? It starts to have a lot of things that need to

be

appropriated by individuals so that

everyone reaches this generic level

of what it is to be a human being. Of course,

this is arbitrary, right? This is chosen

by societies over time.

But what I'm trying to say is that the

more complex this

process is, the more current, the more

contemporary, the

more it is expected that the individual will learn

things

before he or she becomes an

independent subject to act in society.

Right?

Did you understand?

And education, then, is also

work, a work process

that we will call

educational work.

So, educational work is an

expression of human work, that is, it is

a specific form of work in

general

that aims at

this

process of humanizing people.

Here, be careful, right? It's not necessarily

that you go to school

automatically, but there is an intention

to do this, okay? So, of all the

various forms of Of all the types of work that

exist, educational work is one of them

and it has this

special characteristic, okay?

So, I've already said it, right? There are

different forms of work. There are

different forms of work,

yes or no?

Yes or no?

Say

yes. We're going to have some

categories, as they were in the text,

for example, material work, which

is characterized by the

production of an object, where the author, the

producer, creates it and

transfers it to another person.

Educational work can also

fall into the category of producing

didactic material, where the product is

separate from the author, or in the act

of educating, where education is

material work from the moment

the author educates and the

recipient receives it.

I think these are the two main

types of work presented

in the text.

Uh-huh.

So it's good to remember this, right? The

text presents some types of

work, expressions of work, but there are

others that we won't

discuss here. I don't know if you have any

doubts, and if you have time, we'll discuss them later,

but In principle, you know

, work is

productive work.

What is productive and what is not productive will change from era to era.

But if we consider that work

is what reproduces life,

in theory, then all work produces

at least the reproduction of life. So

it is productive, it has a production.

These different forms of work

will try to describe what happens

with this production and the producer, in this case.

So, the text presents two main

types of work,

which are material work and

non-material work,

okay? As Jefferson already mentioned.

So, material work, which will

give us the clue that something is understood as

material work, is the production of new

material goods.

So, it is the production of something,

okay?

Of a new product.

So, for example, work in the field

is material work, the work of the

farmer, he produces a new product.

Work in a factory is

material work; the worker produces

a new product,

okay? So, if we can

think that there was a

process of transformation with the raw material. And a

final product, this transformation process is

material work, right, a few lines.

So, there will be the transformation of the

material into... And here I'm going to bring up another

term that isn't in this way in the book,

in a text, but it's important for

us.

Uh, why is this so important,

right? It seems like this, okay? I took the

wood, right, the log, and transformed it

into a board, so material work.

Why is this important, so

important, that it's what

characterizes the human being?

Because during this process of

transforming the raw material,

we will say that the work of

that human being was objectified

in the final product.

So, there was the objectification of

human work. An object was created through

human work

and it carries within it

impressions of human work.

Why?

Because to transform the log into

wood, the knowledge of the

person doing it was necessary. So they

know what they're doing, they planned

what they're doing, they had an

expected result, which is the board. So,

in a way, there was already a prediction

of the board, right, of... Excuse me, the plank on that

human being's head. Materials were

needed

, right, machines or

tools to carry out this

work. It's not something you just think about

, it requires action. So,

when we look at the plank, if we

pay attention, right, a

more attentive look, we can understand

that the plank is a natural product.

If there wasn't human labor,

the plank wouldn't exist.

Are you following what I'm trying to say?

So we can imagine,

look, for this plank to exist, there had to be

a human being

who knew what to do with the log, I'm

starting there. That already characterizes

that product as a result of

human labor, which is material, okay?

So let's try to explain again.

We have many

products made of metal around us. For example,

here I look at the window which has

an aluminum frame. I ask

the chemists, the biologists too.

Does metallic aluminum exist in nature?

And now I breathe. No

, it doesn't. You're not going to dig and

find a, what do you call it? Here? A

bar. An aluminum bar.

So, how do I have an

aluminum bar right here in front of me? What

had to happen?

Nobody knows.

Tell me, Jefferson

is silent. I don't know if he's talking.

We're not going to be able to get it

naturally, as you explained.

Unlike a log that we

can easily find, it

requires a whole process, for

example, electrochemistry, to

obtain the aluminum and everything else. So, it's

a more elaborate process

than simply finding it.

Uh-huh. Yes, it's more elaborate than what

I mentioned, but I still want

you to understand the following. I have

a raw material,

which in the case of the aluminum example will

be bachite, the ore, which

exists in nature.

And what will be necessary to go

from the raw material to the product?

So, to go from the bachite ore to

an aluminum bar, the

product will have to be mixed

, there will be a whole

chemical process there so as not to lose its

properties and not become harder or

softer than it could be. And it will have to be

molded to... It stays that

way.

Uh-huh. In that format, in this case.

That's it. But first of all, something we

often forget, you need a

human being.

The only thing that can transform a

machine, right, to make it a

machine,

is the human who made the machine and the

human who operates the machine. And the machine

only emerged because humans managed to

understand that it's possible to obtain aluminum

from bachite. Are

you understanding where I'm going with this?

Everything we do as a process

is the result of some

previous human work.

So, when we, when

I say human being, produce

something, for that production to

happen, it

was necessary to use

various knowledge or

technologies, as already described, that

were created by human beings. So,

in this product,

we say that it carries in its

constitution, in its object,

the result of human work. And if I

analyze the product, I can discover

what was necessary for it to

happen.

We don't do this in our daily lives,

in the immediate moment, but we can

do it and we are able to do it, because

this The product retains this in its

constitution,

okay? I know it's difficult, so let's... let's

put myself there.

And another thing, right, that will

characterize any type of work is

this mental planning, right? So, the

activity, the material work, it

's something that involves substances,

right, materials,

but it was also planned

beforehand, right, in the head.

So, it's the realization

in the material world of something that we

can already plan,

okay?

You can interrupt.

Hi. And the opposite of material work is

non-material work. I put it in

red to make it very clear.

So, what would non-

material work be?

In a simple way, it would be the

mental anticipation of material actions,

okay? But the other one also had

mental planning, right?

Everything we do has

mental planning, but we, as human beings,

can carry out this planning in our heads

based on

the knowledge we have.

And this planning is already an expression of

human work, right? Work is always

human, but the expression of work...

Let's try to give more examples, right?

We understand... In this world, each individual

understands the world, reality, through

a mental representation of it,

right? So this theory, Marxist theory,

understands that reality exists—not

only Marxist theory, right? All materialism

understands that reality exists, it

exists materially,

regardless of whether we,

as human beings, understand and act upon it. So, what

happens? Reality exists, things

exist. But to understand what

reality is, we create a

mental representation. The essence of this reality,

which is us thinking about reality

itself, right? This process of

representation, of creating this

representation, of making it increasingly

complex, is also a form of

work,

okay? That's why humans are always

working, because they're always

trying to explain reality in some

way, right? And this process

is also an expression of work.

Here, to create this representation of the

world, this mental representation of the world,

we resort to various things. One of

them,

which we can generically call

science, is knowledge about the

characteristics of the real world. So, the

real world does exist, as I mentioned,

right? Things exist and they have

characteristics, properties, right?

We study many properties in

chemistry and biology.

So, knowledge about these

properties, which is the knowledge of

science,

is one of the things that

allows us to construct this representation of the

world, okay? What else allows us to

construct a representation of the world? A

process that we will call here

valorization.

You'll also find valuation,

but I think valuation is the best,

which is,

literally, assigning value, but

value can be correct, incorrect, good

, bad, right? These are values

that, if we were to

categorize them, would fall under the category

of ethics.

So our vision, our

mental representation of reality,

is not a

pure representation of reality, so to speak. It is the result of

our internal process, which

also depends on ethical considerations.

Remember, the difference between ethics and

morality, right? There's the issue of

behavior, the issue of

social conduct, all of that is relevant here.

We also

use symbols to construct a mental representation of the world,

which here we can categorize as

art, in general,

but not in the sense of

art education, but in the sense that we

operate through symbols, through

symbolizations. And it doesn't have to be a

written symbol. There are

symbolic things that are mystical, right? They're

verbal, and so on, right?

So, these three aspects are what

allow us to

construct our representation of the world,

even if we don't realize it, okay?

Yes,

and in addition, VGTK will primarily

bring to light that human language is

what enables this process

to occur. He mediates this process. So,

we communicate through language, but

there's an internal language that we

don't know how it works, which allows for this

mental representation of reality.

What does that mean? In order to

construct a more objective mental representation

, closer to reality,

we need to appropriate

scientific knowledge, as well as

ethical, artistic, and linguistic aspects.

And all of this is transforming our

representation of reality.

So, a child has a

very different representation of the world than

we do.

There are those classic examples, right, of

us hiding here, right, with our hand, and

the child, right,

understands that we're not there anymore,

right? And there are still people who will have the

nerve to say that the child is stupid. It

's not that the child is stupid, right? That

her representation of people

is through their faces. If there's no face or

voice, or anything to say that that

person, that person isn't there,

right?

This is her interpretation of the world,

because she's still developing this

representation of it.

Well, children, you know, they won't understand

that national conflicts and

things like that exist, because their world is

smaller.

Their mental representation of reality encompasses a smaller context. However,

this very representation

of reality is also a result of

work, but it doesn't involve a

transformation

of one matter, one material, into another

.

That's why we're going to call this

work non-material,

because it doesn't have a physical structure; everything

that's happening here is in the realm of thought,

okay?

But both are productive work. One

will produce new materials and the other

will produce mental representations of

reality,

okay?

Of these two, where would education be located? In

material or non-material work?

Not material.

Not material.

So, when we say that we want to

develop productive work,

we have to understand that what we

ultimately want to develop, if

we were to summarize, is to

develop the mental representation of

reality that students have, that

students produce. It's simple, isn't it? You

can speak, Matthew.

But couldn't you say that it fits into both categories

? Because in a

previous discussion, it was mentioned

that education is

both institutional, within the institution,

and outside of it. Uh-huh

.

So we can't say that

education is in both, can

we? Because

even outside of school, the

learning process involves

mental work and not the transformation of one

material into another.

Ah, yes, I understand.

Thanks.

So, what's going to happen here?

I forgot about that line over there. In

the material work section, I highlighted the

process of objectification,

which was, you know, the imprinting of

human labor onto objects. It

's not the only process that occurs, I just

highlighted it, okay?

But in non-material work, since there wo

n't be the production of the

actual object, as we

expect,

we'll do the reverse process.

We're going to take the objects

and,

as individuals, we're going to appropriate

this human labor that was

inside the object.

We're going to appropriate it and take it for

ourselves. I'll

explain it again here.

Let's assume here that what we're

trying to learn, right, that we

're in a learning process here,

is to perform a protocol that you all

must have already done, some kind of

mixture separation protocol, for example. So

we go there and use a flask, a

vacuum pump, a business funnel,

filter paper, all of which are objects of

human labor.

When we learn the

filtration technique,

if we learn it in the way it's

written here, we'll be able to fully

understand all the work

involved in producing those

materials.

In other words, we're only going to be able to... well,

not really, right? Using these

materials, we can understand what

human beings, you know, the human beings who

produced this technique, thought when they came to

produce it. So, why does the funnel have

those little holes? Why does the

air vent have that nozzle on the side

to release the air?

So I, as a human being, don't need to

discover the filtration technique on

my own. Has anyone ever done this for

me? Not for me, right? Someone has done

this before in history. My role now, as a

human being of this time, is to appropriate

this knowledge so that I

can do new things. Because if

we had to reinvent everything every time

, we would never have gotten

anywhere. Do

you understand? What does the term "

appropriation" mean? And why did I

say correct appropriation?

Because if we don't, it won't be

clear, right? When we learn

things, we can't understand

the human work embedded in them;

we still need to dedicate more time to

appropriating

these objects, you know. And now I've

noticed something that could cause

confusion.

When I say objects,

I can also be referring to

cultural objects.

For example,

writing, the alphabet is an object, okay?

Even though it doesn't have a form,

although it could, we could

carve the letters here, it's also

a human object, it has

the work

put there for us to appropriate, okay?

So, if we think about the word "

object"

in general, it's anything that has been

produced through human labor,

okay? Therefore, a stone is not an object.

The object has to be produced,

okay?

But within the non-material realm, which is

where education is situated, we have

two further divisions: a

non-material work process

, where the product of that work

is separate from the producer.

And here we can take

books, articles, and works of art as examples. So what

happens? There is no transformation

of the raw material. It's not a matter of me going

there to cut down the eucalyptus trees and produce the paper

that will be used for books, or

articles, you know. It's not about me producing the canvas,

producing the paint, it's not that. It's the

work of, starting from, you know, these

existing materials,

producing something that is non-material. So,

the artwork is not simply

the material that is there; it conveys

other things. And these other things,

they are non-material; they involve

valuation, symbolization,

right? In the case of scientific books

, what it will contain

is scientific knowledge. I

don't care, in quotes, about the material,

the product that interests me, it's the

knowledge that's systematized there,

right? That's why they are products of

non-material labor,

only now the labor has become separated from the producer. The person who

produces the book

makes the book, and the book goes away to

be used by other people. Whoever

produces the article, deposits it, and it,

in quotes, goes on to other

people. The artwork, you know, it's

independent of the painter, right? For example,

if it's a painting, the painter dies, but the

work continues. So, there's a separation from that

,

OK?

So, and in addition to that, there's the producer

who makes the product; they're separate, right?

And in another process, other

human beings will appropriate this product,

they'll use this product to build, or

improve, their mental representation

of reality. So we don't necessarily have

contact between the person using the object

and the person who produced it.

Beauty?

And we have non-

material work where there is no such separation.

The product of labor is inseparable

from the producer; it does not generate something

physical. I don't mean physical; it

could be digital, but it doesn't generate something

that can be transported, right? So that it

can be spread to other people.

It is something inherent to that producer,

such as their own educational work

or other forms of

cultural appropriation.

Therefore, when individuals perform

educational work,

the product of that work

is a mental representation of reality.

And I can't

take that mental representation of

reality from another person.

She is my mental representation. And there are

other forms of cultural appropriation as well

, right? In other words, learning forms,

other languages, or

techniques, for example,

a sport, can also involve

educational work, right? So,

learning a technique is something I

learn for myself. I appropriate and am

able to develop this technique. The

result of this is that I am able to develop

the technique. The product of

educational work is my

mental representation,

you understand? He doesn't leave my side.

Do you understand?

But oh, you're talking, right? You're

showcasing the product

of your educational work. Yes. But

when we talk about it, it's no longer the

product, it's something else,

okay?

It's like talking about the bottle and then using the

bottle. They are different things.

OK? Do

you understand? Okay

. Okay then.

So, we define educational work

as non-material work

that is inseparable from the producer,

right? Okay, then

?

And that's why we have the nature of the

educational process as human work, which is

also present in the questions, I think, right?

One of those.

So let's go. Educational work

is not an expression, it is a

type of non-material work

in which there is no separation

between the producer and the product.

OK?

And what exactly is this product, in a

way? How is this

domestic product produced?

It's through the appropriation of what we call

systematized culture.

I paused to see if anyone wanted to

comment. Systematized culture

is that which is

systematized,

which we access in a

procedural way. We can obtain this

culture. It's not something spontaneous, it's not

something experiential, it's something systematized,

okay?

And this systematized culture, it is

systematized in products of

material labor, as I mentioned,

but also in products of non-

material labor that are separate from the producer, okay?

I didn't put that there. So I'm going to come back

here to these material work products

.

So when we use this,

we are, or should be,

appropriating

human ways

of communicating.

For example, everything here is written

in Portuguese, in my case, right? I think that's the

case for everyone here. So, in order for me to

use this, I need to

speak Portuguese.

If I hand this cell phone to

someone who doesn't speak Portuguese, what's the

first thing they're going to try to do?

Configure the device for

her language.

Yes, in her language. She's going to try to change

the language; she's going to need access to

what's systematically organized here.

So here we can reinforce the role

of language, right, in the case of the spoken language.

So we appropriate this culture

that is present in material products.

And this culture will be fundamental in fostering

our individual development,

because I can improve my

understanding of the world

and act differently in society.

OK? This sentence is extremely

broad and generic. I'll try to give you

examples.

When we study chemistry and

biology, what we're

ultimately trying to do is appropriate

this systematized culture, this

chemical knowledge, this

biological knowledge,

in order to explain the world and act

in it, as chemists, as biologists, as

young people, as old people, I don't know what their situation is. They're starting to

classify themselves as

Brazilians, you know. Ultimately, we act in

society, in life, based on what

we have already appropriated from our culture,

okay?

And this allows us to develop, to

develop in the sense of improving this

representation, okay? That's what

development looks like in this case.

So, when you're there learning how to

use the microscope,

now that I'm giving you this

explanation, imagine the microscope. This

is more for biologists, right?

But I'll continue with the microscope.

Can you imagine what I was

talking about? What human work is

present in that microscope?

When you use a burette to perform

a titration,

you realize that it's not

just a

glass container. A lot of

human labor went into that. Can

you do it or not? Some

raised their fingers. That's what

I want you all to start

understanding, you know. So, when I

learn how to use a burette to perform a

titration,

I don't just learn how to open and close a

tap. I learned or acquired

the necessary knowledge to understand

what a titration is,

what an indicator is for, what the

measurement on the burette is for, the

burette's graduation, why I do that,

where I can use it in the

microscope,

I learn about, I should

understand, about

lens magnification, what lenses do, why there's

light coming from below? Why do

I open or close the diaphragm more or less

?

What does it mean to focus, or to

concentrate, since I have the

degrees to do that?

Why are there different types of

microscopes with different materials

to achieve better or worse observation?

Yes, it is different. Ali is talking about the optical one,

right, which is what we normally use,

but there are other devices as well. Okay

? So I want you all to start

thinking about this a little bit too, okay?

No, not immediately.

So the product, right, this

improvement in mental representation,

we can use a more

specific term which is

psychic transformations,

transformations in the psychic structure of the

individual.

And these transformations

allow for the formation of a second

nature. I don't really like that

term, but it comes up in "second nature,"

which is human nature,

OK? So, we become

human beings during

our development, right, through the

psychic transformations that we

bring about through work.

And these transformations, they create a

second nature. What would this

second nature be? We end up

normalizing

cultural processes.

For example,

reading and speaking.

We don't remember very well, I don't know if some

people remember or not, but

learning to read, especially to read—

speaking is easier, but learning to read is

a difficult process for the individual, right?

Poor teachers who have to

teach us how to read.

But now that we know how to read,

we don't think about it anymore. We

read. Reading is natural for us. But it's not

a biological process. It wasn't in

our genes, in the gene g gene gen ler,

right? How could we interpret that, right? From

Pagé, for example. It's not there. The

genetic code doesn't have codons for every

letter you learn, it doesn't

.

What we have is our material base.

Reading is a cultural trait that becomes

automatic to a certain extent, in our constitution, right?

It's reading in Portuguese, in this case, right? If

we were to take the common denominator.

Here's

another example the authors give,

which I also use,

but the most striking example

, I think, is learning to drive or

learning to ride a bicycle.

Driving is also not natural. It

's natural to breathe, not to drive.

But we learn how to drive. And

learning to drive, I believe,

is not a simple or easy process for everyone.

You're there at driving school trying to

learn how to drive, and you need to

think about every tiny movement you're

going to make so that the vehicle doesn't move without you

dying or

running anyone over.

But there comes a point when you

make it automatic, natural. We would

use that term. However, driving is a

cultural trait, not a biological one

.

But we make that automatic,

we automate it. So, the idea of ​​the

educational process is that we can

take scientific knowledge

and make it natural for us, that we

can think about the world in a

scientific way,

that we appropriate

this, that we create this second

nature of thinking scientifically

and acting scientifically in the world.

Did you understand? Okay

? I want to see it, okay?

So here we have

the possibility of establishing the relationship

between education and teaching, which is something

we've already talked about some

time ago.

So, education is this general process,

very general, right,

whose function is that the people

involved in this educational process

appropriate the systematized culture. Okay

? What are we going to give? Other examples

of systematized culture

that we sometimes think

are science, the kind

we get from the library, but that's

not the case.

For example

, there are forms of systematization

that would be, in a way, popular, if

we could use that term. For

example, cookbooks,

which I think are something that don't

exist anymore,

right? So, we look everything up on the

internet, right? We didn't need to, and we don't

need to anymore, go back to the books that

our grandparents, our mothers perhaps had,

to produce food in that

way, you know. That's also

systematized culture because it's written down there,

okay? So, the difference between

systematized and non-systematized culture isn't about

being something scientific or about

being from a university or a school.

To be systematized means to be systematized,

written down, organized, and something a

person can learn from, right?

Culture can be transmitted through

that. Rituals, for example, can be

considered a form of

systematized,

popular culture, normally.

But going back to teaching, the

relationship, education is this

generic process, and teaching

is the part that describes what the

more culturally developed individual

will enable the less developed individual

to appropriate that culture.

So, we don't appropriate

culture alone,

and we don't appropriate culture in an

arbitrary, empirical way.

Empirical means derived from

naive experimentation, without intention.

An intentional process is needed for

this to occur.

And to make that happen, there are

techniques, there is

specific knowledge for that. That's what teaching is all about; it's about

organizing the process

so that someone can learn. And education is

the generic process

of appropriating culture. So,

teaching is much more

present in formal education, in

institutionalized education, in school,

but not always, right?

Not so long ago, in

some places, the father teaches the

profession to the son, he is teaching,

right? He has his teaching methods there

that can be discussed, but he

has, right, an organization of actions. That's what

education is all about in general.

Well, obviously, since we work in

schools, it's through formal schooling, so it's

a specific type of teaching, with its own

techniques and theories.

Oh, I already posted it here, right? So, reading

this, education is the overall process of

human development through educational work,

and teaching is the organization of this

educational process. Here I put "

by the teacher," but we could use "

by the more developed individual"

with the goal of promoting

learning in

less developed individuals.

And that's why when we use "more

developed" and "less developed,"

people feel very

uncomfortable with that term. I do

n't know if anyone here felt this way,

but that's exactly it, folks. Okay?

There are people, you know, who have historically

had access to culture.

So, in cultural terms, within that

cultural scope, she is more developed

than the people she is teaching.

It's impossible to teach, to

carry out this process, if you don't have

this difference in development

in relation to the culture that is being

discussed in the educational process.

So we need this difference here, where the

more developed individuals

organize the teaching and

learning process for the less developed,

right? There's no need to feel uncomfortable, it

's not a bad thing, nothing like that, it's just how it is

.

OK?

And then we enter into a topic that is

sometimes very misunderstood, which is

work as an educational principle.

There's a question about that over there too,

right? He had. So work is everything

we've already discussed, right?

Intentional, planned action by a human being, which

can be material or non-material.

When we say that we understand

work as an educational principle,

we mean that education

is a type of human work.

And in order to learn,

to teach, and to learn, we need to

do work, right?

Educational work will involve

teaching activities, right? And

learning activities.

within this work.

Another thing we're saying, which is

stated in this sentence and which we may not

understand, is that educational work

exists, that education exists, because

human beings today, in our

society,

need an intentional process of

cultural appropriation in order to

develop.

So this appropriation of culture is a

human need that was created by

human beings, but it is a

necessity,

it is in place today for you, for

any individual on the planet to understand what

is happening on the planet, they

need to appropriate the

systematized culture, otherwise they will not

understand. He needs to

know how to read and write, at least in his

native language. You'll understand

mathematical expressions, right, the world,

scientific knowledge in general,

about ethics, right, and morality, about

symbolism. He needs this because

otherwise he cannot understand and act

freely in the world. That's what

this sentence here is saying.

And we're also reinforcing that the

objectification of culture

and the appropriation of culture,

you could put it here,

are not natural processes, they are

social processes in human beings, okay?

So, there is no natural process for

transforming matter into a product,

and the appropriation of culture is not a

natural process,

okay?

No, it's a social process.

So, appropriation, here I put

appropriation, right? I'll correct it. Appropriation

is not spontaneous, that is, it does not

occur by chance.

She needs to be systematic.

So it will involve the intentional action

of the people in the process

on cultural products, which are

human products, right,

with the goal of promoting the

development of a second nature,

which is cultural nature.

Right?

Once again,

then, the appropriation of culture is not

spontaneous.

The appropriation of culture is

a systematic

and intentional process

that acts upon the human products of

culture, both material and non-material.

And the goal of this appropriation is to

develop in that individual a

second nature that receives this name

because it is not the biological nature that

everyone already has, but the cultural nature

that needs to be appropriated by

individuals.

OK?

And here we answer the question from the

beginning. Therefore, human nature

is not given or innate. We are not born with

it, with this second human nature.

It is produced by individuals,

by human beings, based on

natural processes. Natural nature,

the cacophony is valid, right, that I put in the

biophysical basis,

but it is

not present in DNA, so to

speak, putting it in other terms, right?

It's not

that the human individual

, if they develop

biologically, will appropriate this

culture as an expression of the

genetic code, it's not like that. That

works. OK, you can speak, Joel.

Uh, just a question about the appropriation

there to see if I understood correctly. Well,

so for a human being, in order to

produce their own

culture, they have to appropriate

pre-existing culture to create

their own. Could that be it?

Yes, culture is social, okay?

It's best to think of culture as an

expression of society,

but that's what it is.

In order to produce our

mental representation of reality

and ways of acting within that reality,

we draw upon

systematized knowledge from

previous systematized cultures.

And from there, we can act

and produce the culture of our time,

if that's the case, right?

OK. It

's OK.

So,

hi, what did I do? What is

educational work? Notice that we went from

page one to page two of the text,

right? In an hour and a half. Is

everything alright?

Saviana wrote that phrase,

everyone repeats it, gets it tattooed, etc. But there it is.

Educational work

is the act of directly and

intentionally producing in each individual

the humanity that is

historically and collectively produced by all of

humankind.

Did you understand that sentence?

Yes or no?

Yes. Joel no. Yes, the one

. Yes. The other Joel didn't either.

So let's go. Let's go. This sentence

summarizes everything I've said. Let's go.

Come on, Gabriel. Let's go.

What does that mean, right? That's the

little bit, right? The end. Humanity

is a historically and collectively produced form of

humanity as a whole. This means that in order

for us to develop as

individuals,

we appropriate the culture

produced previously.

All good?

OK? That's what it means.

And educational work

is the act, that is, the actions taken

so that the individual can

appropriate this culture.

That's what educational work is all about. Therefore, you

need people thinking about this

process, directing this process with the

intention that each individual

appropriates the human culture produced.

So what he's throwing around in terms of

words is that this

production is internal. So, when an

individual appropriates culture and

internally produces, through

non-material labor, their own

representation of the world, they are

producing in their mind

everything that humanity has produced historically

and collectively. Everything is an exaggeration, right? But

what humanity has produced historically and

collectively, that is, it

develops and becomes

increasingly generic, increasingly human, right, in

quotation marks here, in a

cultural sense. So, what would be the

ultimate goal, if we were to

think about the perfect educational process,

that all people on the planet, as

unique individuals,

would appropriate all the human culture

ever produced?

That would be ideal, that's what's expected.

But, folks, we can barely even get a

share of it, can we? The more

of everything. So, what do we

need to do?

First, or rather, along with the

teaching process, is identifying

which cultural objects,

which part of the systematized culture,

needs to be effectively appropriated

by individuals so that they become

human, so that they

can effectively participate in the

society in which they live.

Right? I'll

give you an example that just came to mind. If it turns out

badly, let me know. All

languages ​​that exist on the planet are

cultural objects, right? Portuguese,

Spanish, Russian, Mandarin, Tupi-Guarani,

languages ​​whose names I don't even know. In

other words, they are human products. humanity

has produced.

But in order for me to live

properly in society,

I don't need to know all those

languages,

because if I did, it would be too late, right?

Impossible.

So, when we think about

which cultural objects are

necessary for

Brazilian individuals to develop, we

automatically think of the

Portuguese language or Brazilian

Sign Language, right? We do

n't worry about other

objects of language.

Oh, no. But then we might think,

no, in today's world, since we live

near the border, it's necessary that we

know how to speak Spanish.

So, these cultural objects, this particular

cultural object will be necessary for

those individuals. We don't need

to understand the

traditional peoples of the region, do we? So let's

speak Tupi Guarani. We need to communicate with the

whole world, so we need to learn

English for now, right? It used to be

French, for example. So the

identification of these objects will

depend on which society, which

time period, and how that society

lived. If we think about the artisans

of the Middle Ages, important cultural objects

were part of their profession. So much so

that most people in the Middle Ages

were illiterate.

Thanks to this, we have the various

languages. If everyone knew how to speak

Latin and spoke Latin all the time,

we'd probably still be speaking

Latin today.

So, back then, knowing grammar, as

they called it, wasn't

important for individuals.

Or for the masses, you know, the working class in

general, you know, in particular. So,

identifying these objects is part

of the educational process,

okay? You need to be able to answer,

or at least have an

explanation for yourselves, whether you're

future teachers or not, but in training with

chemistry and biology teachers, are

those

things you're teaching

essential for an individual to live in

society?

The answer has to be yes, and we need to be

able to explain how,

okay?

OK. So this is an important role of

educational work.

And the second part, which won't come from

systematized culture, so you see, the

cultural objects that we teach them,

good evening, are

already systematized within the culture.

We're going to identify which ones are

essential,

right?

Ah, I haven't changed anything here, except that in this little

blue square, which I'll change in a

moment, we also need to

identify the

best ways

to foster this appropriation in

people, as people, teachers,

right? So, a cultural object exists

to be appropriated; I need

an intentional process that guides

the student toward this appropriation.

How do I do that?

This is the second dimension of

educational work.

So, the first step is to identify the

objects, and the second is to identify

the best way to encourage

students to take ownership of them.

OK? Let's talk a little more about this.

So, what will the identification of

cultural objects involve?

Distinguish. We need to be able to

distinguish between what is essential, that

is, what is indispensable for

a person to know,

what is fundamental, what is most important,

right?

And that which is secondary, that which

is accidental, that which I

can learn

in other ways,

would be the accidental, which is secondary, that is

, it is a detail, it is something that if I

know it, that's fine,

I will be more

culturally aware, but it is not fundamental.

Same thing, something that's an accessory, right?

Something that is not the main thing.

And we need to be able to make that

distinction, okay? There won't be a manual,

well, you could consider a textbook,

but anyway, nothing's set in

stone, right? Society has to

determine that. Within

historical-critical pedagogy,

Saviane uses the term "classic"

to refer to what is essential. What's

essential is what's classic,

right? So,

classical knowledge, classical culture in this

context, is what has been

consolidated throughout history as essential

at a given historical time. So, what is

essential for a

student today?

Language, right? Math, science, so.

So this became firmly established as

essential.

What we need to

understand is that what we're going to

teach at work, in the

educational process, is systematized knowledge.

But not everything that's systematized is

classic,

right? As I said, Latin, for

example,

although we call it a

classical language, it's not classical enough for us to

survive in society. We don't

need to know how to speak Latin. Knowing how to speak

Latin is secondary, an

accessory,

right? That's what I'm talking about in general, right? Of course, there

will be professions, for example, where

this is essential. So, you see what

's essential? It will change, right,

depending on what I want to do. That's why

the process has to be

intentional.

So, this systematized knowledge,

classical knowledge, say Jefferson,

professor, regarding what is

essential and what is non-essential,

let's say, I would like to raise two

questions

regarding some things I have

observed. Well, for example, in

the first book, he mentioned activities

that were taking the place of what is

essential,

such as

, for example, Flag Week, in the text

he mentions, for example,

Flag Week and things like that, which were

activities that should have a

supportive role to what is essential, history,

for example, but were taking its place.

That's why I have a question about,

for example, in PIBID (Institutional Scholarship Program for Teaching Initiation), we saw many

students in teacher training programs working

on a poster about Carnival.

It was a poster that had

historical information about its origin, objectives, and everything

else. And in addition to that, for

example, at an elementary school

here in the city, the children were

dressed up in costumes, you know? The

first question would be this one.

I wanted to know at what point an

activity like studying

the topic in teacher training

, developing a project on the

topic, would

become essential or would it be a

waste of time, so to speak?

Okay, there's

not going to be a clear answer to

that, is there? It will also depend on what

each person considers essential.

But the question we would have to

answer is, for a Brazilian, it

's essential that we understand

this cultural expression that is Carnival

in order to understand

Brazilian culture and our lives

as Brazilians.

That's the question.

I would answer yes.

Yes, I agree. Well, so what

happens then? Just so you do

n't lose, then you ask the second

question. That's the little red square.

Carnival, as a cultural expression, is something

we must understand. Now I

need to think about the little blue square. How do

I do that?

So we can understand it this way: going in

costume or participating in a carnival celebration for a day is

enough

for the student to understand the

cultural expression of carnival, its

historical importance, and its importance in the

formation of Brazilian identity.

And that's when we start to have this question,

right,

of how do I make that object

have the meaning that we need it to

have.

So that's the criticism, the

commemorative dates, it's not the content that's

there, right? But the form, for example,

Halloween. I love Halloween, right? But how does

understanding Halloween

make us, you know, essential to our

role in society?

And how, in the teaching and

learning process, can we best help

students to embrace this

cultural expression that is Halloween, for example? Okay

? I don't know if that was clear, but you can

comment with questions.

You can comment, Jefferson.

Uh, professor, uh, sorry, I wanted to

know, also following that line of thought, what

I wanted to ask about, for example,

the inclusion of entrepreneurship in the

high school curriculum here, based on what

I've seen in the Paraná curriculum. Uh-huh

. It's like, the point is that it's

essential or

important for Brazilian students to

learn this, to have this, for

example, at the expense of reducing the teaching

hours of other subjects, for

example, chemistry doesn't have it. and biology. I

think it's no longer in the third

year either, but entrepreneurship is included

there.

I've been thinking about that for a while now

.

So, we first need to think about

and understand whether entrepreneurship

is an expression of systematized knowledge

in the sense of scientific knowledge,

or whether it

is a technology, ways of doing

something.

Because what we teach, or should

teach, in school is scientific knowledge,

not specific ways of doing

certain things.

For example, we don't teach in

school, and shouldn't teach in school, how to

file income tax returns.

Because if you know how to read, you read the guide

from the Internal Revenue Service and you file your

income tax.

Or you can pay a professional to do

it. There are professions that do this. It

is not essential and is not

scientific knowledge for

filing an income tax return. What

could I do by trying to, you know

, show my income tax return

, learn something,

math, you know, tax law, something like that

?

You see, what we can't do is

put the example and the "how to do it," the "what to

do," before the scientific content.

The scientific content is classic.

So, in the

entrepreneurship course, in the

entrepreneurship component of the curriculum, I

am, you know, the professor, you know, the

professor, uh, teaches

scientific knowledge,

because if so,

this isn't an immediate problem. Now,

if not, it's taking the place of

something that's more essential than that.

Right?

Did I manage to answer?

Yes. Uh, professor, just as an example here,

I have the document open and it

presents the objective: to recognize and

evaluate knowledge and resources

related to mathematics as a means to

achieve personal and

professional goals,

seeking to act proactively.

I think that's a bit out of place, just to

add to what I'm reading in the

document now.

Yeah, do it, compare it to this, right?

So, does the objective he stated there have anything to do

with this? To appropriate

cultural objects produced by

humanity,

right, in order to act in society.

If so, and this isn't happening, the

problem might lie in the

teaching method rather than the content or the subject matter

itself,

right? Now, notice that in the same way,

my interpretation, although it didn't delve

deeply into the text, seems superficial,

because entrepreneurship itself doesn't

depend solely on

mathematical knowledge, right?

So, what would

need to be reversed, in

my view of this pedagogy, what's

important in this whole syllabus is

mathematical knowledge,

right? If we want to use practices that

we understand as entrepreneurship

to bring meaning to

mathematical knowledge, that's one thing, you're

working on the form.

And we can't prioritize form

first, to

repeat myself, right? We need to think

about the content. First of all, we

have to think about

what the object is, right? What is the

cultural object? I

want the students to take ownership. This is

the first one.

And being connected to it, but in a way

secondary, is the best way to

socialize this object.

So, when we change this order,

we empty the school

of its objects.

We'll discuss that at some

point too,

but it's, you know, the issue of

entrepreneurship, for example, that's it. Simply naming names

won't solve much

. We have to consider both content and

form, but since, probably,

in this curriculum design there wasn't

a concern for thinking about content and

form,

it's likely that this type of

curriculum organization won't achieve those

objectives,

right? We have that expectation.

OK?

But let's try using this slide to see

if I can clarify things a bit

more. So, to reiterate, in school the

object of study is systematized knowledge. These are, uh,

excerpts from systematized knowledge that are

essential. But what exactly is this

systematized knowledge?

It is an expression of

elaborated knowledge,

which we can call

theoretical knowledge,

which is the opposite of spontaneous knowledge,

which is empirical knowledge.

So, spontaneous knowledge is what

we are able to learn through our

experiences in human society. We

live and learn spontaneous things,

empirical things from experience.

This type of thing shouldn't be the focus of the

school, because it will already be learned

in other spaces,

and the school needs to protect its

space. Because if theoretical knowledge

isn't taught in school, it won't

be taught anywhere else.

Empirical knowledge, however, will be

taught elsewhere. So it's not that

we're taking one out to put the other in its place.

We are reserving an

exclusive space for theoretical knowledge because it

cannot appear in other spheres outside of

the school, thinking about it in

this way, right?

So it's systematized, it's not

something fragmented, right? It has a

logical sequence

of construction, right? Historical logic of

construction.

Here comes another term, which is

complex here, but it's knowledge

that is scholarly and not popular, but at the

same time we advocate for

popular education. So we need to understand what that

means.

Scholarly knowledge is the same thing

as theoretical knowledge.

There's a parallel here between these

classifications.

And it is theoretical, it is erudite because,

firstly, it depends on a

specific language and secondly, because it is a

conceptual system.

Popular knowledge, or

popular culture, isn't

built like that; it's built

from the experience and explanations of a

group, from something more particular, not

universal, like theoretical knowledge.

So, popular knowledge,

folk wisdom, it is popular, meaning that

it permeates the lives of the people.

Now, what we need is for

everyone to have this

scholarly knowledge as well, something that can't be

restricted

to certain groups of people,

okay? So, methodical scientific knowledge

, uh,

systematized, methodical, theoretical and

erudite knowledge, that's what we're calling

scientific knowledge.

So, it's not chemistry, physics, or biology,

right? It is the systematized knowledge of

mathematics, music, language,

techniques, and technology. All of this

will fall into

this category of

scientific knowledge, okay? So, this type of

knowledge is not learned

spontaneously. So, I need

a place and an

intentional process for this, okay?

And here, anyone who has taken

epistemology classes should remember

these three types of knowledge,

which have been defined

since antiquity.

So here we have episteme, which is

epistemic knowledge, doxa, which is

dogmatic common-sense knowledge, and Sophia, which

is experiential knowledge.

All of this is part of what it means to

be human, okay? How to be

cultural. But

Sofia is the wisdom of our

life experience. So, we

learn by living it.

And doxa is common sense and

dogmatic, religious, mystical knowledge,

in short, that is learned

elsewhere.

Where is the

leftover, right? What's missing from these

two things that you'll

inevitably have is episteme, which is

scientific knowledge.

If you don't have a suitable space

for it, which is school, it will be

lacking.

And we argue that we need

all of this

in the process of humanization. So,

when we hear, for example, that

experience is more valuable

than going to school, than

learning, it's a partial view

of what's truly essential, okay?

So, people who are experienced,

they have knowledge, they are wise, but it's

this kind of knowledge.

We need to complement this with these

other expressions of knowledge.

Similarly, one cannot think of school as

a place of common sense. common sense.

School is part of society, you know,

it interacts with this common sense, but

it has to be confronted,

or

articulated with scientific knowledge,

because otherwise there's no point in having a school.

So, when we start removing

scientific knowledge from schools, the school

loses its reason for being,

which is what we are seeing today,

including a return to what it

was before, because they realized

that it's not quite like that, right?

OK.

And here, right, which is the little blue square that

I didn't correct there,

in addition to the essential cultural objects,

we need to identify the

appropriate means for this, okay?

So, these

educational means will involve

school content,

school spaces, school schedules,

teaching procedures,

teaching resources—all terms that

most of you have already had some kind of

contact with.

So, all these components of

educational work have to be

organized intentionally, they have to

be planned

to enable the cultural appropriation

of the students.

OK?

So here, right, there's an ending, right,

in that same sentence. So, we

organize this for this purpose here, so that

each singular individual may

realize, with a second nature, the

humanity produced historically. In

other words, each individual should

make

this human culture natural

in their way of representing the world and

acting in it,

right? We've

already defined that, but let's

reinforce the social function of the school. What is the purpose of

having school?

First,

school is the part of education

that we will consider in

pedagogical terms. In other words

, social practice, our life,

right, which is global social practice, it

has, right, we educate ourselves all the time,

as has already been said,

but uh, institution, school, will have a

specific dimension, the

pedagogical dimension,

which is intentional, right, for the

appropriation of this culture.

So, the school's

objective, its function, is to provide the

appropriation of cultural instruments

that enable access to

elaborated knowledge and the foundations of

elaborated knowledge.

What provides access to elaborated knowledge?

Especially languages,

the mother tongue

and symbolism, chemistry and biology

are full of symbols, of ways of

writing. If we don't have, if

we don't appropriate these

tools, we can't even

access what chemistry and

biology tell us, let alone use them to

explain the world, right? So, we have to

take care of both of them.

And that's where the term comes from, which

people often don't understand, right? The

process that occurs in school is the

process of transmission and appropriation

of this knowledge,

okay? So, we've been

talking about appropriation from the beginning; the individual who

is learning appropriates

cultural tools. I think that

's OK now.

But that term "transmission," which

many people compare to

traditional teaching, they want to make very

clear that for appropriation to occur,

an intentional process

of socialization of these objects is necessary.

In other words, the student does not construct

knowledge,

he appropriates knowledge that

already exists.

But this knowledge already exists in a

systematized form,

and we need to create a process for

the student to acquire it. This

process is transmission.

They decided to call it a broadcast,

okay? But it's impossible to think of one

without the other. There is no appropriation without

transmission, and there is no transmission. If it does

n't involve appropriation, it's

useless, okay?

So here, access is gained through

reading, through writing in the mother tongue,

through languages, through

scientific language, mathematical language, and so on.

and the foundations of knowledge, then, of the

humanities, natural sciences,

social sciences, technologies, and so on. So,

this is what we define as

essential for the student. So, how much

of the humanities, how much, or what part

of the natural sciences is essential?

This discussion isn't finished; it

needs to happen, and it's not

immutable either, okay

?

And then he comes to the

curriculum design phase. Why?

Well, you already know what a resume is,

right? The school documentation, right?

Primarily the most important aspect of the

curriculum.

So the curriculum is what will guide

the educational work, right? In short, if

it's going to guide educational work,

we've already defined that

educational work must facilitate the

appropriation of systematized knowledge;

the curriculum

must be oriented towards that. All

curricular activities at the school should be

geared towards the students' acquisition of

systematized knowledge,

all of them.

Even the administrative organization

of the school,

the teaching organization, everything has to be

geared towards that.

And the Saviane curriculum will say that it is the

set of core activities of the

school. What are

nuclear activities? those that allow the appropriation

of systematized knowledge.

So, we will need to

promote this appropriation,

and we have defined times and spaces

for that. So, based on

these material issues, we think

about which activities and how they will

take place to enable this

appropriation.

And then he makes the distinction between

curricular and extracurricular activities, right? So,

the curriculum is essential,

but the extracurricular activities can't

just be there taking up space; they have to

be linked to

and contribute to the

curricular processes.

At IF, what would be the main

extracurricular activities, you know, that we can

think of as research and

extension projects that are not part of

your curriculum, right? Final course projects (TCCs) in an extension program

cannot properly exist without

being linked to the work

developed in your training, right?

If we are to follow this

pedagogical theory.

So

Saviane's need to discuss what

is curricular and extracurricular

stemmed from this expanded conception of

curriculum that exists today, largely

derived from constructivism and such,

which involves an excess of stimuli, right? The

more stimuli, the better, but you don't

think very well about how to organize those

stimuli, do you?

And this also ends up placing the school,

or assigning to the school, functions from

other social spaces, which is that

famous expression, right, that the teacher

has become a doctor, psychologist,

social worker, because all

these functions that are not the school's responsibility are thrown onto the school

.

That, you know, comes from a viewpoint

in which systematized knowledge is not

important. These other things are more

important,

and because of that, we lose the

specificity of the school.

If systematized knowledge is no longer

the goal of school, then we don't

need to train teachers

who are very knowledgeable about the

cultural objects that we think we need to

teach. And we undermine

teacher training, for example,

right? We no longer need

teachers who are experts in

chemistry; we need teachers

who know how to mediate conflicts. We

create these other training programs that place

functions on teachers that they shouldn't

have, functions that there are other professionals

more qualified to do.

Bring these professionals to the school.

Do not place the responsibility on the

person who should be disseminating

systematized knowledge.

OK?

That's where the idea of ​​school knowledge comes from.

Therefore,

the mere existence of systematized knowledge

is not sufficient for

appropriation to occur. I already mentioned that, right?

So, the fact that chemical theories exist there

isn't enough for

everyone to know chemistry. And we

observe this empirically.

An intentional process is needed, which is

the educational process.

And this process will primarily involve

dosing and sequencing this knowledge.

To what level of specificity will I

discuss this knowledge? Which ones,

in what sequence?

So, logically, we don't always teach,

in school for example, the

historical sequence of development

of chemistry and biology, because it makes more

sense to sequence it in a different way today, now

that we already know everything,

everything in quotes, right? We're already at the

most advanced level of these sciences,

but historically people were

discovering these things. We didn't

find out anymore. We appropriate

what is already systematized, right? And why do

I have to dose and sequence again

? Because I have defined times and spaces

, right? 200 school days, so many

classes in this subject, so many classes, yes, so many

minutes, all of that is

established. I don't have all the time

in the world to talk about things, so I

need to organize.

It also takes into account the specific conditions of the

individuals and the school,

right? Structural issues at the school

will impact which activities can

be carried out. The level of development

of the individuals will impact the activities

that can be done, possible

specific needs will impact

the activities that can be done, and so

on. That's why there's no

recipe for success. Each group is different

, right?

And we have to think about the order and

dosage that allows for the transmission

and appropriation of culture. It's no use

just superficially touching on things, for

example,

because that way we don't truly grasp them

properly. So it's very difficult to

organize this school knowledge. You probably already

feel this, those of you who are doing internships,

right, and are closer to the end of your course. And besides

that, you know, in addition to balancing

scientific content and knowledge, we

have to establish the best

teaching methods, among the possibilities

we know, which is the best or which are the

best for that group, under those

conditions, at that time, and for that

content,

right?

Oh, and one important thing, right? Sometimes

we think, no, we're

in the 20th century, we're going to do

repetition exercises, we're not going to take

tests, right? We're not going to have them test their multiplication

tables, etc. But that

's completely wrong, okay?

Because I just said that we

normalize the act of driving,

repeating it until it becomes automatic.

We learn and make reading natural

because we repeat it until it becomes automatic.

So, in general, these

automation processes are necessary,

okay? But they cannot be the end of the

process.

I need to use what I've

automated for something, otherwise it does

n't solve anything, right?

And we can't think in terms of

method, which is the case with

active methodologies, for example. We have to

use the best method to teach the

content.

Not using the method I want

to teach everything, or using the method

I want because that method isn't even available.