THE WORK OF THE SCHOOL PEDAGOGUE: A STUDY BASED ON CRITICAL-DIALECTICAL PEDAGOGY

ABSTRACT:

This text is an analytical study whose focus is based on the figure of the school pedagogue. The aim is to promote discussions about the work of the school pedagogue from the perspective of Critical-Dialectical Pedagogy. We used bibliographical and documentary research as a methodological path. We list two documents that dialogue with the research object and provide subsidies for our discussion: the Resolution of the National Education Council (CNE/CP N° 1, May 15, 2006), which established the National Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy Course and Resolution 038/CME/2015 which provides for the General Regulations of the Education Units Teaching in the Municipal Public Network of Manaus. Through this study, we observed the inaccuracies and contradictions found in the documents mentioned here, and this directly affects the pedagogical work. We emphasize that there is still a long way to go to see the implementation of pedagogical work based on a critical-dialectical conception of pedagogy. As main theoretical bases, we list the studies of Schmied-Kowarzik (1983); Franco (2008, 2017, 2021); Freire (1969, 1987); Libâneo (2006, 2012, 2021); Pimenta (2001, 2021); Moreira; Pimenta (2021) and Saviani (1991).

Keywords:
Critical-Dialectical Pedagogy; school pedagogue; educational praxis

RESUMO:

Este texto se configura como um estudo analítico, cujo foco se assenta na figura do/a pedagogo/a escolar. O objetivo é promover discussões sobre o trabalho do/a pedagogo/a escolar na ótica da Pedagogia Crítico-Dialética. Utilizamos como caminho metodológico a pesquisa bibliográfica e documental. Elencamos dois documentos que dialogam com o objeto de pesquisa e trazem subsídios para nossa discussão: A Resolução do Conselho Nacional de Educação (CNE/CP nº 1, de 15 de maio de 2006), que instituiu as Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais para o Curso de Pedagogia, e a Resolução nº 038/CME/2015, que dispõe sobre o Regimento Geral das Unidades de Ensino da Rede Pública Municipal de Manaus. Por meio desse estudo, observamos as imprecisões e contradições postas nos documentos aqui citados, e isto incide diretamente sobre o trabalho pedagógico. Ressaltamos que ainda há um extenso caminho a ser trilhado para vermos concretizado um trabalho pedagógico pautado em uma concepção crítico-dialética da Pedagogia. Como principais bases teóricas elencamos os estudos de Schmied-Kowarzik (1983); Franco (2008, 2017, 2021); Freire (1969, 1987); Libâneo (2006, 2012, 2021); Pimenta (2001, 2021); Moreira; Pimenta (2021) e Saviani (2011).

Palavras-chave:
Pedagogia Crítico-Dialética; pedagogo escolar; práxis educativa

RESUMEN:

Este texto es un estudio analítico centrado en la figura del pedagogo escolar. El objetivo es discutir el trabajo del pedagogo escolar desde la perspectiva de la Pedagogía Crítico-Dialéctica Utilizamos el abordaje metodológico de la investigación bibliográfica y documental. Elegimos dos documentos que dialogan con el objeto de investigación y dan sustento a nuestra discusión: la Resolución del Consejo Nacional de Educación (CNE/CP n.º 1, de 15 de mayo de 2006), que establece las Directrices Curriculares Nacionales para el Curso de Pedagogía, y la Resolución 038/CME/2015, que dispone el Reglamento General de las Unidades de Enseñanza de la Red Pública Municipal de Manaus. A través de este estudio, hemos observado las imprecisiones y contradicciones de los documentos aquí mencionados, lo que repercute directamente en la práctica pedagógica. Destacamos que aún hay um largo camino por recorrer si queremos ver un trabajo pedagógico basado en una concepción crítico-dialéctica de la pedagogía. Nuestras principales bases teóricas son los estudios de Schmied-Kowarzik (1983); Franco (2008, 2017, 2021); Freire (1969, 1987); Libâneo (2006, 2012, 2021); Pimenta (2001, 2021); Moreira y Pimenta (2021) y Saviani (2011).

Palabras clave:
Pedagogía Crítico-Dialéctica; pedagogo escolar; praxis educativa

INTRODUCTION

Pedagogy, as a science of education, has emerged as a promising field of research, analysis, and discussion since its object is the social praxis of education that takes place in school and non-school settings (Pimenta, 2001; Franco, 2008; Libâneo, 2012). In the Brazilian context, studies on Pedagogy divide their efforts into three main axes: Pedagogy as an epistemological field, as a course, and as a profession (Pimenta; Severo, 2021). In this study, we will focus on the profession axis, without disregarding the totality of concrete reality, which encompasses aspects of initial training and the theoretical-epistemological conceptions that permeate the work of school pedagogues.

Thus, this text is part of the reflections of an ongoing doctoral research project, developed in the Postgraduate Program in Education at the Federal University of Amazonas (UFAM). The object of investigation is the work of non-teaching school educators within the Municipal Education Network in the city of Manaus, Amazonas.

In their examination of pedagogical coordination, Pinto (2011), Franco, Campos (2016), and Pimenta (2021) highlight a decline in the pedagogical initiatives undertaken by educators. This decline is characterized by an emphasis on tasks that lack critical and reflective thought. The burden of multiple responsibilities, along with the unpredictability and emergencies stemming from both school dynamics and the broader educational system, has hindered these professionals' ability to engage in meaningful educational actions. As a result, they struggle to fulfill their essential roles in coordinating, articulating, and mediating educational practices.

A body of research (Pinto, 2006; Franco, 2008; Diniz-Pereira, 2014) suggests that professionals are currently trained within a framework of technical rationality that lacks the philosophical and epistemological foundations essential for effective school practice. Franco (2008, p. 132) characterizes this conception as rooted in technicism and practicality, neglecting the historical, social, and cultural contexts that justify human actions. Consequently, individuals tend to perpetuate established practices without critical engagement, becoming uncritical and passive reproducers of reality. Borges (2015, p. 90) elaborates on the principles of Technicist Pedagogy, which inherently embodies an entrepreneurial model, aimed at preparing individuals for the job market and safeguarding the interests of those in positions of capital. According to Borges, this pedagogical approach emphasizes task completion devoid of criticality, thereby shaping individuals who mechanically sustain existing political and social conditions.

Aiming to contribute to research in the professional field of school educators and non-teaching staff, we aimed to promote discussions on the work of school educators from the perspective of Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy. This conception considers Pedagogy as a science of education and takes educational praxis as its object of research (interdependence between theory and practice) in a dialectical relationship, aiming at emancipation and transformation (Schmied-Kowarzik, 1983; Gadotti, 1995). Thus, the theoretical framework from which we start is based on the study of Pedagogy as a science of and in educational praxis (Schmied-Kowarzik, 1983; Freire, 1969, 1987; Franco 2017, 2021; Moreira; Pimenta 2021), which carries in its essence the formation of subjects aware of their place in the world, which constructs knowledge based on the dialectical relationship between theory and practice and which promotes the emancipation of subjects in a process of action-reflection with a view to social transformation (Franco, 2017, p. 153-154).

In this sense, the pedagogue constitutes an active agent in his/her process of investigation, reflection, analysis, reworking, and transformative propositions of the educational phenomenon (Franco, 2008). Saviani (2011, p. 66) states that “pedagogy is the process by which man becomes fully human.” This same author describes the precepts of Historical-Critical Pedagogy, which is based on historical materiality and the appreciation of cultures. It proposes knowledge enriched by criticism, with the possibility of social transformation and the acceptance of popular knowledge articulated with scientific knowledge, to humanize and emancipate subjects.

Focusing on the geographic space of the Amazonas¹¹, we defined the city of Manaus, capital of Amazonas, as the locus of this research. Its location encompasses more than 500 municipal schools distributed across urban, rural, and riverside areas. This universe includes a diverse array of cultures and knowledge that contribute to the Amazonian mosaic. Indigenous people, Afro-descendants, immigrants, and riverside communities live here, making up the city's population, attending regular schools. This creates a rich yet challenging environment for education professionals, considering the need to embrace multiple cultures.

We propose the concept of Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy as a framework for appreciating Amazonian culture, which is frequently perceived as inferior, grotesque, and merely picturesque. This skewed perspective, exacerbated by colonialist, neoliberal, and hegemonic ideologies, obscures the remarkable popular knowledge of these communities. As a result, many individuals may undervalue their own culture, lose their sense of belonging, and reject their traditions and origins. Pereira et al. (2021, p. 6) emphasize the notion of Critical Pedagogy as a vital tool in the fight for the preservation of Amazonian identities and the protection of their territorial rights.

Therefore, we propose two moments of discussion and reflection in this text: the first is based on the theoretical basis that embodies the epistemology of Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy, and the second focuses on the study of two national and local documents: the Resolution of the National Council of Education (CNE/CP 1, of May 15, 2006), which deals with the National Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy Course, and Resolution 038/CME/2015, which establishes the General Regulations of the Teaching Units of the Municipal Public Network of Manaus. The two documents were selected because they dialogue with our object of research, which is the work of the school pedagogue in the city of Manaus, Amazonas. The references supporting our document analysis process are based on the studies of Libâneo (2021), Pimenta et al. (2017), Placco; Almeida, and Souza (2011).

We hope to contribute to discussions and academic studies focused on the work of school educators from a critical-dialectical perspective, highlighting the specificity and potential of the northern region as a producer of knowledge and culture.

FUNDAMENTALS OF CRITICAL-DIALECTIC PEDAGOGY

The critical-dialectical conception of Pedagogy from the perspective of some authors

Pedagogy, particularly in its critical aspect, has been explored by various authors under different terminologies: Dialectical Pedagogy (Schmied-Kowarzik, 1983; Moreira; Pimenta, 2021), Progressive Liberating Pedagogy (Freire, 1987), Historical-Critical Pedagogy (Saviani, 2011), Critical-Social Pedagogy (Libâneo, 2006), and Critical-Emancipatory Pedagogy (Franco, 2008). Each of these approaches fundamentally emphasizes the importance of the historical subject within a concrete and contradictory social reality. The focus of investigation in critical Pedagogy is educational praxis, which involves the active participation of individuals who both experience and transform, while also being transformed by, this reality. Schmied-Kowarzik (1983) highlights the dialectical and critical nature of Pedagogy, asserting that it should facilitate the humanization of individuals and be “[...] motivated by a libertarian interest in knowledge aimed at the emancipation and liberation of humankind” (Schmied-Kowarzik, 1983, p. 13). In this research, we adopt the term Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy (Moreira; Pimenta, 2021; Pimenta, 2023) to underscore the focus of this discipline, which centers on the study of educational praxis in a concrete, contradictory, and continually evolving reality, understood and addressed through criticism, reflection, and action. Moreira and Pimenta (2021, p. 929) describe Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy as a proposition that “advances in the direction of this commitment to transformation.” Thus, action extends beyond mere criticism. The authors convey that this movement goes beyond a “critical phenomenological perspective” and progresses toward an intervention process within concrete reality.

Based on this understanding, we present here some notes from Brazilian authors who discuss the critical conception of Pedagogy with a view to transformation. Paulo Freire (1921-1997) leads this list, proposing a critical conception of education based on awareness and transformative action. He uses the term “banking education” to designate the type of pedagogical relationship in which there is a holder of knowledge—the teacher—who transmits knowledge, without any dialogic relationship with the students. From this perspective, the prior knowledge, wisdom, and culture of those involved in the pedagogical process are not considered. Freire (1987, p. 66) describes this conception: “In the 'banking' view of education, 'knowledge' is a gift from those who consider themselves wise to those who consider themselves to know nothing. A gift in which the former maintain themselves as if they were the owners of a wisdom that they only communicate to the latter.”

Freire (1969, pp. 124-125) describes that human beings are 'beings of praxis' and 'humanity is praxis.' What does this mean? According to the author, there is a dialectical relationship between human beings and the world. Human beings act in the world and with the world. In this interrelationship of objectification, apprehension, and comprehension of reality, individuals transform their environment and, in the same measure, are transformed through a process of action and reflection. 'In this sense, the more critically they understand the concrete, objective conditions of their here and now, of their reality, the more they will be able to pursue the quest, through the transformation of reality' (Freire, 1969, p. 127). The humanization described by Paulo Freire is embodied in this process whereby human beings are subjects in construction, active in the world. Mechanization, conversely, indicates a process of dehumanization. Therefore, a pedagogical conception that renders the subject passive and conformed to historical and social conditions does not find humanization at its essence.

Through Paulo Freire's contributions, the Progressive Liberating Pedagogy emerges, based on education as an emancipatory process, the struggle for change in established hegemonic political structures, the development of critical consciousness through dialogue, the collective and active participation of all learning subjects, the valorization of praxis (the articulation of theory and practice), and education as a process of humanization. “Liberating education is an act of knowledge, an act of creation, a political act” (Freire, 1987, p. 79).

From the perspective of a counter-hegemonic pedagogical theory and based on the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), Demerval Saviani (2011) proposes Historical-Critical Pedagogy, which is based on a conception of humanizing education, welcoming of class struggles and social injustices produced historically.

The ambiguity that permeates the school issue today is marked by this social situation. This clarity is what reflects the critical meaning of pedagogy. Indeed, critical pedagogy implies clarity on the social determinants of education, understanding the degree to which societal contradictions influence education, and, consequently, how educators should position themselves in the face of these contradictions and disentangle education from ambiguous perspectives, to clearly perceive the direction in which the educational issue should be taken (Saviani, 2011, p. 86).

One of the key aspects of Historical-Critical Pedagogy is Saviani's perspective on the importance of engaging with systematized knowledge, which is constructed through a historical and dynamic process. The author does not dismiss popular knowledge; rather, he emphasizes the necessity of expanding one's understanding to include scientific knowledge—not merely fixed, but systematized and refined. This approach equips individuals with the ability to cultivate a critical consciousness conducive to emancipation. Saviani (2011, p. 69) states:

So, the fundamental question here seems to be this: how can the population gain access to forms of systematized knowledge that elaborately express their interests, the interests of the people? We would thus arrive at an elaborate, systematized popular culture. This points toward overcoming this dichotomy, because if the people have access to erudite knowledge, erudite knowledge is no longer a hallmark of elites; in other words, it becomes popular. Popular culture, understood as that culture dominated by the people, can be an erudite culture, which has come to be dominated by the population.

José Carlos Libâneo (2006), in his book “Democratization of Public Schools: Critical-Social Pedagogy,” proposes a general organization of the pedagogical trends that have emerged throughout the history of education. According to the author, pedagogical concepts are divided into two main groups: Liberal Pedagogy and Progressive Pedagogy.

Liberal Pedagogy is the broad umbrella of trends aligned with capitalist society, which emphasizes private property and the means of production (Libâneo, 2006). This perspective ignores social inequalities. Progress in society is driven by meritocracy, with a focus on preparing individuals guided by technical rationality and devoid of critical thinking. The implicit interest is to perpetuate a capitalist political and economic structure, crystallized by hegemonic powers. The Liberal Pedagogy group includes: the Traditional Liberal Tendency, the Renewed Progressive Liberal Tendency, the Renewed Non-Directive Liberal Tendency, and the Technicist Liberal Tendency. Although they have specific characteristics, they all converge toward the maintenance of neoliberal policies.

Progressive Pedagogy is influenced by a critical understanding of social reality, viewing education as a humanizing historical process that inherently serves a political and social function, with the aim of fostering transformation and humanization. Libâneo (2006) identifies three primary trends within this approach: the Liberating Progressive Tendency, the Libertarian Progressive Tendency, and the Critical-Social Progressive Tendency of Content. According to Libâneo (2006), the first two trends emphasize anti-authoritarianism, the appreciation of local knowledge, and the concept of self-management.

The Critical-Social Progressive Tendency of Contents¹² embodies the proposal for the democratization of knowledge. Content is viewed concretely, not dissociated from social reality. Knowledge is conceived as a source of empowerment for the working classes. Higher education does not nullify popular culture, but there is a relationship of continuity, moving toward systematized knowledge used critically. Libâneo (2006, p. 32-33) states:

The critical-social pedagogy of content proposes a synthesis that transcends traditional and renewed pedagogy, valuing pedagogical action as embedded in concrete social practice. It understands school as a mediator between the individual and the social, articulating the transmission of content and its active assimilation by a specific student (embedded in a context of social relations); this articulation results in critically reworked knowledge.

Maria Amélia Franco (2021) argues that, to be ethically sustainable, all pedagogy must be critical. There is no room for neutrality. It is necessary to take a stand against alienating social conditions. Education is understood as a process to humanize, emancipate, and transform society. Therefore, it constitutes a counter-hegemonic proposal. “This is the basis of critical pedagogy: recognizing unequal relationships; raising awareness among those involved in these relationships; and contributing to overcoming oppressive conditions through emancipatory practices” (Franco, 2021, p. 728).

Franco (2008) uses the term Critical-Emancipatory Pedagogy to designate a proposal for training individuals in and for praxis. In other words, there is a feedback loop between practice and theory. Both move through a formative process of action, reflection, and transformation. “Only praxis brings the intelligibility of intentionality [...] Praxis, however, is active, it is life, it gives movement to reality, transforms it, and is transformed by it” (Franco, 2008, p. 68). The author also describes that in Marxist philosophy, praxis is based on a dialectical relationship between man and nature, such that man transforms nature through his work and simultaneously transforms himself. In this sense, knowledge is not something isolated, but is historically constructed. Subject and object are together in this interrelation. Both are affected and transformed in a continuous cycle.

By critical-dialectical practice, I am considering the scientific stance I call formative-emancipatory, which carries within its rationale the dialectical character of social reality, as well as the dialectical logic in the organization of knowledge. This action must imply problematizing and contextualizing attitudes toward the circumstances of practice; working with a critical perspective on the ideologies present in practice; aiming at the emancipation and formation of the subjects of practice; working collectively based on constructed and continually constructed intersubjectivity; and presupposing, as the end of its action, the transformation of oppressive conditions (Franco, 2008, p. 89).

Based on the conceptions of the aforementioned theorists, it is possible to establish common points that guide the critical-dialectical conception of Pedagogy:

• It conceives of education as a historical process in constant movement, considering concrete and contradictory reality.

• It does not condone social injustices, the result of the perpetuation of a class-based society.

• It has educational praxis as its object of investigation. This praxis is based on a dialectical interrelationship between educational theory and practice. The subject participates, transforms, and is transformed in praxis.

• The appropriation of systematized knowledge, elaborated and re-elaborated historically and culturally, constitutes an instrument of humanization, reflection, critical awareness, emancipation, and social transformation.

We believe that pedagogical practices rooted in a critical-dialectical perspective recognize individuals within their historical context, dynamic interactions, and critical engagement. Educational praxis is a dialectical process characterized by the intention to utilize humanistic means for emancipatory purposes. This practice is informed by well-developed concrete thinking, which, in turn, adapts in response to a concrete and ever-evolving reality. This dynamic is essential for the development of critical and consciously aware individuals.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: WEAKNESSES AND INACCURACIES CONSTRUCTED HISTORICALLY AND PRESENT IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT GUIDE THE WORK OF THE PEDAGOGUE

Historical constructions of the training and work of pedagogues in Brazil

In Brazil, the Pedagogy program dates back to 1939. Officially created by Decree-Law 1,190, its objective was to prepare specialists to work in the Ministry of Education. According to Saviani (2008), the program was organized into three initial years, corresponding to a bachelor's/technician's degree in education, followed by a year of completion, focused on didactics. After this completion, graduates would be qualified to teach secondary-level teachers. Pedagogy graduates did not envision any fields of activity beyond those mentioned, so the job demand was low compared to the number of graduates. Thus, for some time, there was uncertainty regarding the course content and the roles of these professionals.

In the 1960s, amid the military dictatorship and the so-called technicist education system, the guidelines for pedagogy courses changed. In this context, education technicians were trained, later qualifying for educational guidance, administration, supervision, and school inspection. Suhr (2012) describes the moment when this occurred:

In 1968, the university reform took place, based on Law 5,540, of November 28, 1968 (...), which gave rise to new legislation for the Pedagogy course, defined by opinion 525, of April 2, 1969 (...) of the Federal Council of Education (CFE). Based on this opinion, driven by the technicist conception, the course began to train the technician in Education based on a structure that included a common base (to be studied by all students in the course) and, after that, a series of specific qualifications, with the student being able to choose one of them. (Suhr, 2012, p. 37).

In this context, tasks within the school environment were organized in a manner akin to industrial work, with each individual assigned a specific function. Teachers focused on instruction within the technical model, supervisors were responsible for disseminating information and overseeing tasks, and educational counselors assisted students in career selection. This framework also gave rise to the secondary school teaching program, which currently aligns with high school education. Regarding the role of educational specialists, Pinto (2006) highlights that the core issue does not stem from the pedagogue's specialization, but rather from the political and social foundations underlying these specializations. These foundations, shaped by the capitalist system, contribute to labor fragmentation and class division. As Umberto Pinto poses, “Furthermore, why cannot only pedagogues be specialists?” (Pinto, 2006, p. 96). He contends that “the most important aspect of both initial and ongoing training for school pedagogues is their specialization in an educational framework dedicated to human development” (Pinto, 2006, p. 97).

As we moved into the 1980s, a wave of ideas and movements emerged advocating for the democratization of education. These movements challenged the traditional hierarchical structure prevalent in schools, which distinguished between those carrying out tasks (teachers) and those overseeing and evaluating their actions (supervisors, counselors, etc.). Central to these discussions was the goal of replacing authoritarian relationships with democratic ones, enabling all members of the school community to collaborate toward a shared objective: enhancing the quality of education. Consequently, training courses for education professionals began to gain traction within this framework, emphasizing the principle of teaching.

In 1996, the new Law of Guidelines and Bases for Education (LDBEN-Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação) established that, to work in Early Childhood Education and the initial years of Elementary Education, it was necessary to enroll in higher education programs. However, in Article 64, the law once again includes training in the specific areas of school administration, planning, guidance, and supervision, leaving room for ambiguity regarding the training of education professionals and the multiplicity of functions imposed on them. Brasil (1996, Article 64) describes:

The training of education professionals for administration, planning, inspection, supervision, and educational guidance for basic education will be carried out in undergraduate courses in Pedagogy or at the postgraduate level, at the discretion of the educational institution, ensuring, in this training, a common national basis.

In this context, many organizations, such as the National Association of Education Professionals (ANFOPE-Associação Nacional pelos Profissionais em Educação), the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Education (ANPED-Associação Nacional de Pós-graduação e Pesquisa em Educação), the Center for Education and Society Studies (CEDES-Centro de Estudos Educação e Sociedade), and the National Association for Education Policy and Administration (ANPAE-Associação Nacional de Política e Administração da Educação), among others, met to discuss the inconsistencies in the training of education professionals. After much debate, disagreement, and agreement, a consensus was reached that education training programs should focus on teaching. However, this decision has been questioned since teaching constitutes one dimension of Pedagogy but cannot be the guiding principle of educational science, as there are other facets of the educational phenomenon that go beyond the teaching and learning process and require deeper pedagogical knowledge. Pimenta and Severo (2021, p. 50-51) state: “Pedagogy is responsible for investigating the nature of the educational phenomenon, the contents and methods of education, as well as its investigative procedures to articulate this complexity in search of the human-humanized and humanizing”.

In discussing pedagogy as a scientific discipline, Libâneo (2012, p. 12) asserts that this field of knowledge engages in “[...] the theoretical-research domain that pertains to the study and systematic reflection on the educational phenomenon and educational practices, serving as a guiding force for educational endeavors.” Consequently, the science of pedagogy extends beyond simply teaching children in early childhood and elementary education, as is often perceived by conventional wisdom. It is also not limited to oversight, accountability, and efforts to enhance academic performance. Rather, the epistemological scope of this discipline includes the processes, structures, research, and reflective practices of pedagogy, to propose and implement methodologies and interventions aimed at fostering continual transformation and progress within education.

Some notes on the National Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy Course and the General Regulations of the Teaching Units of the Municipal Public Network of Manaus

Based on this historical overview and our comprehension of the theoretical and epistemological foundations underpinning Dialectical-Critical Pedagogy, we direct our focus toward two key documents that have shaped the initial training and practices of school educators at both national and local levels: the National Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy Program (2006) and the General Regulations for the Teaching Units of the Manaus Municipal Public School System (2015). The former document establishes the legal framework for Pedagogy programs responsible for the initial training of educators, making it particularly relevant to our research topic concerning the roles of non-teaching school educators. The latter document holds significance as well, as it provides essential guidance for educational initiatives within Manaus' municipal schools and outlines specific directives for the work of these professionals at the local level.

First, we refer to CNE/CP resolution 1, of May 15 (Brazil, 2006), which established the National Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy Course. According to this document, the individual who graduated in Pedagogy would be qualified to teach classes in Early Childhood Education and in the Initial Grades of Elementary Education, in addition to working as a pedagogue.

The Curricular Guidelines for the Pedagogy course apply to initial training for teaching in Early Childhood Education and the initial years of Elementary Education, in High School courses, in the Normal modality, and Professional Education courses in the area of services and school support, as well as in other areas in which pedagogical knowledge is expected (Brazil, 2006, Art. 2).

Consequently, within a single training course, the scope of activity broadens, leading to a comprehensive set of competencies and skills required for professionals in this field. Article 5 of the referenced document outlines sixteen sections that detail the expected competencies for these professionals, along with two paragraphs highlighting the responsibilities of educators who will work with Indigenous communities and descendants of quilombolas. It is evident that the anticipated competencies are extensive. However, undergraduate programs in pedagogy have predominantly focused on teaching aspects and practical skills (Franco, 2008; Pimenta; Pinto; Severo, 2020; Libâneo, 2021). This emphasis has hindered the effective implementation of pedagogical practices in schools. Libâneo (2021) criticizes this resolution for its lack of conceptual clarity regarding the pedagogical dimension. As a result, there is ambiguity surrounding the role of the pedagogue, which is often reduced merely to the realm of teaching.

This conceptual imprecision regarding the object of study of Pedagogy leads to a generic understanding of teaching activities, as stated in the sole paragraph of article 4, in which any and all professional activities in the field of education are classified as teaching activities, whether this activity is educational planning, coordination of work, research and its dissemination, and regardless of the place where it is carried out (at school or not) (Libâneo, 2021, p. 746).

Pimenta et al. (2017) reinforce Libâneo's discussions in their research, criticizing the versatility of teachers trained in Pedagogy. When occupying the role of school pedagogue, they will generally have difficulty articulating, mediating, and coordinating pedagogical processes within a broader management framework due to the “fragility of the professional status of pedagogues” (Pimenta et al., 2017, p. 24). Thus, we raise the following question: what is the quality of pedagogues' work in the school field if their initial training contains gaps in conceptual understanding of the pedagogical dimension?

Moving on to Resolution 038/CME/2015, which establishes the General Regulations for the School Units of the Manaus Municipal Public School System, we can observe the regulatory standards for administrative and pedagogical organization, which is a parameter for the development of the School Regulations for the SEMED School Units. Chapter 4, Article 112 of Resolution 038/CME/2015 describes the responsibilities of the pedagogue in the municipal schools of Manaus. There are 15 sections that range from the development and implementation of the School Unit's Political Pedagogical Project and School Regulations, to the coordination and monitoring of teachers and students, the analysis of educational indicators, and interventions in the teaching and learning process.

The pedagogue's responsibilities include:

1. - Participating in the development, implementation, and monitoring of the school's Political-Pedagogical Project and School Bylaws;

2. - Advising and coordinating teachers in the development and execution of the didactic-pedagogical plan, as well as in the correct recording of class diaries, descriptive reports, monitoring forms, planning forms, and other documents pertaining to the pedagogical process;

3. - Coordinating the development of the Common National Core Pedagogical Proposal at the school;

4. - Analyzing the school's educational indicators, collectively seeking alternative solutions to problems and proposals for interventions in the teaching-learning process;

5. - Coordinating, monitoring, and evaluating the implementation of projects developed at the school, systematizing them through records and reports and disseminating the results;

6. - Coordinating and monitoring the class council at all stages;

7. - Coordinate and guide the activities carried out by the teacher during the Pedagogical Work Hour (HTP);

8. - Coordinate and monitor, together with the faculty, the student classification and reclassification process;

9. - Promote moments of study and reflection on pedagogical practice, disseminating innovative practices in the school;

10. - Ensure the appropriate use of learning spaces and technological resources available in the school;

11. - Support students by identifying, intervening, and monitoring the teaching-learning process and situations of low performance in the school;

12. - Keep the school administration informed about pedagogical activities;

13. - Implement programs, projects, and actions originated by the Municipal Department of Education;

14. - Guide teachers in the process of assessment and recovery of studies;

15. - Other responsibilities relevant to their area of expertise. (Brazil, 2015)

Given the responsibilities outlined above, there is a heightened emphasis on pedagogical coordination and process management. Consequently, we ponder whether a graduate of the Pedagogy program would be suitably qualified for this role, considering their educational foundation is primarily focused on teaching. Libâneo (2021) highlights that while teaching is a significant aspect of the pedagogical dimension, it does not encompass the full epistemological complexity inherent in Pedagogy. Indeed, Pedagogy should serve as a guiding force for teaching. Due to this conceptual and epistemological challenge, school educators may find it difficult to navigate issues that extend beyond the traditional realm of teaching when faced with such situations.

Regarding the responsibilities of the pedagogical coordinator, Placco, Almeida, and Souza (2011) describe this professional as an articulator, trainer, and transformer of educational actions, working with teachers, students, and the school community. These authors contribute empirical, bibliographical, and documentary research that addresses the concepts of pedagogical work, focusing on municipal and state schools in the five regions of Brazil. In their discussions of current legislation, the authors pointed out that, while these documents guide pedagogical work, they hinder it due to the accumulation of tasks they assign to this professional (Placco, Almeida, Souza, 2011, p. 241). Faced with daily emergencies and bureaucratic actions imposed by the system, this professional will be busy with mundane tasks, failing to pay attention to the essence of pedagogical work, which includes reflection and collective action for transformation.

Libâneo (2012) emphasizes the pedagogue's role as a mediator and coordinator of educational initiatives. Such initiatives involve teachers, students, and parents/guardians in an interactive and shared relationship. The mediation of continuing education, not in the institutionalized sense, but in the sense of ongoing investigation, analysis, and reflection, aimed at transforming the individuals involved in the school community, should be within this professional's purview.

The pedagogical coordinator is an essential professional to ensure the integration and articulation of pedagogical-didactic work in schools: the formulation and monitoring of the execution of the pedagogical-curricular project, curricular organization, methodological guidance, pedagogical-didactic assistance to teachers in the classroom in an interactive and shared relationship with the teacher and students, collaboration in reflection and research practices, diagnosis and meeting of needs linked to the teaching and learning of students together with the teacher, continuing education activities, learning assessment practices. (Libâneo, 2012, p. 24).

Returning to Resolution 038/CME/2015, chapter 4, article 112, we draw attention to section (IX): “Promote moments of study and reflection on pedagogical practice, disseminating innovative practices in the teaching unit.” We understand that the processes of reflection on and in practice within Critical-Dialectic Pedagogy need to underpin all pedagogical actions. This concerns the continuous formative processes of school subjects (Placco, Almeida, Souza, 2011; Libâneo, 2012; Franco, Campos, 2016). Therefore, we ask: Does the mere mention of this section guarantee space and conditions for the pedagogue to articulate formative processes in the school environment? We believe not. Oliveira (2021, p. 86) emphasizes that one of the pedagogical coordinator's responsibilities is to articulate school-centered training as a mechanism for problematizing, reflecting, and proposing collective action. To this end, “the education system must structure and provide the pedagogical coordinator with the necessary conditions to perform this function.”

Pedagogy, particularly through its critical-dialectical approach, understands reflection and the cultivation of critical consciousness as fundamentally intertwined with educational practice. Pedagogical mediation goes beyond mere technical advice. The relationship between the educator and the school community is not hierarchical; rather, it fosters dialogue, democratic management, and mutual respect. Approaches that are welcoming yet also promote reflection and critical thinking should be integral to the daily activities of this professional. We draw upon the research by Silva and Ghedin (2021), which explores pedagogical mediation based on a study of continuing education conducted with teachers in the Municipal Education System of Manaus.

Given the above, learning in teacher training must target the characteristics of the teacher as a working adult, proposing pedagogical mediations that contemplate the different dimensions of formative actions, based on the epistemology of praxis, or critical rationality, which surpasses both the traditional model centered on the teacher and theoretical knowledge, as well as the practical model, which exacerbates the potential of practice detached from theory, proposing, in a dialectical relationship, the best of both orientations (Silva; Ghedin, 2021, p.107).

From these initial discussions, we can identify inaccuracies and contradictions within the documents presented, which have a direct impact on educational initiatives. There remains considerable work to be done before we can achieve pedagogical practices grounded in a critical-dialectical conception of education. Transformative praxis—the interconnectedness of theory and practice that influences and reshapes each other—is not merely a method, but rather an epistemological approach that should be integrated into the work of all educational professionals.

Franco (2008, p. 49) describes the potential of Pedagogy as a revolutionary utopia. This utopia does not refer to an unattainable state. Quite the contrary, it is configured as a conscious pedagogical work committed to the working classes and to building a more just society with the power of social transformation.

In this context, we align ourselves with researchers Carlos Libâneo, Maria Amélia Franco, and Selma Garrido Pimenta, who have emerged as prominent advocates for recognizing Pedagogy as a Science of Education. Their work fosters discussions and reflections that highlight the urgent need to reform the laws governing the training and profession of educators. We believe that such changes are imperative, as they have a direct impact on the current state of education. If education professionals are inadequately prepared during their initial training to address the complexities of the educational phenomenon in a humane way, we risk producing students who will continue to hold uncritical and mechanized viewpoints.

Amid this debate, it is also worth highlighting that the regulation of the teaching profession in the country is under dispute. At the heart of this dispute lies, on one side, the denial of the teaching profession as dissociated from the teaching relationship; and on the other, the silencing of the countless professionals who work in non-school institutions. Ultimately, this denial of the profession is based on a technocratic and economistic epistemology that envisions bureaucratic and restricted functions in education.

On the other hand, some advocate for the regulation of the teaching profession—a movement spearheaded especially by the National Pedagogy Research Network (RePPed)—which is currently at the forefront of this issue nationally. They argue that regulation is necessary to guarantee the legitimacy, responsibilities, and labor rights of professionals trained in this field, who work in both school and non-school settings. RePPed's principles include the pursuit of transformative, critical, and emancipatory education, conceiving of Pedagogy as a Science of Education whose object of investigation is pedagogical practice.

CONSIDERATIONS

We view education as a historical, ongoing, and evolving process, with its primary purpose being the humanization of individuals. Humanization is understood as the journey in which humanity, despite its inherent incompleteness, becomes an active participant in its own development. By engaging with and understanding their reality, individuals reflect upon it and strive for transformation. This dynamic interaction continually modifies both the world and humankind in a dialectical manner. Humanization challenges the tenets of Liberal Pedagogy and lays the groundwork for social transformation through the promotion of reflexivity and critical thinking within a collective context. As individuals gain knowledge and relate this understanding to their tangible experiences, they become more aware of their political and social responsibilities.

In our perspective, the school educator is a professional capable of facilitating processes of humanization within their workplace. Through action and reflection, they can articulate, mediate, and intervene in educational practices. However, we also acknowledge the historically constructed contradictions present in the documents that guide the training of these professionals, as well as the concrete realities of the school environment, which are characterized by unpredictability and driven by technical rationality.

Moving away from mechanization and alienation is challenging, but necessary. There are opposing forces that drive immediacy, technical rationality, and thoughtless action. We also understand that concrete reality has multiple dimensions that directly impact the actions of individuals. In this sense, is it possible to envision emancipation? Freire (1996, p. 17) asserts: “It is not possible for the ethical subject to live without being permanently exposed to ethical transgressions.” We see this transgression as a paradigm shift—the paradigm of dehumanization, exclusion, and mechanization. We believe that school educators have the potential to break paradigms and be collective conveners to generate transformations.

Thus, we join forces through debates, discussions, and reflections on the recognition of Pedagogy as a science of education, whose object of investigation is educational praxis. We also reach an agreement with the scholars cited here regarding the reformulation of the legal documents that guide the teaching profession and the profession of pedagogue.

It is indeed the case that educators operate within a political, economic, and social system that can impact their professional behavior. However, whether one adopts a passive or active stance, remains engaged or feels alienated, ultimately comes down to a choice rather than a predetermined fate. Educators can cultivate critical awareness and choose paths of difference, emancipation, resistance, and transformation.

References

• BORGES, Heloisa da Silva. Formação contínua de professores (as) da Educação do campo no Amazonas (2010 a 2014) Tese (Doutorado em Educação). Manaus: Universidade Federal do Amazonas, 2015. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://tede.ufam.edu.br/handle/tede/4981 Acesso em: 05/04/2025.
  » https://tede.ufam.edu.br/handle/tede/4981
• BRASIL. Decreto-lei n. 1.190, de 4 de abril de 1939 Dá organização à Faculdade Nacional de Filosofia. 1939.
• BRASIL Lei nº 9.394 de 20 de dezembro de 1996 Estabelece as Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional. Brasília, 1996.
• BRASIL Resolução nº 1, de 15 de maio de 2006 Estabelece as Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais para o Curso de Graduação em Pedagogia, licenciatura Brasília, 2006.
• BRASIL Resolução n. 038/CME/2015, de 03 de dezembro de 2015 Estabelece o Regimento Geral das Unidades de Ensino da Rede Pública Municipal de Manaus. Manaus, 2015.
• CRISTO, Ana Cláudia Peixoto de. Formação em alternância nas Amazônias: a Licenciatura em Educação do Campo/UNIFAP-AP e as interfaces com a educação-trabalho território Tese (Doutorado em Educação). Belém: Universidade Federal do Pará, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://ppgedufpa.com.br/arquivos/File/anaclaudia.pdf Acesso em: 05/04/2025.
  » https://ppgedufpa.com.br/arquivos/File/anaclaudia.pdf
• DINIZ-PEREIRA, Júlio Emílio. Da racionalidade técnica à racionalidade crítica: formação docente e transformação social. Perspectivas em Diálogo: Revista de Educação e Sociedade, Naviraí, v. 1, n. 1, p. 34-42, 2014. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufms.br/index.php/persdia/article/view/15 Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://periodicos.ufms.br/index.php/persdia/article/view/15
• FRANCO, Maria Amélia Santoro. Da necessidade/atualidade da Pedagogia crítica: Contributos de Paulo Freire. Revista Reflexão e ação, Santa Cruz do Sul, v. 25, n. 2, p. 152-170, 2017. https://doi.org/10.17058/rea.v25i2.8891 Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/10.17058/rea.v25i2.8891
• FRANCO, Maria Amélia Santoro Pedagogia como Ciência da Educação São Paulo: 2. ed. Cortez, 2008.
• FRANCO, Maria Amélia Santoro Pedagogia crítica: a radicalidade da dialética dominação-resistência. Revista eletrônica Pesquiseduca, Santos, v. 13, n. 31, p. 726-742, 2021. https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1183 Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1183
• FRANCO, Maria Amélia Santoro; CAMPOS, Elisabete Ferreira Esteves. A coordenação do trabalho pedagógico na escola: Processos e Práticas. Santos (SP): Universitária Leopoldianum, 2016.
• FREIRE, Paulo. Papel da Educação na Humanização. São Paulo: Revista Paz e Terra, São Paulo, n. 9, p. 123-132, 1969. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://acervo.paulofreire.org/items/e9060875-e850-40e0-b49b-ffd1a9f17ba2/full Acesso em: 15/08/2024.
  » https://acervo.paulofreire.org/items/e9060875-e850-40e0-b49b-ffd1a9f17ba2/full
• FREIRE, Paulo. Pedagogia do oprimido 17. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 1987.
• GADOTTI, Moacir. A dialética: concepção e método. In: GADOTTI, Moacir. Concepção dialética da educação: um estudo introdutório São Paulo: Cortez, 1995. p. 15-38.
• LIBÂNEO, José Carlos. Democratização da escola pública: a pedagogia crítico-social dos conteúdos. São Paulo: 21 ed. Loyola, 2006.
• LIBÂNEO, José Carlos Identidade da pedagogia e identidade do pedagogo. In: BRABO, Tânia Suely Antonelli Marcelino; CORDEIRO, Ana Paula; MILANEZ, Simone Ghedini Costa (org). Formação da pedagoga e do pedagogo: pressupostos e perspectivas. São Paulo: Marília, 2012, p. 11-34.
• LIBÂNEO, José Carlos Diretrizes Curriculares da Pedagogia: imprecisões teóricas e concepção estreita da formação profissional de educadores. Revista eletrônica Pesquiseduca, Santos, v. 13, n. 31, p. 743-774, 2021. https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1189 Acesso em 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1189
• LIBÂNEO, José Carlos Da didática crítico-social à didática para o desenvolvimento humano. In: LONGAREZI, Andréa Maturano; PIMENTA, Selma Garrido; PUENTES, Roberto Valdés. Didática crítica no Brasil 1. ed. São Paulo: Cortez, 2023. p. 50-97.
• MOREIRA, Jefferson da Silva; PIMENTA, Selma Garrido. Pedagogia e pedagogos entre insistências e resistências: entrevista realizada com a Prof.ª Dr. ª Selma Garrido Pimenta. Revista Eletrônica Pesquiseduca, Santos, v. 13, n. 31, p. 925-948, 2021. https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1180 Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/10.58422/repesq.2021.e1180
• OLIVEIRA, Lidiane Malheiros Mariano de. Coordenador Pedagógico iniciante: atuação, formação continuada e perspectivas para o seu desenvolvimento profissional. Tese (Doutorado em Educação). Araraquara/São Paulo. Faculdade de Ciências e Letras - Unesp, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://agendapos.fclar.unesp.br/agenda-pos/educacao_escolar/5740.pdf Acesso em: 19/08/2024.
  » https://agendapos.fclar.unesp.br/agenda-pos/educacao_escolar/5740.pdf
• PEREIRA, Laura Belém; NASCIMENTO, Cassandra Augusta Rodrigues; WEIGEL, Valéria Augusta Cerqueira de Medeiros; SIMAS, Hellen Cristina Picanço; MENEZES, Reinaldo Oliveira. Education as a culture practice in the Amazon. Research, Society and Development, São Paulo, v. 10, n. 3, p. e46010313605, 2021. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i3.13605. Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i3.13605
• PIMENTA, Selma Garrido; FUSARI, José Cerchi; PEDROSO, Cristina Cinto Araújo; PINTO, Umberto de Andrade. Os cursos de licenciatura em Pedagogia: fragilidades na Formação inicial do professor polivalente. Revista Eletrônica Pesquiseduca, Santos, v. 43, n. 1, p. 15-30, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-9702201701152815 Acesso em: 05/04/2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-9702201701152815
• PIMENTA, Selma Garrido; PINTO, Umberto de Andrade; SEVERO, José Leonardo Rolim de Lima. A Pedagogia como lócus de formação profissional de educadores (as): desafios epistemológicos e curriculares. Práxis Educativa, Ponta Grossa, v. 15, p. 1-20, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5212/PraxEduc.v.15.15528.057 Acesso em: 05/04/2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.5212/PraxEduc.v.15.15528.057
• PIMENTA, Selma Garrido; SEVERO, José Leonardo Rolim de Lima. Pedagogia: teoria, formação, profissão. São Paulo: Cortez, 2021.
• PIMENTA, Selma Garrido. Pedagogia, ciência da educação? São Paulo: 3. ed. Cortez, 2001.
• PIMENTA, Selma Garrido Didática Multidimensional Crítico-Emancipatória: Princípios epistemológicos a uma praxis docente transformadora. In: LONGAREZI, Andréa Maturano; PIMENTA, Selma Garrido; PUENTES, Roberto Valdés. Didática crítica no Brasil 1 ed. São Paulo: Cortez, 2023. p. 279-323.
• PINTO, Umberto Andrade. Pedagogia e pedagogos escolares Tese (Doutorado em Educação). São Paulo: Faculdade de Educação da Universidade de São Paulo, 2006. https://doi.org/10.11606/T.48.2006.tde-22062007-095259 Acesso em 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11606/T.48.2006.tde-22062007-095259
• PINTO, Umberto Andrade Pedagogia escolar: Coordenação pedagógica e gestão Educacional São Paulo: Cortez, 2011.
• PLACCO, Vera Maria Nigro de Souza; ALMEIDA, Laurina Ramalho; SOUZA, Vera Lúcia Trevisan de. (Coord.). O Coordenador Pedagógico e a formação de professores: intenções, tensões e contradições. Fundação Carlos Chagas. Estudos e pesquisas Educacionais São Paulo, abril, 2011. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://docplayer.com.br/1424546-O-coordenador-pedagogico-cp-1-e-a-formacao-de-professores-intencoes-tensoes-e-contradicoes-2.html Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://docplayer.com.br/1424546-O-coordenador-pedagogico-cp-1-e-a-formacao-de-professores-intencoes-tensoes-e-contradicoes-2.html
• SAVIANI, Dermeval. O curso de Pedagogia e a formação de educadores. Perspectiva, Florianópolis, v. 26, n. 2, p. 641-660, 2008. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-795x.2008v26n2p641. Acesso em: 05/04/25.
  » https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-795x.2008v26n2p641
• SAVIANI, Dermeval. Pedagogia histórico-crítica: primeiras aproximações. 11. ed. Campinas: Autores Associados, 2011.
• SCHMIED-KOWARZIK, Wolfdietrich. Pedagogia dialética: de Aristóteles a Paulo Freire. São Paulo: Editora Brasiliense, 1983.
• SILVA, Thaiany Guedes da Silva; GHEDIN, Evandro. Entre o blá-blá-blá e o ativismo: A crise nas mediações pedagógicas da formação docente. Revista Humanidades e Inovação, Palmas, v. 8, n.40, p. 103-117, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/5017 Acesso em: 05/04/2025.
  » https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/5017
• SUHR, Inge Renate Frose. Teorias do conhecimento pedagógico Curitiba: Intersaberes, 2012.

• 3
  According to Cristo (2021), the term “Amazonia” is used to designate the sociocultural diversity of the inhabitants of the Legal Amazon. The peoples living in this region have their own specificities and cannot be singularized as if they were unique. “The Amazon possesses immense diversity constructed in varied sociocultural contexts, experienced by the Amazonian people in many Amazon regions” (Cristo, 2021, p. 70).
• 4
  Libâneo (2023) reframes the assumptions of Critical-Social Didactics of content by expanding its discussions to the field of Developmental Didactics. This conception “[...] is based on the idea that the development of human beings in the intellectual, emotional, social, and professional spheres is achieved through the appropriation of systematized and organized knowledge throughout historical-social development” (Libâneo, 2023, p. 66-67).
• Funding
  Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas (FAPEAM); Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM); Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES); Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico Superior (CNPq); Secretaria Municipal de Educação (SEMED/Manaus).
• DATA AVAILABILITY DECLARATION
  The content underlying the research text is contained in the manuscript

Edited by

• Editor(a) de seção:
  Suzana dos Santos Gomes

Data availability

The content underlying the research text is contained in the manuscript

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  20 Oct 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  09 Jan 2025
• Reviewed
  05 Sept 2024
• Accepted
  30 Apr 2025

• This document has a preprint version
  10.1590/SciELOPreprints.9684