Autonomia curricular em enunciação política: significações docentes

Abstract

Autonomy is a key word in the text of the educational policies of the last decades and assumes a multiplicity of meanings that caters from the fundamentals that define the democratic management models to the principles of curriculum orientation. It is perceived, however, that in the discursive effusion, there are silences. Thus, this study aimed to analyze and contemplate the teacher voice in the meaning of autonomy anchored a to a time of important curricular decision, namely, the political-pedagogical project. In the institutional context of the school, the action of teachers is a dynamic identity that needs to be seen more acutely in relation to the State, thus making teacher's voices more evident without losing sight of the setting of national and global policies that endorse autonomy as foundation for building a democratic school. To support, in a general manner, the study of the subject autonomy, I made a historic course transiting a little about the ideal of Greek freedom, as well as in modem analysis of Kant when he understands autonomy as moral foundation of human life. I chose perspectives of critical theory underlying approaches in education, like in Freire (2007, 2005, 1996, 1991.1986), in the analysis of autonomy MARTINS (2001, 2002), the Spanish CONTRERAS (2002), AZANHA (2000, 2006, 1992), and authors of the curriculum field trying to reframe the critical theories to continue the project as an emancipatory process GOODSON (1990, 1997, 2001, 2008), POPKEWITZ (1997, 2001, 2003, 2008). The articulation of policies with the Curriculum field with DALE (2004, 2009), to better understand the patterns of educational governance and the possible forms of disengagement of responsibility with the State. To support the analysis I chose to work with CDA - Critical Discourse Analysis, from the British linguist Fairclough (1999, 2001, 2003), that comes from understanding that social issues are partly linguistic discursive character oriented. The author also considers the discourse in a dialectical perspective shaped by the social structure as well as constitution of the same structure. The speech means and produces meanings, and often these senses are too naturalized and/or blurred. The teaching voice in producing the sense of autonomy was prioritized in the analysis in terms of social practice, complemented by t an analysis of discourse and text. This triangulation is part of the CDA proposal and, within the limits of my view upon the data, it was possible to understand and partially confirm the hypotheses of the research that autonomy in teaching context takes a discursive multiplicity that does not just mean freedom to do something, but an ideal to be achieved that is anchored to teacher training to be able to (re)define the practice as a professional political act. However, the understanding of the official texts is not so detached from C teaching voice, because the regulatory discourse of autonomy also uses trademarks of freedom, identity and political construction, parts of teaching discourse. The discourses that regulate autonomy are built from classical principals of freedom, political and citizenship construction are in confluence, many times. They rebel as hybrids in a constant hegemonic struggle and ideological construction. Thus, autonomy is understood as relational policy requirement that goes beyond the institutional regulatory authorities and this is very important in order to believe in the possibility of setting it in a perspective of struggle and emancipatory movement, at the time of curriculum proposition at the school.