From the perspective of university outreach’s historicity

In Table 1, we present the directions that have guided this object, based on the contents of the PNExt (Forproex, 2012, pp. 18-23). For this analysis, we build on theoretical work by ^{Anjos (2014}), ^{Gatti (2019}), ^{Machado (2019}), ^{Nogueira (2019}) and ^{Bonassina (2020}), and on an interpretation of our own, founded on the comprehension of the political-educational dimension of this function.

^{Morin (2016}, p. 158, own translation) says that in order to understand a system,

. . . the elements must be defined at the same time in and by the original characteristics, in and with the interrelations they participate in, in and with the perspective of organization they participate in, in and with the perspective of the whole they are integrated into.

Thus can we understand that the words expressed in the documents, actions and engagement of the protagonists - students, the Forproex faculty movement - cannot be seen in isolation. While outreach was constituted as a part of the university’s functions, it comprehends a whole because it is supposed to go beyond the campus, therefore it cannot be seen in isolation. This has been and still is the struggle of the entire pro-outreach community! Understandably, this is a fabric woven with confrontation.

Within governmental policies, we have oscillated between “developmentalist” and instrumental projects and progressive projects. Those who confront these models in a way that is detached from the educational, emancipatory dimension are mistaken. ^{Salles (2020}, p. 16, own translation), in reflecting about public university and democracy, says that it is not possible to achieve “academic excellence without deepening social commitment”. ^{Santos (2013}, p. 419, own translation), in pointing out the “theses for a university in line with post-modern science”, advocates a structural, operational and subjective change configured by the principle of a “constructive application of science”.

^{Nogueira (2019}, p. 267, own translation) argues that “university outreach is the academic dimension that can pave the way for diversity and interculturality in the university and work as a space of resistance and deconstruction of the logic of colonization”. In turn, ^{Gatti (2019}, p. 108, own translation) situates outreach in a position that is “pervaded by ambiguities and contradictions, which have the potential to give rise to critical thinking, to questioning one’s own reality, discussing it, and consequently producing true consciousness”. Moreover, ^{Bonassina (2020}, p. 80, own translation) characterizes “university outreach as an instrument of socioenvironmental transformation in cases of social vulnerability”, pointing out that “today’s main challenge for outreach is to rethink the relationship of teaching and research with social needs, to establish the contributions of outreach for strengthening citizenship and actually transforming society”. We can see how these approaches are broad and show richly forms of actions that can be built collectively in processes.

Recognizing that the conceptualizations presented here must find fertile ground so they can be constructed, we build on ^{Santos’ (2013}) idea. The author says that it is necessary to give “centrality to outreach” as a foundational point so that this fabric can have a weave that encompasses all discipline components in an interdisciplinary and, why not say, transdisciplinary discussion.

Giving outreach centrality: Pointing out “breaches” in, and closeness with the normative documents

We relate outreach policy to the main points in the normative documents on action. This relationship is built with the guidelines on teacher education curriculums as follows:

To advance in the analysis, we initially present the concept that defines outreach actions. Then we highlight terms that are made less visible both in scientific output artifacts, as can be seen in the systematic literature review (SLR), and in discourse about “political entrepreneurship”.⁷ They cross through discourses about “competencies”, “education quality” and “new education”.

To give visibility and centrality to the discursive lexicon of the constitutional and me- thodological principle of inseparability and of the educational and political dimension, we present the concepts that are found in the documents that institutionalize outreach. They are:

University Outreach also denotes an academic practice to be developed, under the Constitution of 1988, inseparably with Teaching and Research, with a view to promoting and ensuring democratic values, equity, and the development of society in its human, ethical, economic, cultural and social dimensions. (Forproex, 2012, p. 42, own translation).

Outreach in Brazilian Higher Education is the activity that is integrated into the curriculum matrix and organization of research, constituting an interdisciplinary, political-educational, cultural, scientific, and technological process, which promotes transformative integration between higher education institutions and the other sectors of society by means of the production and application of knowledge, in permanent connection with teaching and research. (Resolução n. 7, 2018, pp. 2-3, own translation).

To identify a correlation, we present the foundations and principles on which it was possible to establish a degree of closeness between the concept of outreach and the documents on teacher education in Table 2 below. To that end, we highlighted assertions in the table. We include Resolução n. 2, de 1º de julho de 2015, because we consider that it has not been long enough for teacher education courses to adjust according to the resolutions on the subject that were issued in 2019 and 2020.

We recognize that the terms highlighted are invisible given the predominance of rationalist patterns which are established for teacher education. We highlighted the segment education as an emancipatory, permanent process in order to draw this term off its “hideout” and point it out as a “breach”. In addition, it is possible to build actions implicated with a “horizontal citizenship between citizens”, as argued by ^{Santos (2002}). This is an approach that leads to thinking of revaluing the role of the subject who is being educated, who should be socially implicated in the context and “who might promote prudent knowledge for a decent life” (Santos, 2002, p. 280, own translation). In these terms, there is the possibility of a rationality that is critical, educational and closer to humanist principles than to structuralist principles.

Believing that it has not been long enough for the current DCN to materialize in the political-pedagogical projects (PPP) of courses, we show the similarity with the concept of outreach and the openness of this foundation to the possibility of an “impact in the student’s education” (Forproex, 2012, p. 52, own translation). This is because it contains the idea of enabling, through teacher education, “critical thinking, problem-solving, collective and interdisciplinary work, creativity, innovation, leadership, and autonomy” (Resolução n. 2, 2015, p. 6, own translation, emphasis added), which can take place through the horizontal engagement that is present in collective, interdisciplinary and inseparable work.

We also point out some closeness to what the documents say about outreach guiding the interprofessional relationship, which is conceived as a form of reflection and action about the profession, about the problems that involve communities and social groups. In the point highlighted, “a broad view of the education process, its different paces, times and spaces, in relation to the psychosocial, historic-cultural, affective, relational and interactional dimensions that pervade the pedagogical action” (Resolução n. 2, 2015, p. 6, own translation, emphasis added), there are some indications of two epistemological extremes coexisting in DCN. One of them regards the acquisition of knowledge from praxis, as an action-reflection about/in reality, which is connected with the types of knowledge built by experiencing the education process in “its different paces, times”. The other epistemological extreme refers to the integration of these types of knowledge into the educational process (specific knowledge and pedagogical knowledge) and which will form the teacher’s professionality.⁸ This coexistence enables meeting the interprofessional guideline inasmuch as the complexity of the school’s dynamics is experienced in the student’s education process. This enables mobilizing the knowledge and competencies necessary to build the teacher’s autonomy and identity.

The terms used from a curriculum perspective - education paths, interdisciplinary processes, curriculum flexibilization - are considered as the ones that enable greater closeness to the conception of outreach, as long as it is from the perspective of a “thinking that creates” (^{Morin, 2015b}). Thus, they assume the transposition of discipline limits, and its foundations develop towards the idea of education for autonomy (^{Freire, 2019b}).

To situate quantitatively the similarities, we extracted two matrices, using the tool MAXQDA, based on the mathematical parameters suggested by it. About this analysis, we used as a reference the existence of codes which indicate the conceptual and educational dimension and suggest the expansion of the universe of reference from a theoretical-practical-humanist perspective (a view of the whole - holistic) and the dimension related to the guidelines that can possibly exist in the documents on teacher education and action.

In the literature, we found that the similarity between the analyzed objects can be explained in two ways. One through association with greater positive correlation coefficients, representing greater similarity. The other occurs because the proximity between each pair of objects can assess the similarity, in which the measures of distance or difference are used, and smaller distances represent greater similarity (^{Assis et al., 2019}, p. 146).

We used the measure of similarity indicated in the tool, with the parameter of “Existence of Code that generates a similarity matrix which considers only whether or not the selected codes occur in the document” based on this method:

Simple correspondence = (a + d) / (a + b + c + d) in which the existence and the inexistence are counted as a correspondence. With: a = the number of codes or values of variables which are identical in both documents; d = the number of codes or values of variables which do not exist in both documents; b and c = the number of codes or values that exist in only one document. (MAXQDA, 2020, own translation).

Using the association with greater positive correlation coefficients, representing greater similarity and adopting the tool’s suggestion, we have “value 0 (no similarity) and value 1 (identical). And the closer to 1, the greater the similarity; the farther from 1, the smaller the similarity” (MAXQDA, 2020, own translation)

We consider that the less similar they are, the greater the existence of “breaches/detours” which can be used in a critical and creative way to develop outreach actions to their full potential, i.e., with the educational, political and social dimension. In the matrix that contains the conceptual dimension of outreach in correlation with the documents on teacher education and on action, we have the data presented in Figure 1:

In the categorization of documents, we used the code CExt for concept of university outreach. We adopted the concept that is present in the PNExt (Forproex, 2012) and the updated one, presented by Resolução n. 7, de 18 de dezembro de 2018.

The code DirCamp was employed to define the conceptualizations of university outreach from the perspective of some authors. ^{Nogueira (2019}, p. 257) sees it as an academic dimension that can pave the way for diversity and interculturality in higher education, as a space of resistance to the logic of colonization. ^{Gatti (2019}) considers outreach as a function that enables transcending the semi-education model.

With these references, we consider that, there are terms in the document which are close to the conception of educational and scientific process. On the other hand, there is a distance from the idea of an education process that is educational-political. In the following matrix, in Figure 2, we expand the dimensions of analysis as we confront the documents with the outreach guidelines and principles. To that end, we turned our attention to the connection between teaching-research-outreach, to the dialogical interaction, and to the contribution to a critical-emancipatory teacher education (Resolução n. 7, 2018).

By conducting a demography of the DCN, we sought elements that might reveal not only indicators of existence of the terms, but also a possible equivalence, denoting some closeness with the guidelines’ purpose and with the theoretical framework underpinning the analysis.

In addition to the categorizations presented, we used the following codes: DID, the Interdisciplinarity Guideline, with a methodological approach that consists in integrating discipline concepts in order to reflect and act on the concrete reality of contemporary human needs; DIp, which refers to the Interprofessional Guideline, from the perspective of the types of knowledge and the values that are mobilized during the educational interaction (^{Fiorentini et al., 1998}, p. 309, own translation); Inseparability (Ind), in the sense of the constitutional and methodological principle.

That said, we point out the significant distance between the documents referring to initial and/or continuing education and the PNExt. As an indication, we have the frequency of words used, as shown in Figure 3 below. The terms denoting some closeness with the critical dimension of teacher education appeared with a significantly smaller frequency.

In highlighting the guidelines DId, DID and DIp, we observed that DCN-BNC-Teacher Education shows a considerable distance from these guidelines, and that Resolução n. 2 (2015) shows a relative closeness to them, as presented in Figure 4.

In identifying this distance, we observed that, in the coded segments of Resolução n. 2 (2019, p. 3, own translation), the indication of the “connection between teaching and research with centrality on the teaching-learning process” signals some closeness to the binomial teaching-research, and the exclusion of outreach. This leads us to conclude that while there is the reference to inseparability, there is not, throughout the resolution’s text, directions indicating the inseparability between teaching, research and outreach, as determined by the Constituição Federal [Federal Constitution] (1988).

Another distance indicator regards the use of the distinction between teacher education institutions and higher education institutions. The university is constitutionally qualified to develop teaching, research and outreach actions. The connective “and” grants the meaning of an indissoluble whole. Teaching cannot take place without research or without outreach, contrary to “teacher education institutions”, whose nature is mainly concerned with teaching. Here, there is a clear indication that the bases underpinning the ideal of teacher education are more in line with education as teaching know-how, the overly practical action, than with an education in which teaching, the production of knowledge, research, and the social relevance of that knowledge are subject to a critical construction.

Finally, regarding the indication about the teacher education intended, as shown in Figure 5, such teacher education has a theoretical and practice-oriented nature that is far from the idea of emancipatory, critical education, with values concerned with teacher autonomy.

Article 4 of BNC-Teacher Education contains, albeit between the lines, a demand for the development of outreach for teacher education in connection with community demands. Of the competencies presented in the document as fundamental for teachers’ action, only one is directly related to the context of development of the teaching-learning process, determining an engagement with families in order to improve the school environment. Here, it is worth stressing that the focus is only on the teacher-student relationship, and not in a broader view that might denote social engagement as an act of knowledge and awareness raising (^{Freire, 2019a}). A limit is perceived which sets the “attention towards communities” to establish a “good coexistence” between teacher and student.

In the PNExt and in Resolução n. 7, the student’s education is endowed with engagement and critical reflection as complementary poles that contribute to an education in which the principle of autonomy can be experienced in the actions developed. Thus, this policy determines as a contribution to the student’s education the expansion of their universe of reference through direct contact with contemporary issues.

Figure 6 below shows the segments with codes that indicate the education presuppositions in the teacher education policies.

The data of Figure 6 confirms what was pointed out by the analyses of this instrument, carried out by ^{Silva (2020}), ^{Lima and Sena (2020}), and ^{Nogueira and Borges (2021}), about the fact that the technical and professionalizing dimensions are far from education questions that enable a more critical education. This dissimilarity of BNC-Teacher Education and BNC-Continuing Education from dimensions that contribute to a more humanist education, advocated by the PNExt, can be considered as a gap to be bridged by another rationality. We consider that the lack of an initial education where macrostructural questions are present, which takes into account the more humanizing dimensions of teacher education, impacts directly on basic education teaching. In other words, if students undergoing initial teacher education only develop operating techniques, in thinking of an outreach action, they will also tend to develop actions that are merely technical, far from a critical-reflective role. We stress the need for the development of mathematical, linguistic and scientific competencies to be connected with social, environmental, cultural, economic and political issues. This dissociation characterizes a state of semi-education (^{Adorno, 1995}) which does not contribute to an education for autonomy and social commitment.

Going against this teacher education model, we can see that BNCC-TCT (Ministério da Educação, 2019) is very close to the idea of a theoretical-practical-humanist education. This opens the possibility for collaborative work with the school to transcend the logic and parameters provided by the instrumental logic underpinning the documents on teacher education and action.

Another point to be noted is the acronym BNCC - which precedes the expression transversal contemporary issues (TCT) - an indication of the prevailing standard - the foundation of competencies and skills and the consideration that these take on greater importance in the assess-ment documents. This points to another dimension of the teacher’s work: reconciling the assessment demands that follow international standards and developing actions with a humanist dimension. In addition, teacher education is faced with the challenge of building an organic relationship between humanist critical presuppositions, which is necessary to an education for autonomy and requires a praxis that encompasses the theory-practice unity.

This analysis corroborates what ^{Hage et al. (2020}) and ^{Silva (2020}) point out about the fact that the overly technical conception of action and teacher education is the key measure to consolidate the ideology of a knowledge society, which prioritizes competencies and skills for employability and homogenizes the knowledge taught in school, without considering the different realities. This reveals the consolidation of an education where the prevalent idea is to prepare a “self-programming workforce to meet the demands of time and space, and on the other hand a generic workforce” (^{Castells, 2018}, p. 135, own translation) adjusted to an economic system that is informational and global. It rests on educators to build another path. And that path is made through resistance and the exercise of critical and creative thinking.