Introduction

In an attempt to summarize what the term curriculum means, ^{Moreira and Candau (2007}, p. 28) claim that this word represents “[…] a set of practices that propitiate the production, circulation, and consumption of meanings in the social space, which contribute, intensely, for the construction of social and cultural identities.” For ^{Goodson (1997, p. 17)}, “[…] curriculum is a social artifact, conceived to accomplish certain specific human goals”, encompassing not only the official proposals, systematized in programs, but also attitudes and values practiced in the school daily routine, although not in an explicit way, what is called a hidden curriculum. In other words, these authors understand the curriculum as all the experiences mediated by the knowledge transmission and by the social relations that contribute to the formation of students’ identity.

In relation to the school, the curriculum is more than a set of rules or prescriptions, it is a way of organizing the space and time for the purpose of educating. The curriculum represents a place where culture is produced and reproduced, although this process is not linear nor unidirectional, given that it takes place in the middle of tensions and conflicts.

Seen in this way, the curriculum is the result of a social construction and cannot be considered as neutral and timeless (^{Ferreira, 2004}). On the contrary, the conceptions of curriculum and the way they appear in educational systems translate the conflicts of conceptions and practices. In fact, the formulation of a school curriculum implies in a process of choice of both content and practices that reveal conceptions that do not represent all social and cultural interests.

Throughout history, according to ^{Goodson (2007, p. 243)}, “[...] the curriculum became a mechanism of reproduction of power relations that exist in society”. In this sense, it also emerged as a way of “[…] directing and controlling teacher accreditation and their potential freedom in the classroom” (^{Goodson, 2007}, p. 243) as they are subject to established rules and values and should address specific topics, “[…] to a great extent, by the judgments and practices of specialists who conduct investigations in this field.” (Layton, 1972, p. 12-13 apud ^{Goodson, 2007}, p. 246). Such characteristic produced, over time, a strong relation between prescription and power, which allows to understand why, in most of the curriculum reforms, there is no effective involvement of teachers in the elaboration process of such proposals (^{Pires, 2009}).

The critique to these assumptions has emphasized the need for a curricula elaboration based on a new stance that contemplates the plurality and the construction of a critical and dialogic space, named culturally oriented curricula (^{Moreira; Candau, 2007}). In this context, the curricular organization should not be characterized as something established and close-ended. The documents that compose the curriculum must be constantly resumed in a democratic process involving reflection, action, evaluation and new actions. Such understanding “excludes the proposition of ready-to-use templates” (^{Ferreira, 2004}, p. 19) that the actors only have to execute. It is essential the existence of space and time for the permanent deconstruction and reconstruction of the curriculum.

According to ^{Lopes (2004)}, the curriculum has assumed the center of attention in educational policies in the globalized world. Even though an educational reform involves legislation, financing, school management, professional training and assessment of results, the emphasis is on the curriculum policy. The author emphasizes that such condition produces a trap, given that, on one hand, the curriculum is the center of reforms, while on the other, the schools have limitations for its implementation. In the face of the dispute between the prescribed/official curriculum and the actual/lived one in schools, ^{Goodson (2007)} points out as a possibility the curriculum to be guided by a narrative identity, that considers the life story of learners and educators and that of formal institutions. The author also states that “[...] learning is seen as a formal task that is not related to the students’ needs and interests since much of the curriculum planning is based on the prescriptive definitions about what has to be learned, without any understanding of the students’ life situation” (^{Goodson, 2007}, p. 250).

In turn, Young critiques the instrumentalist curriculum, in which the concern is contributing to the Economy, captivating students and meeting market demands. For him, the curriculum must have as its purpose “[...] the intellectual development of students” (^{Young, 2011}, p. 614). To achieve this purpose, it must be grounded on concepts. Such model recognizes that knowledge is external to apprentices, but, unlike the traditional approach, the exteriority has “[...] historical social basis” (^{Young, 2011}, p. 614), which determines a different form of pedagogical work, permeated by the engagement (^{Young, 2011}, p. 611) of the actors involved.

According to the author, another problem of the instrumentalist curriculum regards the indistinction between curriculum and pedagogy. Curriculum refers to the knowledge considered important for a specific country, to which students should have access. Pedagogy is related to the activities that the teachers use to involve and make the curriculum significant for students.

[...] teachers cannot, themselves, create a curriculum, but they need it to guide them in what they should teach, the curriculum developers can only stipulate the important concepts to which students need to have access. Curriculum developers count on teachers to motivate students and transform these concepts into reality for students (^{Young, 2011}, p. 612).

When no distinction is made between curriculum and pedagogy, ^{Young (2011)} asserts that the role of curriculum developers and the one of teachers are mixed, when in reality they are different. Such situation leads to an instrumentalist curriculum, based on the proliferation of curricular guidelines and examinations to verify if such guidelines are followed, which confers to the curriculum a controlling nature, more than a guiding one.

In view of the considerations presented regarding the curriculum, we developed a research involving the deployment and implementation of the Curriculum proposed by the São Paulo State Educational Secretariat (SEESP) and in force since 2008. The focus of this investigation is the training process of Math teachers for the implementation of the curriculum proposed and the impacts of the use of this material in their practice. The research, conducted in the Presidente Prudente municipality (SP) with 80 Math teachers from the state network, was organized in three axes: constituent aspects of the basic document of the proposed curriculum, teachers’ perceptions regarding the proposal and its use in the classroom, and how they describe the training process for the curricular implementation. In this paper, we describe the results of the first two axes, analyzing the material distributed to teachers and students for curricular implementation, as well as the responses to the questionnaire applied to teachers, about the option for using or not the material.

Trajectory of Mathematics Curricular Reforms

From the French Revolution and Industrial Revolution, is started the search for education with a systematic nature, carried out by the school institution, already concerned with the curriculum standardization. According to ^{Goodson (2007)}, the prescriptive curriculum, which persists until today, has led to the belief that, to ensure a democratic schooling, it is crucial for it to be put into practice. It so happens that such curriculum is developed in an abstract way, far from the daily life, assuming an exclusionary nature. It can be seen, here, a visible contradiction: the policies of broadening schooling advocate the importance of school access, however, they keep the mechanism of exclusion of the poorest, when they propose a curriculum distant from reality.

Regarding the Mathematics course, the instruction, in general, was performed through the approach of elementary contents, with emphasis on formal aspects and in a decontextualized way. In this context, in 1908, under the leadership of the mathematician Felix Klein, it was created the Internationale Mathematische Unterrichtskommission (IMUK), which defended the urgency of the math instruction reform.

In Brazil, the legal changes will only come to light after 1930, influenced by Euclides Roxo’s programs for Math teaching for the Pedro II School and the book Curso de Matemática [Mathematics Course], launched in 1929, which proposed alterations regarding what was being proposed in Math. Until then, French books grounded on demonstrations were used, with a large amount of exercises and organized according to the topics Algebra, Arithmetic and Geometry. Roxo, concerned with the modernization of Math teaching and sharing the IMUK ideas, joined all three subjects under the name of Mathematics (^{Valente, 2004}).

The Francisco Campos reform of 1931 sought to organize the Brazilian educational system and incorporated the main points of view defended by Roxo in relation to Mathematics programs (^{Carvalho, 2000}). This reform represented an improvement in the curriculum conception, as it included didactic orientations (^{Pires, 2011}). In the Capanema Reform of 1942 and 1946, the Mathematics programs, from these two reforms, followed the characteristics advocated by Roxo at least in two points: the integrated study of Mathematics addressing the topics Algebra, Arithmetic, Geometry and Trigonometry, and the presence of Mathematics in each grade of the curriculum (^{Carvalho, 2000}).

Only in 1961, from the National Educational Bases and Guidelines Law (LDB), Law N. 4024/61 (^{Brasil, 1961}), there were changes in the programs proposed in the previous reforms, influenced by the Modern Mathematics Movement (MMM). One of the key milestones of curricular reforms in several countries, this movement was conceived in the context of a training policy that had to take into account the economic modernization. “The concern was that of having a Mathematics useful for the technique, for science and to the modern economy” (^{Pires, 2000}, p. 11). It was desired an active and open pedagogy. However, in practice, the reform was marked by an excess of symbolism and abstractions at rigorous levels. Official curricula incorporated the MMM principles starting from textbooks collections, which dealt with the Theory of Sets, with an emphasis on the symbolic language. For ^{Kline (1976)}, the criticisms to MMM relate, mainly, to the excessive emphasis on logical structures and the unsatisfactory results of learning presented by students.

From the MMM, study groups on Math teaching were established, strengthening the field of Mathematics Education. In 1980, in the United States, in the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) event, it were presented recommendations emphasizing the resolution of problems as the focus of Math teaching, as well encouraging the capabilities to perform basic operations, the use of computers and the applications of mathematical concepts to the apprentice’s reality (^{Pires, 2000}).

In this context, Mathematics curricular proposals were drawn up in different states and municipalities of Brazil at the end of the 1980s. ^{Barreto (2006)} claims that the movement of curricular reorientation in Brazil in that decade was led by the southeastern and southern states. Moreover, in an environment of democratic transition, when the population yearned for participation, claims burst in the sense of recovering the social relevance of the content present in the curricula to go beyond the “[...] technicist orientations of the 1970s, which valued the methods and strategies of teaching” (^{Barreto, 2006}, p. 5).

Mathematics curricular proposals organized by different states and municipalities had as the main element in common the review of Modern Mathematics principles. In most of such proposals it was emphasized the articulation of school to life, the Mathematics application to other fields of knowledge, the emphasis on the student’s activity through problems resolution and topics related with estimating, probabilistic calculations and statistical treatment in elementary education. Evaluation appeared with a diagnostic function, assigning a constructive role to error (^{Pires, 2000}).

From the analysis of the different curricular proposals developed by different states and municipalities, in 1995, close to the LDB approval in 1996, the Education Secretariat of Elementary Education of the Ministry of Education and Sport began the elaboration process of a national reference document, the National Curriculum Parameters (PCN), that was concerned with organizing a curriculum that indicated parameters for the whole country, without disregarding the local characteristics of each region (^{Pires, 2011}).

The Mathematics PCN (^{Brasil, 1997}) present guiding principles resulting from studies in the field of Mathematics Education. They bring the blocks of contents divided into Numbers, Magnitudes and Measures, Space and Shape and Information Treatment. In the document, there is a section for Didactic Orientations, in order to meet possible difficulties in the learning of certain concepts, as well as to offer methodological possibilities to face them.

^{Pires (2011, p. 60)} claims that it was predicted that states and municipalities would organize themselves to suit the PCN aiming to meet regional needs. The Analysis Report of Curricular Proposals of Elementary and Middle School, published in 2010 by the Ministry of Education reveals that this was done (^{Sampaio, 2010}). On the national scene, of curriculum reforms and the PCN’s adequacy to regional needs, in 2008 the State of São Paulo proposes the deployment and implementation of a proposal that becomes the state Official Curriculum in 2010 and is the object of analysis of this research.

Mathematics Curriculum Reforms in the state of São Paulo

In 1975 it was published , in the state of São Paulo the Curricular Guides for primary schools in the context of Law N. 5692/71 (^{Brasil, 1971}), which structured the elementary school of eight years. Curricular Guides, in the general introduction, described a school of general and instrumental culture, directed toward the comprehensive formation of children and adolescents, concerned with the students’ active participation in learning.

In the Guides, it was evident the influence of Modern Mathematics, when emphasizing the important role of mathematical structures and the predominance of topics involving the theory of sets. The material divided the subjects into Relations and Functions, Numeric Fields, Equations and Inequations and Geometry. Although not diminishing the rigor of the axiomatic method, the authors asserted that the concepts should start from experiences accomplished with the students, close to the concrete and using material handling (^{São Paulo, 1975}). After the publication of the guides, subsidies were produced for the curricular implementation until 1984.

The subsidies were built with a rather colloquial language; they were presented in the shape of manuals for the teacher, as a ‘prescription book’ indicating the content distribution, time, assessment and even words that the teacher should use. It was huge, hence, the extent of detail and specification, seeking to direct and control the teaching practice (^{Souza, 2006}, p. 208).

For ^{Pires (2000)}, the main criticisms to the guides were the excessive concern with training; the repetition aiming the memorization of rules and ways of solving problems; the prioritization of algebraic topics at the expense of geometric concepts; the early formalization of the students, even without their proper cognitive development.

In 1985, in the context of redemocratization and political opening, from the criticism to guides and negative experiences resulting from MMM, it has begun an elaboration process of the Curricular Proposal by the Mathematics Technical Team of the Coordination of Studies and Pedagogical Standards/Education Secretariat of the state of São Paulo (CENP/SEESP). Such process was peculiar for having the participation of different educational segments, among them teachers who worked in the state public schools. If compared to the processes already described, this was the one that had the widest participation of teachers in its elaboration. A preliminary version was discussed extensively with all the public network in 1987. The first edition was published in 1988 (^{Magni, 2011}).

It was evident in the proposal not only the concern to deal with the nature of Mathematics and its function, as that of comprehending the reality in its quantitative aspects, in addition to developing logical reasoning, as well as the ability to abstract and generalize. Is was used the spiral approach of contents, divided into two topics: Numbers and Geometry. The Measures topic was suggested with the aim of articulating Numbers and Geometry. The proposal comprised indications oriented to the work with fundamental ideas as proportionality, equivalence and similarity, involved in different content to be developed. Each topic was accompanied by methodological guidance about the concepts involved (^{São Paulo, 1992}).

For ^{Souza (2006, p. 206)}, the 1988 proposal incorporated principles consonant with “[...] critical theories of curriculum, explaining political and social values, stating the commitment with popular classes”. From the proposal, various materials were organized as subsidies for its implementation. According to ^{Pires (2000, p. 50)}, the implementation process of the São Paulo curricular proposal met resistances not due to its ideas, principles and proposal organization, but arising from “[...] decisive factors related to wage issues, staff turnover in schools and the teacher training itself.”

In 1997, as already mentioned in the previous section, the Mathematics PCN were published. From then on, the state of São Paulo had two official documents, one national and another state, its curricular proposal of 1988.

In the introductory part of the Mathematical component, the PCN (^{Brasil, 1997}) considered that, in general, the schools in different states did not incorporate the previous curricular orientations. Apparently, educational policies had suffered modifications resulting from historical moments of the country and its states; however the schools were functioning at the margin of the changes suggested in official documents, and the math learning remained unsatisfactory.

Curricular reforms, in general, relate to alterations in educational systems and, as a rule, the teachers’ participation is reduced, both in the proposal elaboration process and in the stage of discussion and implementation. There has not been experienced yet proper implementing ways accompanied by an evaluation process (^{Pires, 2009}).

For ^{Goodson (2007, p. 242)}, the difficulty of proposals implementation is related to the fact of the curricula being prescriptive; such prescription “[...] sustains the mystique that specialization and control are inherent to central government, education bureaucracies and the university community”. Thus, it would be almost natural the exclusion of teachers in the construction process of the curriculum. For ^{Young (2011, p. 613)}, “[...] the curriculum itself is increasingly becoming a way to render accounts instead of being a guide for teachers”.

When describing the curriculum reforms, we have identified that, in general, teachers do not consider themselves as participants in the organization and development process of the curriculum. As a result, “[...] quite often it is adopted an attitude of disbelief in educational reforms, declaring that they are distant from the reality of their students and unattainable in the current school conditions” (^{Pires, 2011}, p. 64). The trajectory of distinct reforms reveals how the curricular issue is involved in conflicts of various orders, being one of them the resistance of teachers and schools. It is precisely in this context of reforms and curricular crisis that we have analyzed the policy of curriculum reform deployed and implemented from 2008 in the state of São Paulo.

Methodology

In this paper, we present the results of a qualitative, analytical-descriptive investigation, carried out by means of documentary analysis, from responses obtained with a questionnaire. The documental analysis refers to documents regarding the Mathematics Curriculum proposed from 2008 on in the public network of the state of São Paulo as the basic text of Math Curriculum, accompanied by the teacher’s edition of the student’s workbook respectively distributed. The analysis seeks to identify information in documents, based on issues of interest. For this reason, the analyzed material becomes the source from where it was obtained evidences that may substantiate the statements and reflections throughout the investigation process (^{Lüdke; André, 1986}). In accordance with ^{Cellard (2014)}, the documentary analysis represents a fundamental resource for the analysis of a problem to be studied in its temporal dimension. The material analyzed in this study was produced in a specific time to comply with the policy of curriculum reorientation in the state of São Paulo started in schools in 2008. With this procedure, we have identified the characteristics of the proposed material, as well as the conception of curriculum, school, the teacher’s teaching activity and the student’s learning underlying the learning situations proposed to be developed in classroom.

In a second moment, we have used the answers to a questionnaire applied during the Hours of Collective Pedagogical Work (HTPC) in 24 schools of Presidente Prudente (SP/Brazil). The schedules were planned in advance and 80 Math teachers offered to participate in the study, 64% of the 125 teachers who worked in these schools. The questionnaire addressed several issues about the Curriculum proposed. Particularly in this study, it was outlined the perceptions of teachers in relation to the use of the curricular material.

Data tabulation was performed by means of content analysis of the answers, followed by the definition of categories. It is a research procedure in which, according to ^{Franco (2005)}, the verbal expression, its assertions and messages can be considered as essential indicators for the understanding of the problems linked to educative practices and their psychosocial components. For data treatment, it was used the PSPP free software, an alternative to the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The analysis was performed from the articulation of different data collected based on the theoretical background and researches related to the topic.

Research Findings

Conclusion

Based on a documental analysis of the proposal, it became clear that the mathematical contents do not differ substantially from those that appear in the previous curricular proposals of the state of São Paulo, nor of what is indicated by the PCN and by the Math textbooks. The proposal differential is the organization of both the Student’s Workbook and the Teacher’s Edition under the layout of learning situations, in the perspective of a contextualized and interdisciplinary work with the goal of developing students’ skills and competences. It is expected that the teacher, based on such organization, has an overview about the mathematical topics to be developed and identify the need to use other materials for the resumption or deepening of concepts that are implicit in the situations.

Based on the analysis, it is clear that in addition to a prescription of a minimal curriculum (topics and units) there is also a methodological prescription (proposal of learning situations), although the material indicates the importance of the teacher’s autonomy. The guidelines for the use of the material are clear about the need for its suitability/complementation, just as they make explicit the teacher’s autonomy to do so.

The research data, however, show that there are resistances to the proposal’s use. Although the proposed curriculum is in use, teachers indicate that there are many problems for its implementation in the classroom. In fact, only 18.8% would freely choose its use. The others predominantly pointed out the restrictions related to the material characteristics and the students’ lag of knowledge.

The results obtained allow an analysis taking into account two dimensions: the one of prescription and the teacher’s didactic autonomy. Regarding the former, based on ^{Goodson’s ideas (2007)}, we can say that the implementation of curricular proposals has been supported much more by control mechanisms than by the involvement and intentional accession of teachers, a fact that seems to be reproduced in the case of this investigation.

In the curriculum implementation, power relations are involved, and a relationship of complicity is established between the school and the teachers. The consequences of such complicity are catastrophic to the extent that there are no effective reactions about what is proposed, neither there are guarantees that by complying with what was proposed, it would actually materialize in classroom practices (^{Goodson, 2007}). In other words, the incorporation of some ideas in the discourse does not find correspondence in the practice.

In the same sense, ^{Sacristán (2000, p. 147)} states that the curricular prescription established by the administrative political level has impact in relation to regulate the field of action, but “[...] the determination of pedagogical action in schools and classrooms is in another level of decisions”. The teachers, when developing the curriculum in their classes, must deal with several other variables that go beyond the work with the specific concepts of the discipline that they teach. In fact, in an attempt to provide a guide to the teacher’s work, the curriculum earns a prescriptive character, considering that the curricula, in general, are prepared by a team of specialists with a minimal participation of the teachers who work in schools (^{Pires, 2011}).

As to the second dimension, of the teacher’s didactic autonomy, ^{Young’s (2011)} observation regarding the differentiation between curriculum and pedagogy makes sense, emphasizing that the prescription fits in relation to the knowledge considered important by a given country, and it is up to the teachers to choose methodologies for the development of the classroom work. The resistance to the proposal analyzed is supported by the fact that it has the character of prescription not only regarding the knowledge but methodology as well, what hurts the didactic autonomy of teachers.

Faced with the question that motivated this investigation and the data regarding the teachers’ perceptions about the implemented curriculum, we can claim that the proposed curriculum, due to the characteristics presented, provides few conditions to interfere in the reality of Math classes. The conclusions related to the data collected by the research lead us to think that the process of curricular implementation must be guided by other parameters.

It is necessary to consider that the education practiced in schools “[...] results from a curricular version assumed by the teacher individually or by the body of teachers and the school pedagogical team” (^{Santos, 2014}, p. 17-18). For the author, the legitimacy of the curriculum becomes effective by the active and autonomous presence of teachers, which goes far beyond the curriculum application prescribed by official bodies.

In this sense, the chances that a proposal has to influence the teaching practice are intrinsically related to the teachers’ identification with the guidelines resulting from the proposals. Such identification requires a continuous training activity permeated by the collaborative work of the pedagogical staff of the school, through which teachers are encouraged to exercise an authorship role of their practice. We can say that the policies of curricular implantation that disregard such aspects present great chances of being innocuous, a condition that points out to the necessity of a substantive modification in these processes.