The material permanence

At first sight, the financial condition is the first and determining obstacle that becomes evident to students from the lower social classes for the development of their undergraduate course, having been the most mentioned and problematized in the interviews and in the moments of observation. The concrete daily survival and the way of making it possible objectively permeates the entire academic trajectory of these students and, sometimes, can remove from the student the necessary concentration to respond to the studies. According to ^{Portes (2006}, p. 227), it is possible to say that

If the economic condition is not determinant of the actions and practices of the poor student - in a past and in a present -, it is a real, acting component, mobilizing feelings that commonly produce suffering in this type of student and threaten their permanence in the institution.

To meet their material needs, a student assistance program was institutionally created as one of the strategies and support to keep these students in the university space.

It is worth mentioning that, traditionally, UNIFESP did not have regular services and/or programs focused on student assistance before the consolidation of its university expansion project in 2010. Student assistance is a recent concern in the institutional scope, differently from what is observed in most Federal Education Institutions (IFES). It is materialized based on the National Program of Student Assistance (PNAES), from 2008, which assigns specific resources for all IFES to subsidize local permanence/student assistance programs.

This program is the main mechanism for the operationalization of the student assistance policy at UNIFESP and aims to create conditions for students in a situation of socioeconomic vulnerability to stay in school and take full advantage of their academic education.

Over the last few years, the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the Student Assistance program have been improved and other indicators besides income have been incorporated for the construction of vulnerability profiles in order to guarantee that the financial aid made available by the Student Assistance program would meet the needs of these students based on the principle of equality of conditions.

Aid is granted based on the degree of vulnerability identified in the global population of students who meet the per capita family income requirements of up to one and a half minimum wages. For the purpose of granting financial aid, socioeconomic vulnerability is conceived as a set of situations that may compromise the student's permanence at Unifesp (Federal University of São Paulo). Such situations may include absence or difficulty in accessing basic public goods and services and/or social rights. The proposed aid amounts related to the identified vulnerability levels have the following parameters as reference: profile V- R$160,00; profile IV- R$ 213,00; profile III- R$ 373,00; profile II- R$586,00; and profile I- R$ 746,00.

This financial support is structured as a crucial tool for entering college life, for continuing it, as well as for concluding the course chosen. In this regard, there was a consensus among all the interviewees regarding the importance and significance of the Student Assistance program for their material permanence at the university.

[…] So, I was a little afraid that I wouldn't be able to pay the rent, support myself and everything else. At UNIFESP, I managed to finish the course because if it wasn't for the scholarship, I wouldn't have finished the course, because I wouldn't have been able to afford to stay in Santos. (E6, Nutrition student, full-time, 25 years old).

[...] Because I think that if I did not have the aid, I would not be able to go to college even living in Santos. Because I really can't afford it. If I went to college and didn't have a scholarship, I would literally be screwed completely. Because I would have to walk back and forth. To eat, I don't even know how I would eat at college, because my father would have to work hard, my mother would also have to work hard. Of course, for those who have money it is easy, you come to another city and your father pays for everything and life goes on. But, in my condition, social assistance, the SSC (Student Support Center) helped me a lot, a lot, a lot. (E14, Student of Physical Education, full-time, 24 years old).

There was a recurring speech among all those interviewed about the concern with financial support, which demonstrates the situation of social vulnerability to which they are exposed and the dependence on a social program that enables them to occupy social spaces from which they are usually excluded, as is the case of the university. Specifically, the Student Assistance program is closely linked to the immediate material needs of these students, since it has been constituted as an alternative for minimizing the daily concern of guaranteeing the cost of housing, food, transportation, the acquisition of didactic material and other basic expenses for maintenance in the university space. However, as ^{Portes (2001}, p. 177) points out

In this case, it is not a bias of the researcher's look or a reduction of all the manifestations of the poor university student researched to a material condition. It is precisely the satisfaction of basic needs that can free this subject for other ventures constitutive of a good school education, the construction of identity and affirmation in the world, besides ensuring the school advantages that they all accumulated in an environment hostile to ventures of this nature.

As observed, the most immediate and possible way for these students to face material needs was to seek insertion in the Student Assistance program offered by the institution; it is noted that the institutional financial aid already appeared in the narratives as an initial subsistence plan even before they entered the university.

If I didn't have a scholarship, I wouldn't have... One of the key points, when I discovered the university; because I discovered the public university and what it would bring me, which was the permanence allowance. There are universities that have housing. So, I was counting on all this. Even at the time of the pre-university preparatory course people said: ah, but you are going so far away, how are you going to support yourself? Then I said: No, I'll stay at the university, it has this benefit. They said: But if you don't get in? But I: No, there's no way I won't get in, I need it. If I don't have it, I don't know how it will be. I was confident that I would have this benefit. (E12, Student of Physiotherapy, full-time, 25 years old).

I did a lot of research, I came here before, I tried to study how this reality was, but only because I knew that I would have (student) assistance and I would minimally be able to get a scholarship, because if I didn't, it would be unreal. I would go through this whole process and I would be sucking my thumb at home, upset because I wasn't going to come. Because you have no way of living, it doesn't exist. (E15, Social Work student, afternoon period, 23 years old).

For the group of students who had been working prior to entering the university and, consequently, still played the role of contributor and/or responsible for the household budget, the concern was even greater. The dilemma of reconciling the work activity that these students already had before entering university revealed itself as a significant issue and incompatible with the university trajectory in most of the cases observed, especially for those who sought undergraduate courses whose curricula require full-time dedication.

[...] in my high school... Second and third year, I worked. So, I worked and studied at night. So, I was taking school, I didn't fail any subject or year. We don't study as we should study, because I was tired, the whole day working and at night I went to school, so it was very complicated. So, when I saw that I lived this phase of my life that was work and study, I said to myself: "I won't be able to go. Because university is a much more serious thing, so I won't be able to do it. (E6, Nutrition student, full-time, 25 years old).

[...] at the time, as I was the income of my house practically, because I had worked in a supermarket for six years. And I had a very high position, so it was all like this: I was the one who bought the house. Most of the expenses at home were my own. And then I had to talk to my parents. There was no way. In the beginning it was very difficult. (E11, Marine Sciences student, night shift, 21 years old).

[...] I had passed a public contest and then I was in a dilemma: study or work? Study or work? Because I needed to help at home, but at the same time I needed to study. So, I tried during the first year to keep both together. I could stop on the weekends, but I could see that it was not enough. (E2, Occupational Therapy student, full time, 26 years old).

Researcher: And was it possible to reconcile the work day with the course?

E2: No, because I was always late for work. And it was still in Praia Grande. Which is far! My God! It was a long day, leaving here to go there. It would take me two hours to get there. And I would get in at three in the afternoon there to leave at eleven at night. But here I would leave at four o'clock in the afternoon, when I did. So much so that I got a failing grade because of this. I got a PD for attendance. Although I attended classes, I got attendance because I didn't sign the attendance lists. (E2, Occupational Therapy student, full-time, 26 years old).

In the narratives above, the restrictions that the daily work activity presented to these students' academic development pretensions were present, which would compromise the university experience in a full way. This situation constituted one more challenge for these students. It is worth pointing out that, in the universe of student workers interviewed, all of them, at some point in the course, either at the beginning or during the undergraduate course, had to decide between maintaining their work and staying at the university, given the impossibility of reconciling the two activities. For these students, quitting their jobs would mean making their family situation even more precarious. On the other hand, at this moment of definition, the role of the students' families was highlighted when they supported and gave symbolic support for this decision, even if the students in question played the role of providers and/or contributors to the domestic budget.

[...] And then, it was a very difficult decision. My parents helped me a lot. They said: "You have to study. So, if you have to quit your job, and we have to work two jobs for you to study, that's fine! No problem!" That's what I ended up doing. Although I spent a month martyring myself. What am I going to do? And now what? I have to work to help at home, and study too. I can't reconcile the two. I'll have to choose one. Either I work, or I study. But they (parents) said: "study! We'll manage to take care of the house, the bills, and if we need to help you at the university. I ended up leaving my job, I resigned. And I stayed here alone. (E2, Occupational Therapy student, full-time, 26 years old).

It was possible to see that, although there was no family tradition of access to higher education, the families of the students in question understood the university as a possibility for later obtaining better opportunities in the job market. There was an "educogenic" strategy (one that understands school or education as a fundamental strategy for social ascension). (^{SILVA, 2003}), in which schooling occupied a significant portion of family concerns, aiming at building a project of professional ascension for their children; in this context, university education is seen as a strategy for social ascension. They understood that access to higher education would confer economic power and, consequently, income, which, in general, is directly related to schooling. As ^{Santos (2009}, p. 69) points out, formal education was the driving force for the changes in the living conditions of these families:

In the case of less well-off families, and in general black, the university represents a great achievement, since in their imaginary it was absent, distant, unlikely. The entrance of a member of these families into higher education and their permanence in it have two meanings: one that is individual and the other that is group, since being a university student means the possibility of changes in their future and in the social environment in which this individual circulates.

The possibility of not working and not having to contribute to the family budget thanks to the solidarity among family members would allow the student to invest in the continuity/progression of his schooling. This situation had direct repercussions on the better use and experience of the university space, but also on the symbolic dimension of the permanence of this student, since it would allow him to concentrate only on academic activities. It should be emphasized that the fact of being able to remain only studying and experiencing the university can have repercussions both on the quality in terms of education and on the time to complete the chosen course, thus contributing to the fact that the student with the analyzed profile can more easily complete his undergraduate degree in the minimum time required.

In the same line of discussion, other authors, such as ^{Silva (2013}), consider that the conditions of permanence in higher education have a direct relationship with how students organize and use the time available to them; that is, working and studying or just studying can have repercussions with regard to the participation of students in activities such as research, extension, scientific events, among others. That said, this circumstance portrays a new study-work relationship with qualitative repercussions in terms of the constitution of their university careers. In these cases, the assistance allows, even partially, the material subsistence and minimizes the need for family financial support. This means that, although the income from the student's labor activity is no longer part of the family budget, on the other hand, the access to student assistance resources makes possible the relative exemption of these families that, for the most part mainly for those who have their expenses increased by the fact that they can no longer live with their families, since the university campus is located in the metropolitan region of Baixada Santista, whose distance makes the daily commute to the family residence, usually located in other regions of the state, unfeasible.

It is known that in most cases the institutional financial aid is not enough to cover all the necessary material expenses, especially those that involve the expense of renting property, since the Baixada Santista campus is located in a metropolitan region with a high cost of living, often higher than that of the students' region of origin. This is a recurring issue that ends up being reflected in the daily university life of these students.

Good academic performance as a strategy for material permanence

It can also be observed that most participants in the research expressed a great commitment to the course chosen and to their education and, consequently, to their academic performance. A good income coefficient was also a symbolic and material permanence strategy, since, besides indicating a good use of the academic contents, it also enables better conditions to compete for and access academic scholarships⁵. The Nutrition student (E6) reports having used this expedient:

Whether you want it or not, the performance coefficient is a question that they (the faculty) evaluate too, right? So, I also wanted to be among the best in the class because I knew that this had some weight when we were looking for some kind of scholarship for scientific initiation or extension. And so, I kept on dedicating myself! And so far, I am satisfied. (E6, Nutrition student, full-time, 25 years old).

Thus, at the same time that they fulfilled the workload of complementary activities required by the curricular matrices of their courses, the students in question added points to their educational path and, finally, ensured an addition regarding the possibility of extraordinary resources to fund their material maintenance, a strategy in the same way pointed out by the Social Service student (E15):

[...] I started to dedicate myself. That's when I replaced my salary, which was the value of an (academic) scholarship, I worked like crazy to earn the scholarship value. If we are going to earn the same thing, let's do academic work that will really answer what I came to do and it's not making sense (referring to the quality of training outside the classroom, a differential of the public university in relation to the private university where she previously attended). (E15, Social Work student, afternoon period, 23 years old).

From this perspective, by engaging in para-academic activities, students stay longer at the university, and this becomes a device to appropriate "a more intellectually and institutionally complex world, to understand and make use of the intricacies surrounding the rules and their practices, to transit in a broader and more multiple universes of relationships, in meanings, values and conduct" (^{TEIXEIRA, 2011}, p. 48). This interpretation is also explained by the Psychology student (S3) when evaluating the scope of welfare aid in relation to the prospects of claiming academic scholarships and subsidizing their stay at the university:

[...] But I only managed to do a good PIBIC⁶ project because I didn't have to work four years in the bar until two in the morning. So, it was a strategy that is not only mine. I built strategies directly and indirectly and that were also built here in this relationship, you know? And that ends up not being just a bank. There is no way. Every time I thought about the (welfare) assistance I received and explained it to someone, it came to my mind a lot. It's a help for me to stay. So, there is the concern that I stay. Let's stay and think how to do it. (E3, Psychology student, full-time, 23 years old).

Enjoying an academic scholarship has doubly stimulated the permanence of these students, since, at the same time that this reduces material concerns, it also provides an opportunity for full-time presence at the university and, consequently, a better appropriation of the academic culture. This condition, according to ^{Almeida (2006}), allows students to make fuller use of the services and possibilities offered by the university, bringing them closer to the condition of other students who are better off in socioeconomic terms.

The awarding of scholarships for monitoring, university extension, and/or scientific initiation is a relevant factor both in terms of the hierarchies established among the students and the distinction they imply in the curriculum, and also as university education. Moreover, students appropriate the university space, guaranteeing themselves an active insertion in this new environment, making it familiar and diverse. In ^{Coulon's (2008}, p. 42) perspective, these students become members, which "designates the natural domain of the group or its organization." According to ^{Guesser (2003}, p. 163), membership:

[...] is not only an entity that belongs to a certain group, but on the contrary, it is an entity that shares the social construction of that certain group. In other words, a member is an individual who dominates the group's common language, who interacts with others based on networks of meaning established in the interactional processes, who understands the social world in which he is inserted without great rational efforts, but only by the natural belonging of his socialization.

There is, therefore, a reconfiguration of the social space of the public university with the insertion of students from the lower social strata and coming from distinct life trajectories, in face of not only their socioeconomic reality, but also with regard to the symbolic capital distinct from the hegemonic groups that represented the university's clientele until then.

The symbolic permanence

In spite of the material conditions of existence already pointed out and that cover the axis of material permanence, it is deemed necessary to broaden the discussion beyond the analysis of economic and financial aspects that involve the trajectories of this new university public, in a symbolic perspective that considers the meanings, the interactions, the appropriation of university space and student affiliation. In ^{Santos' (2009}, p. 159) perspective, to remain symbolically requires "the individual's constancy in higher education that allows for its transformation, sharing with peers, and belonging to the university environment. Symbolic permanence involves effective integration into all aspects of academic life, transcending quantitative inclusion. However, this distinction between symbolic and material was made only for analysis purposes, since they are dimensions that go together and are interconnected.

As far as the symbolic permanence is concerned, situations of prejudice experienced, the subtle differentiations to which these students were submitted in the university daily life, and the strategies to overcome possible stigmas were addressed. In contrast to the conception of the construction of a symbolic permanence, we noticed the existence of explicit and non-explicit contents that indicate situations of prejudice of several orders, which were experienced and narrated by these students. There were countless perceptions of discrimination listed that deserved to be highlighted in the analysis.

The Social Service student (S1) calls attention to the teachers' statements about REUNI and the new student population entering public universities. In the discussions that took place in the collegiate body of the course, in which she was a student representative, this student captures the criticism of the probable decline in the quality of education, resulting from the process of expansion and diversification of the form of entry to the university, which allowed the entry of "unfit and unprepared" students to the academic path:

[...] A critic, I remember talk about REUNI, you know! I remember statements from female professors. And then, when I started to understand what REUNI was, I saw the criticism, where it was. Those who are having access to public universities, who no longer go... What is it? That it won't be of excellence because it has to meet the demand that is coming and the demand is from a bunch of assholes. And that made me angry! The disappointment started from there. Do you mean that I am part of this bunch of morons, who barely know how to write? Hold on, I'll show you something else! (E1, Social Service student, night shift, 51 years old).

We recall here the words of ^{Coulon (2008}, p. 68):

To say that 'they do not have a level' is like relocating the question of the manifestation of their habitus and, more than that, their possibility of intellectual affiliation to higher education. These students suffer a rupture that distances them, a little more, from what is required in higher education, in terms of vocabulary, conceptualization, reading and writing habits, thinking, in short, a set of intellectual operations that characterize the academic work.

It was also possible to perceive, in the speeches, that there is an expectation in relation to an idealized student. It is expected that the new student arrives "ready-made," loaded with desirable attributes to the academic environment, which makes students from popular groups feel "out of place, eternal debtors of the ideal, which, by the way, is rarely found in the halls of colleges and institutes" (^{ALMEIDA, 2006}, p. 9). It can be noticed that this model of student that still remains in the imaginary of part of the academic community is the one that represents students who come from an elite that, until recently, exclusively occupied the public university space: white, male, aged between 18 and 20, urban dwellers, descendants of European immigrants, coming from a private high school and who would not have worked until then.

Along these lines, what was unprecedented was the report of another Social Work student (S15) - the only one among the interviewees who entered through an external transfer process, and not through the Unified Selection System (SISU). She brings in her narrative the experience of the "transfer" student, who enters at a different moment in the course and with a previous unequal academic trajectory. This is especially the case for those who come from private higher education institutions. She says that the university still doesn't know how to deal with this student profile or how to receive them. The student also emphatically mentions the prejudiced situations experienced when she identified herself as an external transfer student: "people turned their noses up at me.

I had the feeling that I had gone under the door, that is different, that is the difference when you come from transfer. When you come from transfer, people look at you with a great uncertainty, with a face like: we will see! So, this is very difficult, because besides accessing something that is rightfully yours, you have to keep proving to people that you have to be here. (E15, Social Service student, afternoon shift, 23 years old).

For this student, there is, in a tacit way, a message that indicates the view that the transfer student did not make an effort and entered the public university "under the door. Therefore, the student who entered through a method other than SISU has an unfavorable symbolic condition that puts into suspicion the right and legitimacy of studying in a public university.

The student (S15) also highlights the hierarchy of treatment that exists in relation to the institutions from which the "transferred" students came. For those who came from other federal universities or even from private but prestigious institutions, there was a respectability that was not offered to those who came from private institutions without tradition, or, as the student defined it, from "uni-scholars", so that there was a clear differentiation of treatment based on the institutional origin of the students.

Because he came from UFOP, from UFRJ, from other federal universities. Even from PUC, for example, which is private, but it is PUC! And then... How sensational! The professors say: let's introduce ourselves, you are new, I see you here. Your name is always strange on the list, that zone. Of course, everyone will know that you did not come from SISU. Ah, where did you come from? Everyone says. Then you are always in the same room with the other transfers because you have to take the same damn subjects. Ah, I came from UFRJ, I came from UFOP, I came from I don't know where... (the teachers say:) ah, that's great! I have a professor who is a friend there... And you? Ah, I came from UNINOVE. Oh, cool... So, such a book... I swear! I swear! Today I take it with a dose of humor. But it was scary. All (the teachers) were like that! All of them. "Ah, we'll see, won't we?" This "we'll see" is too much! Anyway, we are there, between the weak and the wounded. (E15, Social Service student, afternoon period, 23 years old).

We observe the predominance of a situation of veiled prejudice, which is not directly explicit and is often naturalized through discursive and cultural processes.

A similar issue was expressed by other students who entered through the process of reserve seats, read quotas⁷, and uttered situations in which they omitted their condition of quota holder. This behavior sought to avoid possible scenarios that could lead to discriminatory actions also associated with discussions about the logic of merit and its relationship with the supposed "quality" of the undergraduate courses - or, as ^{Santos (2009}) points out, because there is in common sense a negative association between student quota and competence/performance, despite studies and data to demystify this thesis. This is clear in the recurring silencing by the quota students in relation to the identification as such, which represents the feeling of not belonging and lack of legitimacy in relation to the university space. E6, when asked about her expectations regarding admission at the university, mentions the concern about not following the course mainly due to her condition of quota holder:

[...] sometimes we feel that because we are a quota student, from public school... Sometimes people have a prejudiced view: 'Oh, but the quality of education will drop'... And I have always tried to prove the opposite. Because we know that it may be so, but not just because the student came from public school. (E6, Nutrition student, full-time, 25 years old).

[It's even with the issue of quotas too. I never told people, for example, that I got in through the quota. Because there are people who do not agree. (E7, Nutrition student, full-time, 23 years old).

In the same perspective, the Marine Sciences student (E11) reported an episode experienced in class, in which a professor mentioned that she was against the presence of quota students at the university, as well as against the availability of research scholarships to Northeasterners, because, in her evaluation, these students did not know how to use these resources. The professor also justified that some researchers from the South and Southeast regions of the country were more "hard working", studied more and, therefore, deserved greater investments in relation to those from the other regions of the federation. According to the student's account, for the teacher in question, the quota holders were occupying the place of people who studied "for real".

This description only corroborates the evaluation made by ^{Santos (2009}, p. 165): "by doing so, these educators stereotype their students and place them in a situation of inferiority in relation to their colleagues. Thus, the figure of the teacher in this process is doubly central, since his actions can either weaken or collaborate positively to the symbolic and also effective permanence of the student in the university. Along these lines, the author adds that:

Stigma is an element in the list of obstacles faced by students in their attempt to stay in the university. The self-esteem of being a university student is antagonistic to the cases of exclusion and prejudice that these young people face in their academic trajectory. The very term "quota holders" is considered by many students (heard in our research) as pejorative and full of excluding signs (^{SANTOS, 2009}, p. 16).

Such situations represent tensions and contrasts experienced in everyday university life. They show the constraints experienced by these students in the relationship with the professors and/or with other colleagues and also with the student model that refers to that coming from the elite and that occupied the public university benches almost exclusively - a model rooted in the imaginary of part of the professors. The interviewees' sensitivity to the pejorative comments about the relationship between the entrance of students from the lower social classes and the supposed decrease in the "quality" of the public university courses is perceptible, and its direct relationship to the logic of merit, since, for some educators, these students would have taken the place of other supposedly better prepared students. This situation is also evident in relation to transfer students from other universities, mostly those coming from less prestigious private institutions.

The feeling of having "come in under the door" (expression used by a student to refer to how students are labeled) represents feeling like an intruder, like the one who enters somewhere without having the right, without being invited or wanted (^{COULON, 2008}). In this manner, this student is not raised to the condition of equal to the others in the sense of rights and, therefore, is not seen as worthy of the benefit of studying in a public university. Such a context configures, therefore, a situation of social humiliation that carries in itself repercussions from the point of view of the logic of exclusion, under a class perspective and in the student's intersubjective sphere. The entrance of these students in the public university, by itself, does not solve issues related to social exclusion, as ^{Rhodes (2014}, p. 37) highlights

[...] social inequality and prejudice would not, therefore, be eliminated through the expansion of opportunities or financial aid, because inequality is also characterized as a permanent threat to existence: a stereotypical place, which can prevent subjects from recreating themselves, transforming themselves.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the university is still organized as a space hostile to diversity and, consequently, as non-subsidiary to the symbolic permanence of the new social groups it is willing to serve - or, as ^{Rhodes (2014}) also points out, despite the discourses of democratization of higher education present in laws and decrees, exclusion within universities persists in the form of actions of prejudice and discrimination. Although there has been progress with the expansion of the possibility of access to public higher education and the consequent reduction of exclusion via restricted access, there is evidence that exclusion still takes place within the public higher education system.

However, contrary to what one might imagine, it can be noticed that the situations of prejudice experienced were constituted as a mobilizing force for these students to deconstruct the prejudices and the uncertainties about their presence and permanence in the university.

[...] I was not used to this frenetic rhythm of being all day long in college. Of having to study a lot! You have to dedicate yourself to it to the maximum. If you don't dedicate yourself, you won't succeed. Some people have it easier. In my case, I thought I needed to dedicate twice as much as I did. Because I didn't understand anything the professors said. And the university is like this: "turn around, my son!" (E2, Occupational Therapy student, full-time, 26 years old).

The need to prove good academic performance to be recognized and accepted was preponderant, which was consolidated as a strategy for these students to overcome the feeling or experience of prejudice experienced by the condition of being a quota holder and/or with deficient education in terms of previous education.

We can notice in E2's account that the language used, as can be seen by some terms present there, shows a certain distance from the language of the traditional university environment; that is, the cultural capital, concept elaborated by ^{Bourdieu (2007}), of these "new" students is not the same detected among the profile of students who commonly met and find themselves in this social space. This means another issue related to differentiation, but also a hindrance for the adaptation of these students in the new symbolic universe that represents the public university. However, as ^{Almeida (2006}) had already observed, although at first, they did not have the cultural repertoire valued in the academic environment, these students, despite the difficulties to take the course ahead, ended up developing dispositions such as determination, dedication, and proactive attitude, which boosted their university trajectories. It was possible to verify that there was an intense investment on the part of this group in favor of good academic performance and quality professional training, a strategy that would guarantee prestige and legitimacy before the other players in the academic community.

Comparative studies, as pointed out by ^{Zimerman, Pinezi & Silva (2015}), on quota holders and non-quota holders in public universities demonstrate this same situation in which initially there is great difficulty for quota holders to keep up with the pace of studies, presenting a lower performance than non-quota holders. However, generally between one and two years, the performance of quota students tends to be equal to that of non-quota students.

Still from the standpoint of symbolic permanence, the relationships and interactions that were designed throughout the observed academic trajectories called our attention, as opposed to the mentioned situations of discrimination. It is believed that these also had repercussions on the affiliation and belonging process of the students who participated in the research. This includes interpersonal relationships between students and professors, as well as the relationship or involvement with extracurricular activities that were frequently mentioned in the observed narratives.

Regarding the relationship with the faculty, there was a report from the Occupational Therapy student (S2), who highlighted the role played by two professors at the beginning of the course, a time when she had difficulty with the academic content, having to reconcile the undergraduate course with her work. These professors perceived his difficulties and offered him incentives and guidance for his studies. This, in her evaluation, was essential for her to remain at the university in a period of uncertainty and adversity, especially because the student, at that moment, was forced to reconcile her formal labor activity with her academic activities. Another Social Work student (E4) also mentions that her professors were careful with regard to the students' difficulties in relation to the course, showing themselves to be accessible to dialogue. The Nutrition student (E8) reports having always been encouraged by professors to continue studying and to develop research projects, and this contributed significantly to her student affiliation process. In the same vein, another Marine Sciences student (E10) reports having felt welcomed by the professors, and the university, for her, has become a familiar environment, despite all the infrastructure limitations existing in the newly created course.

[...] The teachers are always helping you, any of them. If you need equipment, a book, they will always help you. I don't know if it's because this course started out small, with few people, and then it grew. (E10, Marine Sciences student, afternoon period, 26 years old).

The role of pedagogical orientation and counseling also played by the professors was crucial when faced with the anguish and doubts in relation to the possibilities of action of the interdisciplinary baccalaureate, a new course modality and little known outside the academic environment.

For authors such as Tinto (1987 apud^{RHODES, 2014}), the informal contact between teachers and students, beyond the mere formality of academic and intellectual work, contributes to the educational development and, consequently, to the affiliation process and the symbolic permanence of these students. ^{Portes (2001}, p. 208) points out that "the occupation of different university spaces, even if it happens slowly and gradually, as the subject feels more 'adapted', appears as an important element for sustaining the academic trajectory and the formation of identity of our young people". In this aspect, it was possible to observe that, among all the participants in this research, only one student reported not having been involved in research projects, extension and/or monitoring. All the others have had extra-classroom experiences, and some have also participated in academic mobility programs. As far as academic scholarships are concerned, with the exception of the aforementioned student, all the other interviewees had obtained scholarships for the activities and/or projects in which they had participated during their undergraduate studies. It is possible, therefore, to infer that, contrary to expectations, these students were able to respond to academic demands, having been recognized for their ability and commitment and, thus, constituted their processes of student affiliation.

On this, ^{Machado (2011}, p. 170) points out that:

In view of the discourses of democratization of federal institutions of higher education, which transformed the possible scenarios of enunciation, both of the students and of the other people who constitute them, at the same time that the hegemonic modes of production of identities are fragmented, by the very diversity that starts to compose this institution, the desires to consume a same mode of subjectivation, characterized by the young intellectual/professional, competitive and who proves their merits, are consolidated.