Introduction

The theme of this paper is the privatization in education, which according to Rikowsky (2017) does not change ownership, the school remains public, however, it is the private sector that takes control and defines its content. We will approach the materialization of this process in the partnership between the State Department of Education (Seduc /AL), and the Lemann Foundation - FL, through the Formar Program, which has as one of its working fronts, the Management for Learning Course. FL has a management proposal for results that is inserted in a general administration management concept, different from the constitutional proposal of democratic management.

This paper is based on research that focuses on the relationship between the public and the private sectors and the implications for democracy, as we understand that education plays an important role in building a democratic society. In this sense, we emphasize that democracy is understood not as an abstraction, but as the “materialization of rights in policies collectively built on the self-criticism of social practice” (^{PERONI, 2013}, p. 1021). This concept of democracy is essential to discuss the standardized and replicable material that arrives at schools via partnerships with private institutions and, in the case of this paper, more specifically the Lemann Foundation.

Another theoretical-methodological point of analysis in our research is that the privatization processes of the public occur via execution and direction, in which the private sector operates directly in the offer of education, or when the private sector acts towards public policies or schools, and the property remains public. In this sense, the public-private relationship has as its conception, not only the property but the corporate projects in dispute from a class perspective (^{PERONI, 2018}). In the case of Brazil, it is also important to emphasize that this relationship did not start in this particular period of capitalism; historically, the dividing lines between the public and private were very thin (^{PIRES; PERONI, 2019}).

Research also shows that partnerships with private institutions bring projects that are standardized in ready-made classes and teacher training (^{ADRIÃO; PERONI, 2011}; ^{CARVALHO, 2018}; ^{CAETANO, 2018}; ^{PERONI; COMERLATTO, 2017}). Standardized and replicable material is used to have control through monitoring, which causes an increasing process of alienation from teaching work. The teacher receives the completed material; they must no longer be an intellectual who produces knowledge, which has profound implications for the democratization of education.

The text is split into two parts. The first deals with administration management as part of the privatization proposal in education (^{RIKOWSKI, 2017}), in the context of new neoliberalism (^{LAVAL; DARDOT, 2017}) and the second generation reformations based on the Entrepreneurial State (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}). The second part of the text deals with the Lemann Foundation, on how the administration management proposals in the partnership materialize, through the content of the Management for Learning course proposal, in the public basic education network of Alagoas.

Administration management as part of the privatization proposal in education, in the context of the new neoliberalism and the second generation reforms that are based on the Entrepreneurial State

^{Rikowski (2017)} points out that there are two basic forms of privatization. The privatization of education, which refers to property and deals with the conversion of State revenue into private profit, and the privatization of education, which refers to forms of control over education by companies. For the author, “privatization in education is not essentially about education. It is about the development of capitalism and the deepening of the domination of capital in specific institutions (schools, colleges, universities, etc.) in contemporary society” (^{RIKOWSKI, 2017}, p. 395). According to our research, Managerialism is part of privatization in education within public institutions.

We also deal with privatization as part of redefining the role of the state, which reorganizes its borders between the public and the private sector. For ^{Wood (2014)}, the national state in the Financialization period has an even more important role for capital than it had before, an analysis contrary to the minimum state, the neoliberal diagnosis that the crisis is in the state and the market is a quality parameter.

For ^{Puello-Socorrás (2008)}, neoliberalism started as a project to renew liberalism that was transformed into an institutional political system. Elements of the initial project have been neglected, but from the beginning, there has been a natural anti-democracy with market rules guiding government policies.

What characterizes the economy of neoliberalism is not the passiveness of the political sphere, or its minimal character, or its shrinkage, but rather the contrary: it is the consistency of governmental interventionism acting as the generator of a new order. This special interventionism must be understood for what it is: a set of both conditioned and conditioning policies, which both depend on and generate a system (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 55).

For the author, the institutionalization of the new neoliberalism has several dimensions: the political dimension that involves the conception of the corporate state and corporate governance; the economic dimension that includes financialization, delinquency, and pension reforms; and the cultural dimension that proposes corporate citizenship, depoliticization and the process of losing solidarity. It is also highlighted that the enterprise is the main focus of this institutionalization process.

These unison attempts aim at the use of management tools originating or stemming from private administration in the management of public affairs (some approaches do not even make any kind of distinction between the public and private spheres, while others ascribe them a few nuances) in such a way that a neoliberal (entrepreneurial) governance can be developed according to their interests and, most certainly, viewing the Market as the exclusive paradigm in the production of "the social" (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 110).

For the author, the state reform proposed by the new neoliberalism is part of the second generation proposals of the Washington Consensus, which focus on the role of NGOs and the role of the enterprise:

Programs related to the “financial self-sufficiency” of entrepreneurship regulated by governments, but this time in the hands of non-conventional commercial banks, that is, Non-Governmental Organizations of the segment in what is called: "Private Financial Funds" (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 103).

The proposal decouples the public from the state, proposing a non-governmental public space in which the state and the market are compatible and friendly (Market friendly policies), being complementary competitors. For this, it is necessary to deepen the commercial logic in the field of the state apparatus and the totality of the social. The author criticizes this proposal and warns that it affects all economic, political, and social relations.

This non-state public method of institutional intervention has, evidently, major implications. But, surely the most significant is its claim to deepen the univocal aspect of the commercial logic in the domain of the state apparatus and the political relations that structure the entirety of "the social" today (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 108, bold by the authors).

It is vital to remember that Brazil already materialized this proposal in 1995, with the Master Plan for State Reform in Brazil approved during the Fernando Henrique Cardoso administration. Social policies were considered non-exclusive services of the State and, therefore, of non-governmental public or private property, no longer belonging to the strategic nucleus. Thus, that must be exercised by society through privatization in different ways: privatization, which is the passage of profitable services to the market, outsourcing is the process of transferring auxiliary services to the private sector or of supporting and publicizing which is the “transfer for the non-governmental public sector of social and scientific services that the State currently provides”. (^{PEREIRA, 1997}, p. 7- 8).

The plan also proposed management based on managerial principles and the constitution of “quasi-markets”. (^{PEREIRA, 1997}, p. 8). It is what the author calls Corporate Government that no longer executes public policies that materialize rights, but serve the client: “The market – not the State or the Government – is the one that best allocates resources; and only individuals can be ‘the best judges of their own well-being’, since they, in their role as clients, ‘know what is important’” (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 112).

^{Laval and Dardot (2017)} also deal with this particular period of capitalism with a deepening of the withdrawal of the State's role towards social policies with profound implications for democracy.

The new neoliberalism is the continuation of the old one in a worse way. The global normative framework that inserts individuals and institutions within an implacable logic of war, is increasingly reinforced and progressively ends the capacity for resistance, deactivating the collective. This anti-democratic nature of the neoliberal system largely explains the endless spiral of the crisis and the acceleration before our eyes of the process of de-democratization, by which democracy is empty of its substance, without being formally suppressed. (LAVAL; ^{DARDOT, 2019}, p. 11)

For the authors, the crisis exists, it is structural, however, instead of being weakened by the crisis, neoliberalism is strengthened and advances in the restrictions of state spending on public policies:

(...) The system is in crisis and its crisis is both chronic and comprehensive; it extends to all aspects of reality since neoliberal logic does not leave any dimension of human existence untouched. However, the formula also means that the system feeds on the crisis and that it is strengthened by the crisis (...) they force governments to submit to the consequences of the previous policies that they have carried out themselves (^{LAVAL; DARDOT, 2017}, p. 31).

It is not without reason that this management model for education resurfaces what is wanted to control school actions, given that these are also being conceived, externally, as pointed out by Puello-Socorrás:

The commodification of public affairs results, on the one hand, in the 'thinning out' and in the systematic reduction of the state apparatus (in its empirical and quantitative nature); on the other, it results in the increase of outsourcing or “contracting-out” through the reiteration of mechanisms such as outsourcing and complementary mechanisms, as mentioned previously (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 114-115).

^{Clarke and Newman (2012, p. 355)} situate the concept of managerial state: “We talked about a managerial state because we wanted to locate managerialism as a cultural formation and a distinct set of ideologies and practices that formed one of the underpinnings of the new political agreement that we have been emerging”. For the authors, the main question was:

Breaking and redesigning the political-economic agreement between capital and labor, whether it is registered in the welfare state itself, or the traditions of Tripartite wage negotiations between unions, employers, and the state. What happened next included a new emphasis on market-centric approaches, with a return to contracting, buyer-supplier separation and domestic or quasi-markets; a mixed economy emerging from service provision and financing; a complex process of restructuring and deregulation of the workforce; and a subsequent rhetorical privilege of the client or consumer of public services (^{Clarke et al., 2007}). These changes were supported both by an ideological belief in the power of management to produce transformative changes and the dispersion of state power to a framework of empowered management agents (^{CLARKE; NEWMAN, 2012}, p. 357-358).

The concept of managerial state, for the authors, involves managerialism as an ideology and managerialization, as the process of establishing managerial authority over corporate resources (material, human or symbolic). Management provides ideological and organizational coherence for the reforms of the State, which for authors are devices of accountability and evaluation. Managerialism is essential for a reformation project, even where public services were not fully privatized, they were required to perform as if they were in a competitive market.

State dispersion is the basis for managerialism. It occurs via the transfer of resources to Non-Governmental Organizations – non-elected NGOs –, and occurs as an internal logic in organizations through intra-organizational competition. At the same time that they should be more flexible, the institutions are less autonomous, since control occurs through performance evaluation.

Public managers (or entrepreneurs), leaving aside their submission to rigid adherence to bureaucratic rules and procedures, are guided by creativity, flexibility, and the maximization of “unexpected” profits and benefits, obtaining (measurable) ‘results’, flexible innovation in their management and presumed altruism towards the public that, in the end, materializes in market contexts (^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}, p. 114, bold by the authors).

We understand that the State chooses to hire the private sector to bring the logic of the private sector into the school. The private sector promotes an educational policy with a market logic (^{CLARKE; NEWMAN, 2012}; ^{PUELLO-SOCORRÁS, 2008}), determining the direction of the proposal to be implemented by the educational system. This form of standardization in pedagogical practice, with the establishment of routines, has taken away from school its autonomy, despite the widespread speeches on democratic management, as is the case of the public-private partnership between Seduc/AL and FL.

How the administration management proposals materialize in the partnership of the education network in Alagoas and the Lemann Foundation, through the content of the Management for Learning course proposal

Starting its activities back in 2002, with the businessman Jorge Paulo Lemann as president, Lemann Foundation presents itself as a family organization that claims to be a non-profit organization. Its focus is on two major fronts, quality public education, and leadership for social impact. The Formar Program is leading this, which consists of a partnership between the Lemann Foundation and governments, implemented in all regions of the country as a training course for managers so that they fit into a new school model, whose content of the course proposal has brought a new paradigm for education, both concerning the practice of managers, as well as pedagogical and teachers. Nowadays, the Program has already more than 25 education networks, in all regions of the country, reaching more than 1 million students and 2000 thousand teachers (^{FUNDAÇÃO LEMANN, 2019}, p. 15).

The beginning of this entire movement was publicly advertised by FL for the education networks to apply to have it as a partner, specifying characteristics and requirements to be met. Once selected the official representatives of the network sign, together with FL, a partnership term. In the term, FL is called a non-profit Institute, while ELOS Educacional, co-promoter, responsible for all didactic, curricular and hiring of training personnel, named only as “Elos”, making its characteristic evident for a profit entity as per the excerpt on its website (^{ELOS EDUCACIONAL, 2019}).

Some points of the partnership term model³ provided by Seduc/AL, reveal the managerialist emphasis, through the inspection character on the actions of the managers, in schools, to guarantee the fulfillment of the standardized contents/activities, as a condition for the certification of the course. Reaffirming the management model, another clause aims to guarantee authorization so that managers can freely film the classroom to intervene in the methodology of the teacher, assuming its improvement. The Seduc/AL team of technicians will act as multipliers in the “training” for technicians from the Regional Management of Education (GERE), preparing them for on-site monitoring in schools, where they will supervise the activities carried out, as an action plan developed during the course.

Further, in the partnership term model, it is determined that every month ELOS must inform Seduc/AL through a report, about the performance of the students, including practical activities, which, under the guidance of the course, should be carried out at school with the whole community, that is, activities such as pedagogical meetings, institutional evaluation, observation and filming of classes, which indicates the school's little autonomy to manage its actions.

Lasting up to two years, the program operates at four levels of the network: the leadership and technical staff of the Secretary’s Office, and the teachers and school management. This way, the program assists in the “creation of strategies for the education department to identify its great challenges and opportunities” (^{FUNDAÇÃO LEMANN, 2020b}, p. 6); thus, FL maintains control over all the movements developed in the consultancy, including the ones involved, since the work is first aligned with the managers of Seduc/AL, through “management with a focus on results” (partnership also signed between Seduc/AL and FL), and all guidelines and referrals to ensure the implementation of the work are defined among representatives of Lemann Foundation, Elos and Seduc/AL.

The Formar Program has broad educational characteristics, as it influences the definition of educational policies in public education systems; articulates the broadband internet network, in partnership with the government, as a way to consolidate its innovation proposal, and promotes continuing education for managers of the network's schools, to which the Lemann Foundation provides advice.

The main objective of the educational policy front is to support the continuous improvement, development, and implementation of educational policies; this way, the works are more directly linked to the leadership and technical teams of the Department to, based on a diagnosis, improve pedagogical and educational processes. To guarantee students' learning, the internal structuring of the department has as main work areas: Strategic planning and improvement of the organizational structure; Curriculum; Network-level learning assessment; Pedagogical Monitoring; Continuous training of teachers, managers, and technicians; Collective planning time in schools; Class observation with formative feedback; Strengthening School Leadership; Communication and engagement in the Department and with schools; Optimization of Internal Processes; Diagnosis of financial management and recommendations for improvement, as stated in the notice of the Formar Program of FL, (^{FUNDAÇÃO LEMANN, 2020b}, p. 6).

The Management for Learning course and the Consolidation of Administration Management in Alagoas

The state network is divided into Regional Management of Education (GERES) that acts as articulators in Seduc/AL, receiving the guidelines, determinations, and referrals to be developed within the scope of its regional responsibility. It is worth mentioning that these regions were not always called managers before they were recognized as Regional Education Coordinators (CREs); the name change took place in 2015 during the first term of Governor Renan Filho, with the Deputy Governor, Luciano Barbosa, both from the MDB party, as Secretary of State for Education. Besides, at the same time, the positions of regional managers, previously appointed by the portfolio's executive power, will be filled through bonuses for that public school director who achieved the highest Basic Education Development Index - IDEB, i.e., every two years, the regional leadership changes to “reward” the school leader who guaranteed prominence for his school. Thus, this performance bonus policy, in a way, generates competition between school institutions.

When treating as 'managers' those responsible for the functioning of the secretary’s offices, the business logic is conveyed to the public sector, making public services similar to a business. Furthermore, the figure of the manager takes on a personification opposite to that of the politician, professional, or administrator (NEWMAN; ^{CLARKE, 2012}, p.359).

From a managerial perspective, vertical and centralized practices prevail, leading society to comply with imposed determinations – in the case of this research, the school management team, which is now controlled by Seduc/AL, through Pedagogical Support Technicians of the Regional Education Managements, which systematically monitor the actions planned/developed by the schools.

In 2017, the State of Alagoas registered 503,322 students in elementary school and 118,933 in high school. It is worth mentioning that 95% of the enrollment in the initial years of elementary school and 75% of the final years of elementary school are in the municipal network, which is why the State, through Seduc/AL, entered into a partnership with all municipalities in the state, through the Program called “Escola 10” (School 10). The Program results from State Law No. 8,048/2018 (^{ALAGOAS, 2018}) where each school, based on a diagnosis made, signs a commitment term to fulfill a goal determined by Seduc/AL, always higher than the target projected in the school's IDEB. Once achieved the goal, the school will be awarded a bonus – this time, the bonus guarantees the 14th salary to all school staff – according to State Law No. 8,224/2019 (^{ALAGOAS, 2019}). This program was an initiative by Seduc/Al to improve the state's IDEB.

This time, the controversy about bonuses or awards for management and teachers who reach performance goals is rekindled, as a way to hold the school responsible for the obtained results. This policy of accountability in education has been dividing opinions regarding its feasibility: on the one hand, managers who consider recognition on their merits; on the other, the Union of Education Workers (SINTEAL) and the teachers who are not benefited, consider that the schools that most need incentives to improve their indicators are exactly the ones that are left without investment. This award ends up promoting a competition with which schools seek to achieve their goals to receive recognition, through the bonus, signaling Freitas's criticism:

[...] in the form of a “theory of accountability”, meritocratic and managerial, where the same technical rationality is proposed as in the form of “standards”, or expectations of learning measured in standardized tests, with emphasis on the processes of school workforce management (process control, bonuses and punishments), anchored in the same conceptions from behaviorist psychology, strengthened by contemporary econometrics (^{FREITAS, 2012}, p. 383).

The content of the Management for Learning Course Proposal

In the “Continuing Education” area, the Lemann Foundation has expanded its service in the education networks, with a focus on training school managers through the Management for Learning Course (GPA). It is worth mentioning that the way the course is presented, through the distance education system, has caused controversy in schools, since the level of requirements has been superimposed on the pedagogical accompaniment inherent to the teaching and learning process. Along the same line, there is also a change in the behavior of school management, which has shifted the focus of the process only to the result of convenient indicators to meet the objectives of the Alagoas educational policy, anchored in the public-private partnership, with the Lemann Foundation, and, thus, distancing itself from the democratization of education.

Analyzing the conditions imposed in the public notice, we highlight points that lead us to identify other managerial characteristics, such as the imposition of FL when it establishes that Seduc must be following changes in the organizational structure of the pedagogical department and the functional assignment of its employees; the direction and contents of the partnership proposal, the regulatory nature of monitoring compliance with the actions established by the teachers, disrespecting the pedagogical autonomy of the teachers and the school.

Such monitoring has been causing concerns in the pedagogical relationships that involve pedagogical coordination and teachers, given the accumulation of spreadsheets and forms that need to be filled in to guarantee evidence of the actions carried out. This also involves observing the on-site classes taught and preparing the work plans in line with the models indicated by Seduc/AL, in collective meetings within the school, the so-called HTPC - Collective Pedagogical Work Hours.

This model proposed in the course has profound implications for changes in the boundaries between the public and private sector: “This form of public dimension, naturally denationalized, commodified, and preponderantly coordinated by the market, would dictate the pattern of organization and the main rule of social functioning with the subsumption of the State”. This being "a box of tools derived from (private) Business Administration that are applied without suspicion to the public segment” (^{PUELLO-SOCARRÁS, 2008}, p. 113-114).

These characteristics identified by the author highlight the transfer of responsibility from the role of the State to the private sector in directing education policies.

Regarding the content, forming the course program, the participants received from FL the guiding book for the first part of the course, serving as a probable manual for the development of strategic planning practices at the school - “Strategic Planning: an instrument for the public school manager” (^{DALCORSO, 2017}), written by Elo’s coordinator, Claudia Dalcorso, where a progressive language and a theoretical framework compatible with the view of democratic management are observed, however, what we will observe in the proposal of the course content are terms such as “shared decisions”, which go against the grain of democratic management, making the community itself responsible for the success or failure of its formation, without any decision-making power, shifting the hard-won democratic management model to the managerial one, which we now experience with excess bureaucracy, competitiveness, routines, standardization and search for results, inside and outside the school.

As the conclusions, the author highlights issues such as: “the conflicts that schools are experiencing and their constant search to improve the quality of the service offered”; “external evaluation mechanisms are increasingly exposing the weaknesses of educational systems”, and that “strategies to achieve better results must involve the largest possible number of social agents”; “use of management tools, such as strategic planning, to contribute to the organization of the school's daily actions” (^{DALCORSO, 2017}, p. 66). Therefore, the objective is for the management team to make a cross between the items identified as relevant to be included in the initial action plan, confronting and establishing guidelines that should reverberate in actions to be developed, after the strategic assessment F.O.F.A.

^{Paula (2015, electronic document)}, informs that F.O.F.A. framework is a business analysis tool, widely used in corporate spaces whose name is an acronym in Portuguese for Strengths, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Threats, also known as the SWOT framework (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats). Perform a F.O.F.A. analysis leads the company to think about the favorable and unfavorable aspects of the business, its owners, and the market”. This framework is being used at the time of the strategic evaluation, to detect the strengths and weaknesses of a company (school?), to make it more efficient and competitive, starting to see its indicators as the main objective of its educational work in order to reach agreed goals and that will result in bonuses to the workers of the schools that reach them, denying the true social function of the school which is to guarantee systematized knowledge.

In this analysis model, “advantages and disadvantages compared to the competition” are identified (would that be the other schools?). From there, weaknesses can be eliminated or improved, and strengths are developed to become key parts of business success (education? learning?), therefore, its impacts can be measured (evaluated?) with the SWOT Framework, which makes the company (school?) more prepared for its possible effects. In other words, the manager's job, among other things, will be to control the indicators of the external evaluations to obtain an ideal result in the IDEB and to be able to guarantee the bonus (14th salary) for all the school's staff, as occurs in the public education in Alagoas. When issues reverberate to decision-making, we know that they arrive ready, however, with the subtlety of those who are consulting or suggesting something leading professionals to better embrace “the suggestions”, the question is, that it is not always possible to develop what is proposed in the routine or the standardization of actions, either due to the limited time to fill out forms and plans or due to the lack of material or human conditions.

The evaluation process should serve to be able to manage actions that effectively were able to minimize the great obstacles that hinder the learning of its students. On the contrary, we have seen changes in the more energetic and authoritarian way of charging actions to teachers, who feel pressured in fulfilling the tasks imposed by Seduc/AL, leading them to a feeling of guilt, when educational indicators are not achieved.

The evaluation of the results seeks, simply, to identify the performance of the students in the Basic Education Assessment System (SAEB), from the results of the proficiencies in mathematics and Portuguese language, since these imply results for the IDEB. From then on, all actions are designed and focused on meeting needs and resolving critical situations, such as dropout and failure rates. It is urgent to emphasize that in the way and at the pace that the actions are placed and charged, schools are unable to manage and much less commit themselves to the cause of evasion, since they need to fulfill a whole ritual of tasks, predetermined by Seduc/AL, and that are studied in the second half of the course, namely: Know the theory of Constructive Alignment; (Re)signifying elements that make up a formative agenda; (Recognize) know the classroom observation methodology proposed in the course; Systematize important characteristics for feedback; Reflect on the value of the training process in your professional development (^{FUNDAÇÃO LEMANN, 2020a}) all with their respective form, to emphasize the standardization of actions. This time, it leads us to reflect, once again, that the State transfers all responsibilities to the school community, so that it feels fully responsible for its results, demonstrating, yet another characteristic of managerial bias, in the administration of schools.

The book, “Aula Nota 10: 49 técnicas para ser um professor campeão de audiência” (^{LEMOV, 2011}), is used as the main reference for the themes (actions) covered. In it, the author makes it clear that the teacher has no mastery of appropriate techniques to pass the necessary content to students. Viviane Senna, president of the Ayrton Senna Institute (IAS), points in this same direction, when she says that teachers do not know, so the contents must be strongly structured:

The materials are strongly structured, in order to ensure that even an inexperienced teacher, or with insufficient preparation – as is the case of many teachers in Brazil –, is able to provide the student with a quality program, with a high degree of student participation. in the classroom, at school, and in the community (^{SENNA, 2000}, p. 146).

Which leads us to agree with ^{D’ávila, (2013, p. 11564)} according to the statement “[... ] This material is more of a didactic manual, which expresses a prescription for the teacher”, so that the teacher makes consultations whenever working on the contents of their classes, in a standardized and replicable way, as if the classes were homogeneous and all students were in the same level of learning, removing from the teacher their didactic autonomy to decide from the diagnosis, what needs to be worked with the student, causing what ^{Rikowski (2017)} calls “taking control of education by companies, in opposition to direct privatization”.

We agree with ^{Paro (2008, p. 61)}, that in administration management everything is centralized in the image of the manager and in the need to control all processes, particularly the efficiency of results. This concept of control, in managerialism, considers that, in the capitalist production process, it is inevitable, at the same time, the “process of capital appreciation and the process of exploitation of the workforce”, exactly what we have seen happening, currently, in schools in the state of Alagoas.

Concluding remarks

This paper sought to bring elements of how the change in school management is linked to a project much bigger than the change in management – it is related to corporate projects in dispute. It also discussed how administration management materializes a broader proposal of business status.

From the analysis of the documents presented, it was possible to notice that they endorse not only the “ideology of managerialism in education but also express the conformation and production of a new educational ‘lexicon’, a hybrid of pedagogical and managerial” (^{SHIROMA; CAMPOS; GARCIA, 2005}, p.438). It is also the documents that show us the centrality of the Lemann Foundation, in the content and implementation of the policy of continuing education for school managers in the State Education System of Alagoas, through the Management for Learning Program.

As the Management for Learning course is being conducted, we can consider that the referrals are leading the school, the loss of autonomy in the way of conducting the entire pedagogical process. That said, we emphasize that it is the teacher who knows their students and, therefore, only the teacher, together with the pedagogical team and the councils, can define strategies for the teaching and learning process, aiming to overcome abstractions that only aim at results in rhetorical practices, corroborating with indications of managerialism.

We understand that we are experiencing great setbacks in education and, amongst them, the return of the technicist trend where models are reproduced and students only need to guarantee good grades, despite all the appeal that foundations and institutes have been making to convince society that they are the “salvation” for Brazilian education. Not surprisingly, his speeches are progressive, bringing technological language (and not just language, but products) with strong scientific rigor, which helps to fill the gaps left by the public authorities. In this sense, the state network of Alagoas lives the contradictions of a silent correlation of forces, on the one hand, the Ordinances published by Seduc/AL to determine the fulfillment of actions, previously directed by the Lemann Foundation through the Management for Learning course; on the other hand, teachers who feel repressed and pressured to fulfill the determinations at the time that managers monitor and charge for actions promptly.

What we have noticed is that these changes have been shifting the focus of education to a competitive market that requires efficiency and specific skills that lead to a dispute, inside and outside the school. Following this logic, the product to be delivered to social matters, and no longer the process of development of the subject, as guaranteed by our Federal Constitution/1988. At the same time that partnerships increase, social policies are reduced, especially those recognized as universal rights – as is the case of education.

We understand that this process of privatization of the public has great implications for the democratization of education, which is serious, given the important role of the school in the construction of a democratic society. Assuming that democracy is a learning process, that nobody is born democratic, and that people are learning about democracy in conflict, in relationships, the role of the school in this construction process is fundamental. According to ^{Thompson (1981)}, democracy is born from experience, it is by experiencing democracy that we become democratic individuals.

Democracy is pedagogical, it is not simply the means – democratic management – but an end in itself. Democracy learning is a school subject. Likewise, a democratic society is not built without access to knowledge. People will only participate effectively if they know what they are deciding if they can read, understand, take a stand, and relate. They cannot read a newspaper and think that an economy article is not related to health or education. But they can only relate by having access to knowledge, which is very different from access to education.

Access to knowledge is much more than knowing the number of points in Mathematics or Portuguese; it means being able to read, interpret, relate, and understand oneself in the world. This is also the construction of a democratic society, which cannot be built without knowledge. Relationships based on democratic principles are also built in the process of collectivizing decisions. ^{Vieira (1998)} points out that there is no citizenship without rights and a state. Citizenship rights are historically born in society. They are not a gift. Policies are always the result of popular complaints. They were the struggles of humanity. So, when we go backwards in the democratization of education, we are going backwards in the historical struggles of humanity.

We question the withdrawal of the process of collectivization of decisions, because, as it is written in the LDB and in the Constitution – this should be the role of the school community –, and a private institution arrives to monitor, train teachers and deliver ready material for the teacher to be just the executor, alienated from his work, separating those who think from those who perform, it is not constitutional.

We emphasize that partnerships, and especially the one analyzed in this article, bring administration management by results to school, which has administration management as a parameter (SOUSA, 2009), to the detriment of democratic management. Administration management starts from the neoliberal assumption that the public is doing poorly and the market has to be the standard of quality. As soon as it is privatized (the idea is the free market), and what remains in the public starts to have market rules, because the idea is that quality is in the market and not in the public, therefore, the quality of the market it is the product, competition and meritocracy, and not democracy, respect for the different, solidarity, the collective construction of knowledge. It is the idea of meritocracy that prevails, that it is necessary to be better than others; which is completely contrary to the idea of democratic management (PERONI, 2019)

Thus, we witnessed disputed corporate and education projects. The content of the school is very important. Approximately 80% of the Brazilian population attending elementary and high school is enrolled in public schools. The number of students enrolled in private schools does not reach 20%. The generation that is in school, which is mostly in public school, will be the basis of our society. So, when we deal with the relationship between the public and the private sector, the focus is on the dispute for the content of education, for the training of teachers, for the training of new generations, for the construction of democracy in our country.