Introduction

Schooling in Brazil has revealed one of the faces of social exclusion, since, throughout history, popular classes have been deprived of the right to quality teaching. For this reason, even though there is expansion of places in schools, the dropout, failure and distortion rates between chronological age and the year of schooling are extremely high, indicating a great distance between access to school and access to knowledge (^{ESTEBAN, 2015}).

^{Pereira (2017}) states that such a contradiction expresses the dialectical movement of the appropriation of knowledge in the capitalist mode of production, as this system seeks to invest in an education capable of equipping the workforce that will become the productive force of our society. Thus, it becomes an imminent danger for the student to understand the reality and try to break with the current economic order. Thus, what the capitalist mode intends to do is to avoid the effective appropriation of knowledge by the least-favoured social classes.

When dealing with a high school project integrated with a technical education, ^{Ramos (2008}) points out that the axes of this type of education, which are work, science and culture, must try to overcome the conflict that permeates the school, or to educate citizens, or to train people able to develop productive work. Therefore, the author stands for a curricular construction aimed at comprehensive training, guaranteeing students an omnilateral education. The purpose is to make students able, from the knowledge acquired, to transform their reality, building fairer social conditions.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to have a kind of knowledge certification, which is done through assessments. However, ^{Esteban (2015}) states that the hegemonic educational project is far from developing learning assessments that are instruments capable of helping students in social transformation, because such assessments become means of regulation, control and standardization that strengthens the classificatory sense and excluding, feeding the system that generates social inequality.

According to ^{Luckesi (2001}), school educational assessment needs to overcome the authoritarian view that generates punitive pedagogical practices and that is used to preserve a capitalist and unjust society that domesticates and oppresses students. It must become an instrument that is used as a diagnosis for social growth and transformation.

According to ^{Bedin and Del Pino (2018}), the assessment process must have a mediating and formative character and not be reduced to tests and exams. The teacher, in this case, must, when assessing the student, diagnose and reorient him, observing the satisfactory points in order to reinforce them and, in relation to the negative points, try to overcome them, so that the assessed subject becomes critical, reflective and autonomous. This is supposed to happen from the construction of knowledge in the relationship between the teacher and the student.

According to ^{Fernandes (2011}), formative assessment, when it is at the service of learning, contributes to improving the ways of learning and teaching. In this context, ^{Perrenoud (1999}) considers formative assessment as one that helps the student to learn and progress continuously, through the self-regulation of learning, which should be systematic and individualized in order to improve learning. Thus, from the observation of the teacher, the necessary interventions will be outlined in the classroom. It is an interactive regulation in which observation and intervention take place in real time and are inseparable from didactic interactions.

Accordingly, this article intends, when studying the assessment of learning in a formative perspective, to contribute to a better reflection on how this practice is being built in a Campus of the Pernambuco Federal Institute (IFPE), based on the perceptions of students and on the documents studied.

Thus, the primary goal was to understand the assessment of learning from the perception of students from the integrated high school of that institute and from documentary analysis.

This text is organized as follows: initially, the methodology is presented, containing information on the methodological path chosen for the construction of the work, followed by the topic referring to the discussion of the results obtained from the study of IFPE documents and some normative acts that regulate education in Brazil on assessment of learning, in addition to the discussion of semi-structured interviews carried out with integrated high school students.

Then, the conclusion will be presented, listing the most important points discussed throughout this article. Finally, the bibliographic reference used will be available.

Methodology

The research content is part of a study carried out in the master’s course⁵, which was developed in a qualitative, exploratory and descriptive perspective. The data were collected from the mapping of sources such as the institutional documents of the IFPE: Institutional Development Plan (PDI), Institutional Pedagogical Political Project (PPPI) and the Institutional Academic Organization. Other guidelines and norms that make up the public collections and the legal framework of the Brazilian education were also included, such as: the National Curriculum Guidelines (DCN) for mid-level technical education and the National Educational Bases and Guidelines Law (LDB).

Additionally, semi-structured interviews were carried out which, according to ^{Minayo (2009}), can provide the researcher with information conceived in the dialogue with the respondent, based on the interviewee’s own perception of their real context.

Five students regularly enrolled in the integrated high school of an IFPE’s Campus were interviewed, four female students and one male student, who were already attending classes from the common curriculum matrix and also from the technical base, from courses of labor safety, electrotechnical, electronics and buildings. These students were invited and agreed to participate in the research after signing the Informed Consent Form (ICF).

The selection of participants occurred for the sake of conveninence. The number of five students was based on the theoretical saturation point that corresponds to the phase in which the researcher, when observing the data collected, finds that new facts do not appear and that the concepts of the theory are properly developed (^{RIBEIRO et al., 2018}).

All interviews were pre-scheduled at the time the students were already on Campus, not generating a demand for travel and extra costs. In addition, the interviews were conducted in a room that offered privacy to the interviewee and the interviewer. All interviews were recorded on an audio recorder. The content of the interviews was transcribed, double checked, guaranteeing the reliability of the participants’ discursive content. Subsequently, the audios were discarded.

Data collection was carried out in April 2019, after approval of the project by the ethics committee of the Integrated Faculty of Pernambuco (FACIPE), which took place in March of the same year, under opinion number 3.196.987.

In the document analysis, exploratory readings of the chosen documents were carried out in order to identify the orientations that these documents offered and that served as a basis for the development of the assessment processes in education, mainly in professional and technological education.

According to Lüdke and André (2004), documentary analysis is a valuable technique for the exploration of qualitative data in order to add information to those already obtained, or to add new data to the studied theme. It is a rich source from which evidence that guides the researcher's statements can be extracted.

The treatment of qualitative data obtained in semi-structured interviews was carried out based on the content analysis proposed by ^{Bardin (2011}), which allows the best organization of ideas and the objectivity of the results.

The technique used for content analysis, in this research, was the “context units” (^{BARDIN, 2011}, p. 38) related to the research categories. For ^{Bardin (2011}, p. 39), “the categories are types of drawers or significant rubrics that allow the classification of the constituent elements of meaning of the message”.

After the floating reading of the transcribed interviews, the initial categories that were most repeated in the students’ speeches and that represented the context unit were identified, and these, in turn, are linked to the issues addressed in the interviews.

The categories were then grouped into subcategories that were critically analyzed and whose thematic core allowed to reflect on how the assessment of learning in the integrated high school of an IFPE’s Campus is developed, through the perceptions of students, as described in chart 1:

Results and Discussions

The analysis of some guiding documents will be presented below so that there is a better understanding of the context in which the assessment is inserted and the analysis of the categories arising from the content of the students’ speeches, maintaining confidentiality regarding their identifications.

Documentary Analysis

In the documentary analysis, the documents that guide the assessment of learning were studied both at national level, such as the DCN for technical education at secondary level and the LDB, and at the level of the internal documents of the IFPE, such as the PDI, the PPPI and the Institutional Academic Organization.

In the analysis of the DCN for mid-level technical professional education, it is observed, specifically in Title III, which talks about evaluation, use and certification, and in Chapter I, which deals with assessment and achievement:

Art. 34 The assessment of students’ learning aims at their progression towards achieving the professional profile of completion, being continuous and cumulative, with the prevalence of qualitative aspects over quantitative ones, as well as the outcomes throughout the process over those of eventual final exams (BRASIL, 2012b, p. 9-10).

It can be noticed, in article 34, that the assessment is in the context discussed in this research. That is, an assessment process that aims to help the student’s development and not just measure his knowledge in unique stages that do not complement each other and that facilitate the student’s failure during his educational path.

In addition, one must give value to the qualitative aspects and students should be given opportunities to make progress, especially when the results of the assessments are not satisfactory.

When discussing this guideline, ^{Rodrigues (2018}) states that assessment of learning addressed in the DCN for technical vocational education at secondary level is not very different from how it is presented in other teaching modalities. The specificity of this guideline is related to the contextualization that must exist between theory and professional practice. Thus, teachers will have to assess the student according to their performance not only in theory, but in practice, contributing, also, so that this student can be inserted in the working environment.

On the other hand, LDB, as amended by Law 13.716, of ^{September 24, 2018}, in Title IV, which deals with the organization of national education, highlights, in Article 13, that teachers are responsible for: “III - ensuring student learning; IV - establishing recovery strategies for low-income students ”(BRASIL, 1996, art. 13). In section IV, which specifically presents high school, LDB brings in article 35-A:

§ 8th Contents, methodologies and forms of procedural and formative assessment will be organized in the educational networks through theoretical and practical activities, oral and written tests, seminars, projects and online activities, in such a way that at the end of the high school the student demonstrates:

I - mastery of scientific and technological principles that govern modern production;

II - knowledge of contemporary forms of language (BRASIL, 1996, p.25).

On the teacher’s task established in article 13, it can be understood, once again, that the role of the teacher is to stimulate his students in the teaching-learning process and to ensure that the knowledge discussed in the classroom is acquired by the student, in order to provide his development, especially when this student has a low performance.

In this scenario, ^{Luckesi (2001}) points out that it is necessary a critical teaching practice, interested in effective learning by the student and that takes into account political, scientific and methodological objectives. Therefore, the author considers that it is necessary to have an active transmission and assimilation of the subjects worked, as a response to a systematic form of teaching present in the way the teacher plans, performs and evaluates the entire teaching-learning process. Thus, this teacher will be able to achieve the expected results.

In paragraph 8th of article 35-A, it is said that the student needs to present, at the end of high school, the ability to master certain principles and knowledge, such as: the domain of scientific and technological principles and knowledge of contemporary forms of language. Although it is considered important for the student to achieve these characteristics at the end of high school, this refers to the idea that the learning process that occurs throughout the student’s journey is forgotten, even if at the beginning of the paragraph the terms procedural and formative assessment appear.

In turn, ^{Vasconcellos (2008}) argues that the teacher needs, as there is the construction of knowledge by the student, to assess him during the process, ascertaining his stage of development and not judging him at some specific moment. Therefore, it cannot be taken into account that, only at the end of high school, the student shows that he has the knowledge recommended by the school.

From that moment on, IFPE’s internal documents will be analyzed with regard to the assessment of learning. Initially, it was found that the PDI presents a formative and diagnostic assessment in a continuous and permanent process, enabling the teacher to understand how the student’s learning takes place.

The conception of teaching and learning assessment that should guide the IFPE’s assessment system is that of a formative and diagnostic assessment, no longer having the role of verifying content apprehension. This will allow the teacher to have a broad view of how the teaching and learning process is taking place, in each stage and curricular component, so that, from there, he can plan or review plans whenever necessary. Assessment must be experienced, therefore, as a permanent process (BRASIL, 2015, p. 137).

The assessment also needs to individually monitor the growth of the students’ skills and the specific objectives of the curriculum components. These, in turn, must be clear and pre-established, prioritizing qualitative aspects over quantitative ones (BRASIL, 2015).

It can be seen that the IFPE’s PDI is consistent with what is standardized by the DCN and the LDB, already discussed here. Also, when dealing with the design of the curriculum that underlies the identity of the IFPE, the PPPI brings, among several elements, the development of the procedural, training and continuous evaluation that can respect the pace of learning of students and the diversities present in the classes, be they social, cultural, religious, gender, among others (BRASIL, 2012a).

The curriculum design proposals that will provide the basis for the construction of IFPE's identity refer: [...] To te valorization of the individual’s experiential knowledge, social, artistic, cultural, ethnic, religious, gender, physical, emotional and mental conditions, of special educational needs, privileging the humanistic dimension; [...] To the guarantee of contextualization, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity; To the use of multiple strategies and languages that facilitate learning; To the respect for the learning pace of each student; To the processual, formative and continuous assessment (BRASIL, 2012a, p. 79-80).

Regarding the existing diversity in the school environment, ^{Silva (2013}) recognizes the importance of the teacher to understand the different histories and personalities of his students, with the intention of making the contents, objectives, and ways of assessing more flexible, contextualizing his pedagogical practice and the curriculum to the reality present in the classroom. It is up to the school, then, to provide the means for achieving meaningful learning on the part of students and that generates citizenship.

Just like the internal IFPE documents mentioned, the Institutional Academic Organization also stands out for the same form of formative assessment. The assessment instruments used, therefore, must be defined in the teaching plan of the curriculum components. The Academic Organization, in addition, displays other details, as we can see in chapter XIII, which deals with the assessment system and, in section I, the learning assessment process:

Art. 143 The result of the assessment of learning of each curricular component must express the level of students’ academic performance, expressed by a score from 0 (zero) to 10 (ten), considering up to the first decimal place [...] (BRASIL, 2014, p. 42).

The Institutional Academic Organization, in addition, states that the student, in order to be approved in the integrated technical courses, must have an attendance equal to or greater than 75% of the total and average workload equal to or greater than 6.0 in each curricular component. If this student fails more than three curricular components, he can only continue his studies after attending again the classes he failed (BRASIL, 2014).

Article 143 and the following discussion by the Institutional Academic Organization emphasize the grade, as a way of quantitatively evaluating the student, in order to guarantee or not his access to the subsequent modules or series (BRASIL, 2014).

It is known, therefore, that this modality of quantitative assessment is present in school contexts, since the school system, being in line with the logic of the market, needs to register in some way, in the school history, the learning results of the student. This must be done through a language that is accessible to the insertion of this student in selection processes that allow him to have access to future economic activities in his professional field.

When discussing the meaning of the terms testing and measuring, ^{Hoffmann (2017}) argues that there is a vague and confused conception on the part of teachers in relation to these terms. So, what happens is an indiscriminate use of numerical degrees attributed to many aspects of the student at school, including behavior and interest, although not everything can be measured.

The author believes that the consequence of assigning grades or concepts without previously established criteria is to generate arbitrariness, since the teacher will act subjectively, without having the clarity of the knowledge he is investigating (^{HOFFMANN, 2017}).

It is noticed, throughout the analysis of the documents, that all of them are in consensus when it comes to assessments of learning, not least because such documents defend the integral formation based on work, science and culture, a tripod that supports education professional and technological.

The assessment of learning is placed at this scenario, as one of the elements that help in the realization of this educational model, since it is presented in the documents, above all, as formative, diagnostic and continuous, even though there are some aspects of traditional assessment.

Therefore, these documents, in essence, stress that any student has access to an education directed towards their inclusion, regardless of their differences.

Semi-structured interviews

Final considerations

Studying the theme assessment of learning from the perspective of integrated high school students, from a Campus of the Federal Institute of Pernambuco, as well as the documents that guide education at the referred institute, the PDI, PPPI and the Institucioanal Academic Organization, in addition to national standards, namely: the DCN for technical secondary education and the LDB, it has brought valuable contributions to the understanding of assessment of learning in the context of professional and technological education.

Assessment of learning practices are one of the elements of great impact on the inclusion or exclusion of the student, since, if they are focused on a traditional, technicist conception, they will focus on the classification and consequent elimination of the unsuccessful student.

Overcoming these limitations is also thinking of assessment practices that happen integrated to the student’s learning process, that is, continuously. These, in turn, must serve to diagnose the difficulties presented in the teaching-learning process and, based on the results obtained, offer the teacher the ability to plan the necessary changes so that these difficulties can be remedied.

In the same way, the teaching evaluative practice needs to establish a dialogical interaction between teacher and student, so that both understand that the important thing is the development of the subject as a social and transforming being of the uneven reality. It is in this perspective that the concept of a formative assessment is inserted.

Based on this, when discussing the assessment of learning, it is observed that the internal and national documents in the excerpts that guide the pedagogical evaluative practices, at the same time that they provide foundations that stimulate evaluations in the characteristics that aim at inclusion and integral development of the student, they also bring up the need to evaluate, in order to measure and classify, the students who will pass and those who will fail, characterizing the traditional model that still persists in education.

Similarly, we found the traditional and formative perspectives of assessment of learning, through the perception of some students. The traditional view is observed when they mention, for example, the existence of teachers who make it difficult to pass their subjects, because it is difficult to monitor their level of education in the classroom.

Another element brought by the interviewed students was the test, as an evaluative instrument of greater weight in terms of grade. In turn, such an instrument sometimes brings a greater level of complexity, making approval very costly. Such a situation causes anxiety, fear, learning difficulties and, consequently, low academic performance.

On the other hand, the students recognize the existence of teachers with assessment practices contrary to punishment. In this case, the assessment aims to help the student in his learning and to realize his difficulties and try to solve them, encouraging him to continue studying.

It is understood, however, that the elements that make up the school environment are complex and that it is not only the evaluative practice that will shape the human and comprehensive development of students, although this action is a component of fundamental importance to guarantee opportunities for education better, especially for students who have greater learning difficulties.

Furthermore, there is a great responsibility in relation to the teacher’s actions in order to guarantee this much desired education. However, it is known that guaranteeing such education is not only about the commitment of teachers, but of the entire academic community, made up of managers, students and family, who must collectively claim the guarantee of the implementation of their rights and duties. Essentially the right to appropriate knowledge historically produced and systematized by society in a satisfactory and critical way.

From this approach, it can be seen that assessment of learning, in the context of comprehensive education, which aims at the development of students in the areas of work, science and culture, should generate significant changes in the lives of students and which are reflected in society, through the construction of critical and transforming individuals.