Introduction

In bringing up the issue of the protagonism of black female intellectuals in studies published in the period from 2010 to 2019, it is essential to announce that this study assumes that such problematization cannot do without the historical-social and political elements that make this issue urgent and necessary. Even after the American abolitionist movements of the nineteenth century, which began to recognize black women as human beings (and no longer as anomalous beings devoid of gender) (^{Davis, 2016}), and the second wave of feminism - through which they claimed a space of political dispute, especially in the South of the United States - it is clear the difficulty of insertion, permanence and recognition of black women in the academic field and in intellectual production in the contemporary scenario (^{Reznik, Massarani, Ramalho, & Amorim, 2014}).

When analyzing social relations in capitalism it is necessary to pay attention to the intersections between race, class and gender, "[...] in order to realize that among these categories there are relations that are mutual and others that are crossed. No one category can assume primacy over others" (^{Davis, 2011}). They cannot be analyzed separately within the context of studies that propose to side with the feminist antiracist struggle.

According to ^{Hooks (2013}), in the early movements of the 1960s, on the occasion of the first wave of (suffragist) feminism, although white women gained some space within the labor market, including in academic centers (and consequently in women's studies), "[...] there was no collective zeal for the creation of a body of feminist studies that addressed the specific realities of black women" (Hooks, 2013, p. 164). Moreover, while many white academics active in the feminist movement created networks of scientific collaboration, black women were generally excluded from this circle.

The Brazilian national panorama demonstrates the timeliness of the narrative described by ^{Hooks (2013}) when referring to the Southern United States context in the 1960s. Among these dehumanizing movements, it is evident the efforts to erase the intellectual potential of women and especially black women. What we realize is that throughout history, "[...] the social and political segregation to which women have been historically driven has resulted in their widespread invisibility as subjects, including as subjects of science" (^{Louro, 2003}, p. 20). In the specific case of black women, this reality is even deeper and more perverse.

According to ^{Almeida (2019}, p. 191), the "[...] classification of human beings would serve, more than for philosophical knowledge, as one of the technologies of European colonialism for the submission and destruction of populations of the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Oceania. Thus

[...] it is in this context that race emerges as a central concept so that the apparent contradiction between the universalization of reason and the cycle of death and destruction of colonialism and slavery can operate simultaneously as irremovable foundations of contemporary society (^{Almeida, 2019}, p. 193).

Among the elements that underpin this society and contribute to the estrangement of the human race through the hierarchization of subjects, racism stands out. According to ^{Almeida (2018}, p. 15-16), racism is always structural, that is, "[...] it is an element that integrates the economic and political organization of society. [...] Racism is a normal manifestation of a society and not a pathological phenomenon or one that expresses some kind of abnormality." From this thesis, it is possible to recognize that the field of intellectual production, as a human product based on class society, is also grounded on structural racism. The academic-scientific knowledge was and is, historically, male and white (^{Chassot, 2004}).

Once the reality of structural racism is evident (^{Almeida, 2019}), and we are faced with the epistemicide (^{Benite, Bastos, Vargas, Fernandes, & Faustino, 2018}) of black women's thought it is patent to hypothesize that this same phenomenon is reflected in scientific productions in general, as well as in other forms of expression in society. Since this research focuses specifically on studies emerging from the field of Education, the list of journals evaluated by the committee responsible for this area of knowledge along the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher-Level Personnel (Capes) is taken.

In this sense, the following research problem emerged: What has been discussed in the period 2010-2019 about the protagonism of black female intellectuals in studies published in journals in the field of Education, evaluated by the Qualis Capes with A1 stratum?

The choice for the period 2010-2019 is justified because this is the most recent decade in relation to the period in which this research was carried out. On the other hand, the choice for A1 level journals, evaluated by the Education area at Capes, is justified because this is the highest-level reference adopted for the evaluation of the Stricto Sensu Graduate Programs in Brazil, the main ones responsible for the production of knowledge in this country.

Based on this question, the main objective was to investigate the panorama of studies that focus on the role of Black intellectuals in scientific productions in the field of Education, evaluated as having the greatest impact worldwide by one of the main institutions that promote and monitor Brazilian scientific production.

Specifically, this study aimed to: understand the scope of the theme in the main vehicles of scientific dissemination; analyze the approach to this issue in studies published in these spaces of socialization of knowledge; and assess possible trends and theoretical gaps in this field of research for prospective scenarios.

Thus, over the next sections, the theoretical background, the description of the conceptions and methodological paths, the results of the research and some considerations on the subject are presented.

Literature review

In the contemporary scenario we can observe the rise of a conservative wave that has been more strongly expressed since the second decade of the 21st century. In it has been built a more or less cohesive cluster of what has been called the 'new right'. Its ideologies flirt "[...] with Nazifascism ideas and [...] contribute to normalize them" (^{Carapanã, 2018}, p. 39). The new right presents a reactionary discourse, of preventive counterrevolution, which starts from the assumption that everything is in chaos, disorder, that things are out of place and that it is urgent to proceed, by whatever means, to reestablish order.

The central ideology of the new right, libertarianism, is a variant of classical neoliberalism and is descended from the Austrian economic school. This ideology "[...] preaches the smallest possible state and asserts that any situation born of market mechanisms is fair by definition, however unequal it may seem" (^{Miguel, 2018}, p. 19). The narratives and actions emerging from libertarian conceptions assume "[...] a proto-fascist character, under the sign of science, seeking an appearance of social criticism" (^{Casimiro, 2018}, p. 44).

According to ^{Silva, Maciel, and França (2020}b, p. 260), "[...] classical conservatism is founded on irrational ideas. However, nowadays it gains new characteristics". In this sense, the agendas of feminist movements and progressive black movements have been harshly attacked and deep setbacks have been observed in the field of human rights. There is a deepening of the incarceration of black people, violence against women, and consequently the opening to sexist and racist discourses of all kinds (Silva, 2018).

Taking the Brazilian case as an example, it is possible to realize that, according to the Atlas of Violence 2018, "[...] in 2016, 49,497 cases of rape were registered in the Brazilian police, [...]. In that same year, 22,918 incidents of this nature were registered in the Unified Health System" (^{Cerqueira et al., 2018}, p. 56). This study also indicates that "[...] in 2016, 4,645 women were murdered in the country, which represents a rate of 4.5 homicides for every 100,000 Brazilians" (Cerqueira et al., 2018, p. 44). When we observe the microdata by Units of the Federation (UF), it can be seen that, in the period from 2006 to 2016, in Rio Grande do Norte and Maranhão the increase in homicide cases against women grew by 138.1 and 137.3%, respectively. Of the 27 UF, only seven showed negative rates. However, when these data are observed from the intersectional issue of gender and race, is found that "[...] in relation to the ten years of the series, the homicide rate for every 100,000 black women increased by 15.4%, while among non-black women there was a drop of 8%" (Cerqueira et al., 2018, p. 51).

When you look at what happens in Brazil with black people, what is evident, is that "[...] a young black man is 147% more likely to suffer homicide than a white man" (^{Teles, 2018}, p. 66). This study also points out that in 2016, the homicide rate of blacks

[...] was two and a half times higher than that of non-blacks (16.0% versus 40.2%). In a period of a decade, between 2006 and 2016, the homicide rate of blacks grew by 23.1%. In the same period, the rate among non-blacks had a 6.8% reduction (^{Cerqueira et al., 2018}, p. 40).

Even in the face of these numbers, what we can see is that, instead of gathering forces that converge towards an uprising against the increase in these rates, what we see is the deepening and use of "[...] conservatism as an ideological instrument" (^{Silva et al., 2020}b, p. 257), as a technology of social control with a view to the implementation of neoliberal policies and the establishment of barbarism.

It is "[...] an instrument used to disseminate hatred and prejudice by the subaltern classes, with the full purpose of maintaining the current order and property" (^{Silva et al., 2020}b, p. 260). According to ^{Bersani (2017}, p. 381), structural racism can be understood as a "[...] system of oppression whose action transcends the mere formatting of institutions, since it permeates from the aesthetic apprehension to any and all spaces in the public and private spheres, given that it is structuring of social relations. That is, racism is, itself, the norm that regulates relations in this model of society and that operates in the sense of maintaining/furthering the current status quo of things. There is no type of racism that is not structural and structuring in this society.

As a result of this process of erasing those who deviate from the norm, it is known that "[...] the academic space is restricted to a portion of society to the detriment of others" (^{Bersani, 2017}, p. 384). In Brazil, universities "[...] have always been spaces dominated by the economic elite, notwithstanding the public nature that leads us to the basic premise of an investment promoted by the whole society and that should serve it generally, without exclusion of any groups" (^{Bersani, 2017}, p. 386). In this sense,

[...] if the space is historically elitist, as history also shows that enslaved Africans and their descendants did not have any space in the social bosom beyond oppression during slavery and social exclusion after being discarded by this system, it does not take much effort to conclude the fact that Brazilian public universities are reserved for white elites, as paradoxical as this expression may seem, because the inequality consolidated here has made room for the formation of a single elite -and it is white (^{Bersani, 2017}, p. 386).

The inequality of access and permanence of black women in universities and, consequently, in the production of scientific knowledge, are analyzed, therefore, as faces of racism and machismo that are structural to our society.

According to ^{Longaray and Ribeiro (2015}, p. 317), scientific knowledge "[...] is one of the mechanisms of this control, in which the knowledge produced in this sphere is understood as the true knowledge. The knowledge of science dictates the rules. In this sense, school, university, and scientific production can contribute to reinforce the existing systems of domination. Education and scientific production, as social categories, are substantially responsible for the reproduction of racism and other inequalities in society (^{Davis, 2016}).

Indeed, the need for scientific productions that shed light on the protagonism of black female intellectuals in the production of knowledge throughout history is, before anything else, an act of resistance. It is a force that, in potency, adds up to a counter-current of class, race, and gender struggle that envisions an egalitarian society. This is because to make racial, gender, and class equality a reality is to challenge the prevailing social order. Since the norm is centered on Eurocentric, white, and masculine thinking, to be white is to never have to think about race. This is also a localized issue in time and space. A white Brazilian, when he goes to the United States, for example, is racialized and may discover that there, he is no longer white: he is Latino (^{Almeida, 2019}).

In the context of knowledge production in Brazil, the study by ^{Reznik et al. (2014}, p. 53), states that "[...] half of the scientists registered in the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) are female, being research leaders in 45% of the groups. In view of the shift to the right of the June 2013 protests (which had as their motto the demand for more rights, especially the right to urban mobility) for the 2015 protests (which claimed, among the conservative agendas, the extinction of quotas for blacks in universities and the suppression of the debate on gender in schools) (^{Silva, 2018}), it is possible to see the rise of a movement that, in the limit, claims the erasure of black women, especially black women in spaces of knowledge production.

In this way, the prospective scenario for the training of black scientists in Brazil is worrisome. To get an idea of the picture that existed before the June 2015 days, it is possible to observe the statistical overview of black women who occupied seats in Stricto-Sensu Graduate Programs in Brazil in 2015. What can be seen from this data is that, even before the rise of the conservative wave that complains about the erasure of the debates of black women in the spaces of knowledge production, the number of scientists who declared themselves black or brown and who composed the faculty of Postgraduate Programs (PPG) in Brazil, was 219 in that period, i.e., these women did not even represent "[...] 3% of the total faculty" (^{Ferreira, 2018}). Moreover, according to the Continuous National Household Sample Survey (PNAD), conducted by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE, 2015), by the end of 2015 the population of black and brown people was already over 55% of the Brazilian people. It is also observed that, specifically in relation to the number of men and women (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics [IBGE], 2018), women represent the majority of the Brazilian people (51.7%).

Given these data, this contradiction signals the capillarity and depth of structural racism expressed even within the spaces of intellectual training and research development (^{Almeida, 2019}). Now, if the majority of the Brazilian people are black and if the majority is also composed of women, proportionally, in an egalitarian society, it would make no sense that less than 3% of black women occupy seats in the PPG chairs in Brazil. This situation is even more worrisome when we take the picture of scientists with research productivity fellowships with projects in effect in the period 2005 to 2014, released in 2019 by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (^{CNPq, 2019}). These data reveal that the higher the level of the productivity fellowship, the lower the participation of women. In the specific case of the most prestigious fellowships (1A and Senior), while men hold about 80% of them, women make up about 20%. Moreover, of the total number of research productivity fellowships held by women, only about 7% are held by black women. Table 1 sheds light on this issue.

Table 1 shows that, although the total volume of CNPq research productivity fellowships reflects the degree of inequality between men and women, the volume of fellowships going to white women in relation to black women, throughout the academic career, intensifies this inequality. Of the total number of scholarships occupied by women at the Scientific Initiation level, about 30% are occupied by black women.

Indeed, it should be noted that in the percentage of black women who ascend and stand out in the field of knowledge production, although they are present in all fields of knowledge, this participation varies abruptly "[...] according to the area of knowledge: women are the majority in care-related areas and minority in technological and exact areas" (^{Benite et al., 2018}, p. 4). The areas where women, and especially black women, achieve greater insertion are, not coincidentally, those of less social prestige, since, according to the study by ^{Benite et al. (2018}, p. 7) "[...] careers are marked by gender and the so-called female professions are more devalued in the labor market."

In this sense, it is necessary to understand what has been discussed in the last decade (2010-2019) about the protagonism of black intellectuals in studies published in journals in the field of Education, evaluated by Qualis Capes with A1 stratum. To this end, a systematic review of the literature was conducted. The conceptions and methodological procedures are described in the following section.

Methodology

To meet the stated objectives, the systematic literature review was used as a theoretical and methodological reference. This type of study requires the formulation of the question, the location of studies, the evaluation and selection of studies (or relevance test), analysis and synthesis (^{Segura Muñoz, Takayanagui, Santos, & Sanchez-Sweatman, 2002}; ^{Ramos, Faria, & Faria, 2014}; ^{Nunes, Silva, & Mercado, 2016}; ^{Dias, Silva, & Rios, 2020}; ^{Silva, Dias, & Rios, 2020}a).

According to ^{Segura Muñoz et al. (2002}, p. 1), the systematic literature review presents "[...] changes in the profile of the traditional literature review, constituting an important methodological tool for research in the areas of evidence-based medicine, nursing, and public health." Indeed, studies such as those developed by ^{Ramos et al. (2014}), present possibilities of appropriation of this method for the field of studies in Education, since it proposes to gather the best available research and synthesize its results. In this sense, its greatest contribution is "[...] to integrate existing information on a specific theme, through the grouping and analysis of the results coming from primary studies conducted in different places and times by independent research groups, allowing the generation of scientific evidence" (Segura Muñoz et al., 2002, p. 1).

In this sense, the guiding question of this systematic review was outlined as follows: What do studies say that take as the focus of their investigations the protagonism of black women and that were published in journals in the field of Education, evaluated in the highest stratum?

In light of this guiding question, we proceeded to define the means for locating the studies. To this end, it was based on the studies of ^{Nunes et al. (2016}), which took as their database the frame of journals evaluated in the Qualis Capes⁸ strata. In this study, the authors considered all journals evaluated in the area of Education, in the quadrennium 2013-2016, and only the journals and articles published in Portuguese were considered.

For this investigation, given the guiding question, we defined as database all journals evaluated in the area of Education, with A1 stratum, in the quadrennial evaluation of (2013-2016). The option for this cutout is justified by the fact that Capes is the institution responsible for the evaluation of graduate programs in Brazil and this is the main locus of knowledge production in the country. In addition, the quadrennial evaluation of 2013-2016 was the most recent until the development of this study.

Once the database was defined, we went on to define the period for the survey of the studies. In this sense, we chose to gather research that had been published in the decade prior to the completion of this systematic review. This option follows the tradition of Systematized Reviews that commonly take the period of ten years for the synthesis and presentation of scientific evidence on a particular topic (^{Silva & Mercado, 2015}; ^{Nunes et al., 2016}; ^{Dias et al., 2020}; ^{Silva et al., 2020}a).

Once the databases and the period that would be used to define the location of the studies were defined, as well as the criteria for evaluation and selection of studies (or relevance test), we went on to define the procedures for analysis and synthesis. About this dimension, S^{egura Muñoz et al. (2002}, p. 1), consider that

The review is called a qualitative Systematic Review, or simply SR, when the information obtained from the studies included in the review is not susceptible to statistical analysis. When the studies included in the systematic review allow a statistical synthesis of the evidence generated, it is a quantitative SR or meta-analysis, being the term meta-analysis, the statistical method used for the numerical analysis of the SR.

In this sense, this research cannot be classified as a meta-analysis since the method for generating the results was not statistical, but qualitative.

In the research developed here, the option was to cut out the best ranked journals in the last quadrennial evaluation of Capes (2013-2016), i.e., those evaluated as A1. No language restriction was adopted for the journals or articles.

Thus, when consulting the Qualis Capes database, the four-year evaluation of 2013-2016 was selected as the 'Classification Event', the evaluation area was 'Education', and the fields 'ISSN' and 'Title' were not marked. In addition, the search was limited to journals evaluated as A1. From these options, a list of 121 journal records was retrieved. However, Qualis considers as separate items a journal that has more than one ISSN. That is, if the journal is published in both printed and digital formats, it receives two ISSN records. Thus, when refining the search, 69 different journals were identified.

For the survey of articles focusing on the protagonism of black female intellectuals in knowledge production, we took as references the studies of ^{Silva and Mercado (2015}) and ^{Nunes et al. (2016}) that, instead of using descriptors for the search and retrieval of studies, consulted each of the issues of the journals that were published in the investigated period. In this way, all the articles published in these 69 journals in the period 2010 - 2019 were observed, one by one, their titles were checked and, when necessary, their abstracts.

From the material collected, we moved on to the stage of analyzing the studies that focused on the role of black women in the production of knowledge. For this analysis, we took as reference the strategies proposed by the studies of ^{Dias et al. (2020}) and ^{Silva et al. (2020}a). These authors read the material surveyed, unitarized the research focus, categorized and systematized the results pointed out by the interlocutors. Based on these methodological options, the following section presents the results and analysis emerging from these research movements.

Analysis and results

By proceeding initially with the identification of the journals evaluated as A1 in the quadrennial evaluation of 2013-2016 promoted by the area of Education at Capes and then, the survey of studies that focused on the role of black women, it was possible to identify 69 scientific journals and in these, 18 studies that were of interest to this research. Table 2 provides an overview of this first stage of the research.

It was observed a predominance of studies on women about themes such as violence, care, body, sexuality, abortion and childbirth. We identified studies on the protagonism of women in the exercise of labor activities in the most diverse fields of human activity, in law, in nursing, in public and private company management, in formal education (basic and higher education), in the union movement, in political parties, as well as studies on the protagonism of women in the field of intellectual work. However, very few studies focused on the role of black women in the production of knowledge.

Table 3 allows the visualization of the temporal distribution of the articles surveyed.

From the temporal distribution of studies published in the period from 2010 to 2019, observed in Table 3, it is not possible to affirm that there is a trend of growth or decline in the scientific dissemination of research with a focus on the protagonism of black intellectuals. However, what can be ratified in view of the volume of number of journals analyzed in each of the 69 journals and the volume of studies surveyed, is that the scenario of knowledge production socialized in the most prominent vehicles of scientific dissemination in the field of Education, as human products, ratify the thesis of structural racism of ^{Almeida (2019}).

Indeed, when analyzing the 18 retrieved publications, it was observed that these were written by 26¹⁰ female authors and 3¹¹ male authors. This data indicates that women are more engaged with studies that are interested in investigating the protagonism of black intellectuals in the field of Education. However, among those who composed these 18 works, only one name appeared in more than one of them. Professor Paulo Fernando de Souza Campos co-authored two of these studies. This shows that there is a participation, albeit timid, of men in shedding light on this field of studies; men who recognize the need to engage in the construction of an egalitarian society. This is also a scenario that needs to be expanded. This is a commitment from all of us and depends on a movement to which all forces must contribute.

Moreover, it was possible to observe that these 18 studies, from the point of view of the methodology used, can be categorized into at least three types: a) Investigative interventions; b) Documentary studies; and c) Studies based on interviews. The first category was only possible because among the 18 papers surveyed, one of them, the study by ^{Benite et al. (2018}), referred to an in-depth analysis of a pedagogical intervention developed in the Chemistry curriculum component focusing on 'Science Teaching and Black Identity: studies on hair chemistry'. This study was based on participant research between the researchers and nine black students, being 14 girls and five boys in high school (four in the 1st grade, four in the 2nd grade and 11 in the 3rd grade) of a state school in the western region of Goiania.

Other six surveyed works consist of documentary studies that focused on recovering the contributions of a particular black intellectual who stood out in her field at a particular historical moment, in narrative analyses based on letters, or in investigations about contemporary objects of study based on documents from international organizations, legislation, or curriculum proposals. ^{Bonelli (2017}) engaged in giving visibility to globally pervasive processes that decenter the faculty profile while engendering intersectional stratification of gender and race with tenure, regional location, institutional types, and work regime¹². The study by ^{Cruz (2018}) presented a cartography of research that dealt with the condition of black women and children within the studies that made up the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) research program applied in Brazil, known as the 'UNESCO Project', on race relations, in partnership with the Anhembi Magazine of São Paulo between 1950 and 1953. The work of ^{Leach (2012}), was motivated in light of the little attention given to the schooling of Anglican girls and missionaries. This study analyzed 71 letters written between 1804 and 1826 by women and girls associated with a British missionary society in Sierra Leone. The works of ^{Campos (2013}), ^{Cardoso (2014}), and ^{Campos and Carrijo (2019}), on the other hand, used document analysis to give visibility to the biography and contribution of black intellectuals to the fields of Nursing (Maria de Lourdes Almeida), the field of Afro-Latin American feminism (Lélia Gonzalez); the legacy of Virgínia Leone Bicudo to the field of sociology of childhood in Brazil (^{Santos, 2018}); and again, the field of Nursing (Lydia das Dôres Matta), respectively.

It can be stated that of the 18 studies surveyed, 11 emerged from qualitative research with a focus on interviews, questionnaires, and focus groups. It is observed that this is a trend in gender studies, especially in intersectional studies.

The study by ^{Silva and Euclides (2018}), discussed institutional racism and the performance of black female PhD professors in three public universities located in the state of Ceará and two public universities located in the state of Rio de Janeiro. Semi-structured interviews were used with nine professors from these five institutions. ^{Lange, Mitchell, and Bhana (2012}) analyzed, through a focus group, the voices of female teachers who teach in rural schools in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, around their views of gender and violence. ^{Hirshfield and Joseph (2012}) investigated how women (in general) and women of color (specifically) perceived that their gender and racial group influenced their experiences in academia. To do so, interviews were conducted with 32 women professors working in public universities in the Midwest of Brazil. ^{Butler (2019}), examined the narrative of African American women's stories and experiences as a radical way to capture their ways of conceiving a pedagogy grounded in the ethics of care. ^{West (2019}) conducted semi-structured interviews to analyze experiences of American student affairs administrators who consistently participated in the 'African American Women's Summit' (AAWS) between 2006 and 2004. ^{Massarani and Lima (2012}), focused on the challenges for science in Mozambique. The research was based on the considerations of an interview with Lídia Brito, director of the Science Policy and Capacity Building Division of UNESCO and former minister of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Mozambique. ^{Chetcuti and Kioko (2012}) investigated, using questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups, the extent and depth of black female students' attitudes toward their approaches to science. ^{Crisostomo and Reigota (2010}), invested in understanding the condition of black women, teachers in higher education in private universities in the city of Sorocaba, state of São Paulo, in the period from 2000 to 2007. To this end, they conducted interviews with three female professors (two active and one retired). ^{Stockfelt (2018}), looked at the issue of additional marginalization of black academic women in the UK. This study relied on narratives from eight black female students at top-ranked institutions. ^{Eriksen (2019}), addressed the school resilience of girls in ethnic minorities from a psychosocial analysis approach in extensive fieldwork and interviews with students in a Norwegian high school. Finally, this methodological category includes the study by ^{Alvarez (2012}), who conducted an interview with the Minister of the Secretariat of Policies for the Promotion of Racial Equality, Luiza Barros, focusing on the evaluation of the (dis)meeting points between the antiracist and feminist struggle in Brazil.

From the point of view of the results that these 18 studies pointed out, it is possible to highlight that such studies signal the development of new counter-spaces (and the enhancement of existing counter-spaces) for black women, in the context of Higher Education and beyond (^{West, 2019}). The study by ^{Cruz (2018}), demonstrates that with regard to historical research on the experiences of black people with their education in Brazil, it has been identified that the movements that have been analyzed in this research leverage educational experiences dedicated to black children and the status of black women. This means that it is increasingly necessary to invest in the recovery of proposals and suggestions from black subjects that have guided research on the constitution of racial issues in Brazil, especially the effective participation of women who currently live-in ostracism, whether in sociological research or in educational research.

The research developed by ^{Lange et al. (2012}) concluded that the voices of women teachers, both in relation to society as well as in the school context, speak to a strong awareness of what is generally considered the 'foundation' of gender-based violence, that is, the inequality that manifests in their community is reflected within rural area schools in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Such a scenario reinforces that the debate on institutional racism can never do without the debate and struggle against structural racism, thus the struggle in favor of building another society.

The work of ^{Silva and Euclides (2018}), demonstrated, from the analysis of interviews, with black female PhD professors that they mean their presence in the academic field as an act of resistance. However, it is a presence not only from a quantitative point of view (the body present) but mainly from a qualitative point of view (the body of a black woman present and in action, in favor of other black women and diversity).

The study by ^{Bonelli (2017}) showed that the general panorama of law courses in countries such as Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Brazil reveals that this is an elitist niche, mostly male and white. The overwhelming majority of the few women who manage to enter this niche are white and of high social class. Even so, they are generally linked to the disciplines considered to be of lesser curricular prestige and generally linked to the issue of care. Specifically in the case of black female professors at the Law School of the University of São Paulo (USP), of the 170 professors at the time of the research, 29 were women and of these only one was black. The reality is not different in the Nursing course, for example. The research of ^{Campos (2013}) evidenced the struggle movements for the insertion of black African descendant women who were prevented, real or symbolic, from entering the academic space of Brazilian nursing.

The results of the participant research developed by ^{Benite et al. (2018}), demonstrated that the planned and developed pedagogical intervention made it possible to question discourses that reinforce discriminations and stereotypes. It also presented didactic alternatives for Chemistry teachers to work on themes related to Ethnic-Racial issues based on the knowledge mobilized in this curricular component. This is a proposal for the teaching of antiracist chemistry, and in this sense, an antiracist curriculum proposal.

^{Hirshfield and Joseph (2012}), based on the analysis of the taxation of gender and race identity expressed in the speeches of research participants, concluded that this is a common problem for female teachers in their academic experiences. This inflicts physical and emotional oppression on them. Within the academic space, the taxation of these identities affects the hiring, retention, health, and productivity of the members who are taken. The reflection of this is the construction of an elitist, male, white university that strives for social exclusion based on the pillars of gender, race, and class.

^{Butler (2019}), demonstrated that the patchwork quilt, for African American women, is a construction of their identity from group representations, in addition to providing the discussions in the political and social scene, is configured as a space-time for debate on issues of gender and racial violence involving black women. This patchwork quilt, produced by these women, also represents their sisterhood and the way their knowledge can materialize in a pedagogy of resistance.

^{Massarani and Lima (2012}), warn that science is not for everyone, because it is not produced by/for everyone. In this same sense, ^{Campos and Carrijo (2019}), add that such inquietudes demand new incursions on the protagonism of black women in the sciences. Their lives and work translate the efforts against the permanent oppression in Brazilian society, which vilifies and restricts the recognition of the performances of these black women in society and, therefore, within the academy. These findings are echoed in the results noted by ^{Chetcuti and Kioko (2012}) who demonstrated that the majority of Kenyan girls who participated in the study have a favorable attitude towards science. Girls from SS schools were found to have a more favorable attitude than those from middle schools, while girls from rural area schools considered science more relevant than those from urban schools. It emerged from this study that Kenyan girls' attitudes are influenced by their perceptions of the relevance of science, the enjoyment of studying science, the perceived suitability of science for a career, and their perceptions of the difficulty of the subject. Therefore, this is an issue that, at the level of phenomena, presents itself with greater or lesser intensity, but in practice is universal. Black women are excluded from the production of scientific knowledge not because they are not interested, but because racism and machismo, which structure this model of society, prevent them.

Similarly, ^{Crisostomo and Reigota (2010}), argue that the condition of black women as university professors is one of exclusion. In this study, the author and co-author argue that the moment the black woman becomes more present as a professor at the university and in social positions and professions in which they were not allowed before, the construction of diversified identities will be promoted, with new ways of existence and representations that may contribute to the consolidation of a plural society. In other words, a different society. This maxim is corroborated in the study of ^{Stockfelt (2018}) whose narratives provide implications for future policy and research about the protagonism of black women in the sciences.

^{Eriksen's (2019}) study presents, through school opposition, that girls are constituting a transgressive femininity that does not compromise their ethnic belonging or femininity in school. In this same direction, the results of the study by ^{Alvarez (2012}), highlight the power of black women in political contexts and militancy struggles. As an example of this, it is possible to cite the draft laws spearheaded and disseminated in Brazil by these women. Also in this sense, the results of the study by ^{Cardoso (2014}) conclude that when a black woman occupies center stage in the production of knowledge in a particular area, she is leading an act of resistance and, supported by her sisters, opening spaces for others to rise. In this sense, the results of the studies by ^{Leach (2012}) sustain that to challenge gender and race norms is to challenge the entire social structure.

Final considerations

From the narratives about the first feminist studies and the volume of studies recovered in the first stage of this research, the structural condition of racism in capitalist society is evident. Thus, it is not possible to envisage a genuinely egalitarian social panorama without considering the intersectional character of race, class, and gender.

The urgency of this debate is not reflected in the volume of studies focusing on the protagonism of black female intellectuals in the field of Education. is What we see that this is a latent field of research that lacks investigations. Moreover, most of the studies found are based on a narrow field of methodological approaches. This picture points to the need for other looks and new research paths to be taken in order to shed light on this issue and, thus, point to possibilities for the construction of an egalitarian society.

Another gap that can be pointed out is the one revealed by the finding that, among the 69 journals listed as A1 by the Qualis Capes methodology in the area of Education, only 11 of them have published any study focusing on the role of black female intellectuals. Of these 11 journals, 6 are edited by Brazilian public institutions and the other 5 are edited by the English institution Taylor & Francis. In other words, in view of the volume of journal issues analyzed, the volume of studies surveyed and the low diversity of editorial boards that publish this type of study, the thesis of structural racism is ratified, whose facet is observed in the production of knowledge in the field of Education.

It is also observed that, among the studies surveyed, almost all of them were produced by women. For the construction of an egalitarian society, this is a scenario that also needs to be changed. The highlighting of the presence of black female intellectuals in the scenario of knowledge production is a commitment from all, but also from all, who are engaged in exercising a counter-current in favor of the implosion of the foundations of this unequal society and aiming at an increasingly more humane society.

From the analysis of the data that has been made up to this point, it is possible to sustain that this truth is generalized to all fields of knowledge production. In this way, it is essential that we stand up attentively for the construction of another society in which we are free from the inequalities that subjugate human beings. For this we can never do without the intersectional analysis of the categories of race, gender, and class.