SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.44John Dewey: interest and effort under debateProblematization as a teacher training tool on active methodologies author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Share


Acta Scientiarum. Education

Print version ISSN 2178-5198On-line version ISSN 2178-5201

Acta Educ. vol.44  Maringá  2022  Epub Jan 02, 2022

https://doi.org/10.4025/actascieduc.v44i1.48662 

TEACHERS' FORMATION AND PUBLIC POLICY

Pedagogical work from the perspective of pedagogues those working in non-school education

José Leonardo Rolim de Lima Severo1 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5071-128X

1Departamento de Habilitações Pedagógicas, Centro de Educação, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, Campus I, Lot. Cidade Universitaria, 58051-900, João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brasil.


ABSTRACT.

The article presents data from a research interested in understanding the characteristics and processes of the pedagogical work developed by pedagogues in non - school education spaces (NSE). To this purpose, it uses the specialized literature on Pedagogy, Non-School Education, Social Pedagogy and Educators' Training to analyze formative trajectories and professional action of 38 pedagogues from different Brazilian regions whose work inserts into three main areas: action socio-educational, labor/organizational education and specialized education in health contexts. The data related to this group of research participants derive from a virtual questionnaire applied through mapping of Internet contact networks. These data are presented and discussed through statistical compilation and interpretation in the light of the theoretical framework that configured the analysis. The considerations point out that NSE, as a pedagogical field of work, is dynamized through processes of inventiveness of the professionals who articulate different knowledge, some present in the initial formation and others absent, based on a continuous process of dialogue with the specifics of each field of activity. It is from this perspective that the data about the practice of pedagogues in non-school spaces, in the light of critical references, allows thinking a curriculum of Pedagogy that provides moments of significant praxis to students in the face of the characteristics of the pedagogical action in those spaces.

Keywords: pedagogy; pedagogical work; non-school education

RESUMO.

O artigo apresenta dados de uma pesquisa interessada em compreender as características e processos do trabalho pedagógico desenvolvido por pedagogas/os em espaços de educação não escolar (ENE). Para tanto, recorre à literatura especializada em Pedagogia, Educação Não Escolar, Pedagogia Social e Formação de Educadores(as) para analisar trajetórias formativas e ação profissional de 38 pedagogas/os de diferentes regiões brasileiras cujo trabalho se insere em três principais âmbitos: ação socioinstitucional, educação laboral/organizacional e educação especializada em contextos de saúde. Os dados relativos a esse grupo de participantes da pesquisa derivam de um questionário virtual aplicado mediante mapeamento de redes de contato via internet. Os dados são apresentados e discutidos por meio da compilação estatística e da interpretação à luz do quadro teórico que configurou a análise. As considerações apontam que a ENE, como campo de trabalho pedagógico, se dinamiza mediante processos de inventividade das/os profissionais que articulam diferentes saberes, alguns presentes na formação inicial e outros ausentes, com base em um processo contínuo de diálogo com as especificidades de cada âmbito de atuação. É sob essa perspectiva que os dados sobre a prática das/os pedagogas/os na ENE, à luz de referenciais críticos, permite pensar um currículo de Pedagogia que proporcione momentos de práxis significativa aos estudantes em face das características da ação pedagógica naqueles espaços.

Palavras-chave: pedagogia; trabalho pedagógico; educação não escolar

RESUMÉN.

El artículo presenta datos de una investigación interesada en comprender las características y procesos del trabajo pedagógico desarrollado por pedagogas(os) en espacios de educación no escolar (ENE). Para ello, se recurre a la literatura especializada en Pedagogía, Educación No Escolar, Pedagogía Social y Formación de Educadores(as) para analizar trayectorias formativas y acción profesional de 38 pedagogas(os) de diferentes regiones brasileñas cuyo trabajo se inserta en tres principales ámbitos: acción sociomunitaria, educación laboral/organizacional y educación especializada en contextos de salud. Los datos relativos a ese grupo de participantes de la investigación derivan de un cuestionario virtual aplicado mediante mapeo de redes de contacto vía internet. Estos datos son presentados y discutidos a través de la compilación estadística y de la interpretación a la luz del cuadro teórico que configuró el análisis. Las consideraciones apuntan que la ENE, como campo de trabajo pedagógico, se dinamiza a través de procesos de inventividad de las(los) profesionales que articulan diferentes saberes, algunos presentes en la formación inicial y otros ausentes, con base en un proceso continuo de diálogo con las especificidades de cada ámbito de actuación. Es desde esta perspectiva que los datos sobre la práctica de pedagogos(as) en espacios no escolares, a la luz de referencias críticas, permiten pensar un currículo de Pedagogía que proporciona momentos de praxis significativa a los estudiantes frente a las características de la acción pedagógica en esos espacios.

Palabras-clave: pedagogía; trabajo pedagógico; educación no escolar

Introduction

This text presents an excerpt of data analysis resulting from a research about the role of pedagogues in Non-School Education (NSE) spaces. The objective of the research was to gather information about training, ways of acting and training needs of Pedagogy professionals who are inserted in different socio-educational contexts beyond the school. In this text, in particular, analytical considerations are circumscribed based on data toward the trajectory of training and performance of 38 subjects and their engagements and interventions in the socio-institutional, organizational education and specialized education in health contexts. In a broader framework of motivations, the research was guided by the questioning about how ENE has been constituted as a theoretical and professional field of Pedagogy in Brazil.

The analysis of the practices developed in the scope of pedagogical work in non-school spaces can help to design a curriculum for the Pedagogy course that has as reference the conditions and possibilities that permeate professional realities and their challenges. It is believed that this reference contributes to the selection and organization of knowledge for the construction of a more fruitful formative praxis with regard to the consolidation of knowledge that subsidize more qualified interventions, in an emancipatory perspective.

In seeking to discuss professional practices, it is important to value the professional's experience, their knowledge built in action, their perspectives for evaluating the training received and the challenges assumed in practice, highlighting the limits and also alternatives that the training process presents in front of the same ones. It is therefore necessary to undertake the effort to study the “[...] set of knowledge actually used by professionals in their daily work space to perform all tasks” (Tardif, 2000, p. 13). Furthermore, this way of treating the reference to practice in the curriculum is in line with the approach of educational reality by Pedagogy as a Science of Education, since it is built “[...] from the practice of educators taken as a reference for the construction of practical knowledge in the confrontation with theoretical knowledge” (Pimenta, 2010, p. 47).

Methodological aspects

Using the online platform of Google Forms, a questionnaire was structured, considering the parameters pointed out by Gil (2008), consisting of 38 answer items, with 24 objective questions and 14 open questions. Such instrument was elaborated according to the research objectives and dimensions of the intended analysis; the items that composed it were organized into four blocks: 1) sociodemographic data; b) formative data; c) professional data; d) specific issues thematizing knowledge, experiences, perceptions and perspectives of action as a pedagogue in a non-school educational space4.

A first version of the questionnaire was evaluated by a group of eight PhDs in Education belonging to the Sociedad Iberoamericana de Pedagogía Social, with teaching and research activities in Spanish universities. After gathering the contributions of the evaluators specialists in Social Pedagogy, the questionnaire was reorganized for application, in the previous testing model, to three subjects with characteristics corresponding to the profile of study participants, in order to verify the clarity of the questions and the time that would be spent assigning responses. There being no significant changes to be made, the data collection stage was started.

The questionnaire's dissemination strategy to reach potential participants was through the request for collaboration in the study along with messages sent to social network groups to people who fit the typical profile stipulated in the research. Likewise, e-mail messages sent to subjects indicated by others, but who were not on the social networks used for the initial search, were used. In all, 207 messages and e-mails were sent to different people and groups on social networks, reaching the final number of 41 questionnaires duly answered. Of this quantity, three were answered by subjects who did not corresponds the profile to participate in the research. The other completed questionnaires contained valid data for the study and, thus, were treated using simple descriptive statistics procedures.

The analysis applied to the data mixed statistical results with reflective notes based on the theoretical framework that supports the work, so that it was possible to deepen the analytical density beyond the quantitative description. This took place through the dialogue between authors whose approach perspectives are relevant to the conduct of empirically based reflection and the interconnection between different data, which is, according to Pérez Serrano (2007), an important methodological care in research qualitative that deals with empirical records obtained from the application of questionnaires composed of objective items.

Research participants were divided into 30 females (85%), 07 males (13%) and 01 who chose not to identify their gender (2%). As for the age group, these participants are grouped into 15 people aged between 22 and 32 years (40%), with 15 people ranging between 33 and 43 years (40%) and 08 people enrolled in the group of those aged between 44 and 54 years old (20%).

Regarding geographic distribution, participants were reached from Alagoas (01 = 2%), Bahia (01 = 2%), Minas Gerais (01 = 2%), Pará (03 = 9%), Paraíba (03 = 9%), Paraná (06 = 18%), Rio de Janeiro (03 = 9%), Rio Grande do Sul (06 = 18%), Santa Catarina (01 = 2%) and São Paulo (10 = 29%). Thus, 13% of the participants belong to the northeast region, 40% to the southeast region, 9% to the northern region and 38% to the southern region.

Formative and professional trajectories of pedagogues in non-school spaces

The educational and professional trajectories of the pedagogues who participated in the research were outlined with important characteristics for the analysis of their perspectives on Pedagogy and NSE, because they consist of a field of experiences for knowledge construction, modes of action and idiosyncratic elements amalgamated in the way in which these subjects situate themselves and conceive the constituent elements and dynamics of their practice as pedagogues in non-school spaces, many of them 'alien zone'.

The research subjects obtained their degrees as pedagogues at different “ages” of the Pedagogy course during the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s; 5% completed the Pedagogy course between 1990 and 1995, 15% between 1996 and 2000, 7% between 2001 and 2005, 32% between 2006 and 2010 and 48% between 2011 and 2014.

Regarding the institutions where they received their initial training, the participants have different profiles. As for the administrative character, the group is classified into 14 who graduated from state public institutions (38%); 05 in federal public institutions (14%), 01 in a municipal public institution (3%); and 17 in private, confessional or community institutions (46%). Among them, 4 graduated from colleges (11%), 8 from university centers (22%) and 25 from universities (68%).

About this, it is noteworthy that, in recent years, there has been a greater opening of thematic private institutions related to NSE in the curriculum, meeting the demands of the world of work, although this is generally done under the sign of market logic, in the in order to increase the employability potential of its graduates, a circumstance that gives them greater visibility among the options for choosing new entrants. Indeed, inclining the curriculum to employability demands without a critical approach to the dynamics of work in contemporary society deflates the political sense of the relationship between knowledge and the interests of the economy, which crystallizes a functional-utilitarian trend in higher education training, submitting it to the capitalist imperatives of the market in a logic of unilateral influence, as problematized by Ball (2005). In a counter-hegemonic way, the reflections in this text are based on the understanding of pedagogical work as “[...] a social practice provided with form and content, expressing, within its objective possibilities, the dominant political and ideological determinations in a society or , still, seeks to explain the overcoming of these determinations” (Frizzo, Ribas, & Ferreira, 2013, p. 556).

Furthermore, it is common to observe that there is a recurrent tendency to associate Pedagogy in some non-school spaces, especially in corporate environments, with the way of capitalist interference in the uses of education to enhance the adaptation of individuals to the knowledge society with a view to consolidating the project of neoliberal society, demanding from them the necessary performativity for increasingly brutal levels of productivity and competitiveness (Lima, 2012). The advance of neoliberalism as an economic model directly affects the configuration of social relations, weakening the role of the State as an entity representing collective interests in order to strengthen the market sphere and the unbridled search for profitability. In this context, individualism, competitiveness and self-employment become traits that shape human sociabilities in neoliberalism (Hill, 2003).

It is noteworthy that this ideological orientation of educational processes, both at school and outside, does not apply to all cases, because there are, of course, actors and institutions engaged in establishing practices guided by emancipatory social ideals (Libâneo, 2019). It is, therefore, these practices that must be legitimized as reference processes in NSE for Pedagogy.

A group of 29 (77%) subjects holds academic degrees in postgraduate courses, primarily in the field of education, but also involving related areas such as Psychology, Social Sciences and Letters. In total, 16 (42%) subjects are specialists, 12 (32%) are masters, 1 (3%) is PhD and 8 (21%) do not have postgraduate degrees.

In addition to these courses that bring official titles, the subjects reported having other complementary training experiences corresponding to activities of other modalities, such as extension courses, open courses in Distance Education and continuing education courses offered by institutions and educational management.

Some courses are worth mentioning: reader training course, introduction to social pedagogy, inclusive education, education and technologies, courses aimed at the publishing market, courses on social development, recreational environments, corporate development, contemporary social paradigms, courses on human rights, gender , sexuality, training for socio-educational agents, popular education, assistive technologies, educommunication, ecology and environmental issues, mental health, art and human development, strategic management of human resources, knowledge management in business environments, training courses on various social policies and other courses offered by municipal and state education secretariats.

The themes addressed by these complementary education activities are inscribed in a wide field of questions about contemporary education and its interfaces with processes developed in other socio-institutional spheres. Some of these themes does not belongs to the initial training of pedagogues traditionally practiced in Brazil, demonstrating that there is a clear demand for the search for training alternatives that go beyond the limits of the Pedagogy course and allow professionals to appropriate different knowledge according to the work need. that develop in the non-school field (Fernandez, 2006).

In fact, it is recognized that, given its time limit, initial training does not allow for the inclusion in the curriculum of diversified themes related to the multiple possibilities of engagement of its graduate professional. For this reason, it is configured as a moment of experiences that enable the acquisition/construction of basic knowledge of professional development, and it is up to the subjects to implement, throughout their entire life in the profession, continuing and permanent education strategies that respond to non-only the type of work performed, as well as the perception that the educator builds about what identifies his/her profession for himself/herself and for the broader social context, as pointed out by Zayas (2012). However, it is reasonably known what is the 'basics' of school education that the Pedagogy curriculum should include, but what does it consist of as basic knowledge about NSE that should be conjectured to the pedagogical project and course curriculum? This understanding will certainly qualify the curriculum for the formation of pedagogues in times when the professional educational task is manifested in different spaces and requires different action strategies to contribute to a more just and democratic society.

Asked about if the training received in the Pedagogy course was significant in preparing them to perform professional functions in the non-school field, the pedagogues clearly stated that the degree of relevance of the training was low or reasonable, preponderantly. Regarding this aspect, the group of participants was divided into 05 people who consider the training to be very little significant, 11 who see it as little significant, 11 who consider the training reasonable, 06 who consider it very significant and 05 who, because of their time, they see it as immensely significant. Adding these values, it is possible to see that 27 participants judged the training between very little and reasonably significant and 11 judged it between very and very significant. Therefore, most subjects are dissatisfied with the training received in view of the activities they perform.

An interesting fact is that most of these subjects went through training experiences during the course that brought them closer to the non-school field, so their assessment of the meaning of the training received is guided not only by understanding the omission of the curriculum, but also regarding the quality of these formative experiences. A group of 20 (53%) people reported that they had experiences in this field and another 18 (47%) reported the opposite. The experiences correspond to extension projects, internships, and activities promoted by agreements with various Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), penal complex, childhood and adolescence court, corporate environments, hospital, social communities and social inclusion center.

Among the pedagogues participating in the survey, 22 (58%) are currently exercising professional functions in the non-school field and 16 (34%) say they are not working in the field. The average length of professional experience that subjects have in this field is 4.5 years, with the shortest time being 3 months and the longest being 25 years.

Regarding the way of entering the institution where they work, 17 (45%) subjects were approved in specific selections for temporary service, 11 (29%) are pedagogues hired by public examination and 10 (26%) they entered the institutions without admission tests, having been invited by managers or indicated by third parties.

The practices developed in the field of NSE are plural and difficult to typologically classify, as many of them are not regulated and/or are not on the priority agenda of Brazilian educational research, in addition to the factor related to the very little in-depth and inconclusive debate on nature and variations of the NSE as a conceptual category that serves to designate educational practices developed outside the framework of organization and functioning of education systems (Severo, 2015).

Based on this understanding of NSE, a general typological classification was adopted in this work, which is based on the specificity of the purposes of the practices carried out in three main aspects identified in the NSE, based also on the data produced: socio-institutional education, labor or organizational education and specialized education in health contexts. The classification adopted here sought to establish a limit that, although tenuous, delineated the models of practices in NSE, given the pedagogical focus they apply and the training intentions they translate, so that they can manifest themselves in different scenarios and even fit together, following what Trilla, Gros, López, and Martín (2011) point out.

In this sense, 21 (55%) of the pedagogues work in socio-institutional education, 09 (23%) in labor or organizational education and 08 (22%) in specialized education in health contexts. It is noteworthy that the pedagogical practices developed encompassed both project execution activities and educational actions, as well as the management and investigation of these actions.

Pedagogy in the context of socio-institutional action

The practices inscribed in the socio-institutional action comprise the work developed in fields whose mission is expressed in the commitment to the development of individuals and groups located, especially, in contexts of social vulnerability. These are predominantly institutionalized actions, which are managed via social organizations and instances of municipal, state and federal governments. There are also some non-institutionalized practices which, therefore, are not officially regulated by specific management organisms within a formal structure, in which pedagogues, even professionally asserting themselves as such, engage in social sensitivity, political activism and voluntary membership.

In the Figure 1, the actions developed by pedagogues who are classified as practices in socio-institutional action are presented.

Source: research data (2019)5

Figura 1 Actions included in the socio-institutional action aspect 

The activities listed in the Figure 1 are not limited to a instructive intervention in spaces other than the school. Such activities, in their own ways and within the presupposed possibilities, materialize the transforming purpose of Pedagogy expressed in alternatives for the socialization of knowledge with a view to the development of human educability and the emancipation of individuals and groups (Rodriguez, Bernal, & Urpí, 2005).

The practices mentioned are more frequent in institutions that work with poor population segments and in contexts of social vulnerability. They reflect a type of systematic action that is guided by concrete training needs of groups in situations of social development linked to specific contexts that go beyond the school. These are practices developed in the educational spheres that are organized to cover demands that school institutions do not have because these demands do not appear as goals of the school or because of limitations that prevent such institutions from effectively assuming them. Due to these characteristics, these practices could be included in Social Pedagogy, since they are configured as

That systematic and grounded action of support, mediation and transfer that specifically favors the development of the subject's sociability throughout his life, circumstances and contexts, promoting his autonomy, integration and critical, constructive and transformative participation in the sociocultural framework that involves him, relying, firstly, on their own personal resources, for both the educator and the subject, and, secondly, mobilizing the sociocultural resources necessary for the surroundings in order to create new alternatives (Pérez Serrano, 2009, p. 126-137 , our translation).

It is important to note that these practices should not coincide with strictly subsidiary or assistance actions, as they can be conceived as a process integrated to the community and for the community, enhancing its educational dimensions, as proposed by the critical current of Social Pedagogy (Hämäläilen, 2003). In this way, they will be able to meet the demands of citizenship, becoming an instrument of emancipatory and not merely normalizing action to strengthen the Right to Education and the transformative protagonism of individuals and groups to create initiatives to tackle problems that need to be understood from a pedagogical perspective.

Pedagogy within the scope of labor or organizational education

Corresponding to 23% of the records on the actions developed by pedagogues in NSE spaces, what is called Labor or Organizational Education was manifested through various activities carried out in organizational environments with a view to training people within the framework needs related to work (Miguel & Picatoste, 2016).

In Figure 2, the actions mentioned by the pedagogues and that are inscribed in the referred strand of practices in NSE are presented. As they happen in corporate environments, these practices are informed by organizational objectives subordinated to the purposes of the organizations themselves, of course. The synergy between the educational practices inscribed in this aspect and the dynamics of organizations often ends up shifting the creative action of the pedagogue within a more critical framework, since, in the current context of capitalist development, ideals of productivity and competitiveness impregnate labor education with a sense of, in some cases, instrumentalization and normalization of the subject to the work environment and functions, referring to more conservative and technical pedagogical conceptions.

Source: research data (2019)

Figura 2 Actions registered in the field of Labor or Organizational Education 

It is observed that these practices reveal the dynamic character of the pedagogue's action in the field of labor education, in the sense that this professional is not only linked to the process of direct instruction with individuals, but acts as a manager or coordinator of teams and processes, which demand the articulation of conceptual, attitudinal and procedural elements specific to Pedagogy, as well as built on interdisciplinary dialogue with contributions from different scientific and technological fields. As manager or coordinator of educational teams and processes, the educator provides specific professionals who work directly with teaching with the necessary resources so that their practices are planned, executed and evaluated with based on parameters and criteria related to the recommended pedagogical concepts and the expected results.

In this process, the contributions of pedagogical theories and Didactic certainly collaborate from the conception to the evaluation of developed processes. These contributions constitute the general framework from which Pedagogy is conceptually established in work in labor education, although the pedagogical action is linked to other sources and foundations, such as the knowledge of General Administration, Organizational Psychology, Work Sociology, etc. Likewise, informed activities demand the application of skills for the strategic use of technologies, media and other operational devices for the development of online learning projects, requiring from the pedagogue basic knowledge in the area of communication, computing and information systems, for example (Morales & Moncera, 2019).

The pedagogical focus thus comprises the organization of practices that aim at both direct instruction and pedagogical mediation to enhance the insertion and adaptation of the worker in the work context, change or encouragement to habits of organizational culture, integration of people and sectors of the organization, of personal and collective well-being and maintenance of a motivating climate that meets the needs and expectations of the organization, given its institutional purposes, and of the people who make it up.

Pedagogy in the context of specialized education in health spaces

The practices that referred to the actions inscribed in the aspect of specialized education in health contexts were classified in 22% of the records reported by the pedagogues, which are shown in Figure 3.

Source: research data (2019)

Figura 3 Actions included in the Specialized Education in Health Contexts aspect. 

Based on the actions reported by the participants, the practices inscribed in this aspect demonstrate greater proximity to teaching, seen as a teaching activity directly carried out by the pedagogue with an individual or group, but also incorporate, as it can be verified in the table, specific management and research processes of educational situations whose purposes consist in designing, structuring, coordinating and monitoring health promotion strategies or pedagogical support to institutions and projects dedicated to this end (Serrano, 2013).

The relevance of these practices is evident when considering the demands for health education that require institutions to develop systematic actions with technical-scientific support within the scope of Pedagogy to achieve satisfactory impacts and results. From this point of view, Pedagogy starts to configure one of the constitutive dimensions of the necessary framework for the work of carrying out socialization policies and access to health information, the ongoing training of professionals in institutions and the promotion of specialized pedagogical activities with groups of users of public and private services, thus strengthening the processes of collective health, including the scope of Mental Health and Long-Time Therapeutic Institutions.

In effect, this understanding is opposed to the biomedical model that, traditionally, has acted as a parameter of health care processes carried out from traditional practices centered on the 'health versus disease' binomial. In addition to humanizing the therapeutic process, permeating the concept of the subject of health as someone who elaborates meanings through learning experiences and mobilizes them in their conduct, adhering or not to the conditions that influence their biopsychosocial well-being, Pedagogy provides important theoretical resources, methods for organizing meaningful health promotion situations in different contexts. In this way, there is a shift in the trend of health information to the perspective of training in, for and in health, including professionals and workers who, institutionally, work at different levels and who need to be permanently human, conceptual and technically (Severo & Queiroga, 2020).

The actions informed show the pedagogue involved in practices aimed at individuals, in a more clinical approach, or at groups. Pedagogical monitoring in therapeutic communities concerns the teaching action and coordination of educational work and multidisciplinary teams in approaching the subject in therapeutic processes, such as children with cancer or those in psychological distress. The educational practices developed with these groups help to alleviate the psychosocial impacts of severe or culturally stigmatized treatments, allow the construction of empathetic bonds between people and the development of learning that promote personal strengthening in the face of disease limitations, autonomy, self-esteem, diverse cognitive abilities, being able and potentiating the optimized social reinsertion of these people.

These practices refer to the meaning of health as a globality of well-being and education as a process of qualitative behavioral change through conceptual, attitudinal and procedural learning. Conceived in this way, these two concepts, education and health, provoke and legitimize the need for the pedagogue to act as a professional specialized in the structuring, management, execution and investigation of educational situations that may imply the promotion of the conditions necessary to deepen the biopsychosocial well-being of individuals and groups, whether in the work directly focused on them or on professionals and institutions providing services.

Therefore, the pedagogue needs to understand the health determinants and indicators, principles and devices of the Unified Health System (SUS) and its policies, especially those focused on the field of health education, mobilization strategies and awareness for diverse learning, among other things, in addition to the basic knowledge that the Pedagogy course already includes on the fundamentals of education and the organization of pedagogical work, especially Didactics.

Final considerations: the dynamics of pedagogical work between different practice matrices

Although it requires knowledge about teaching, as it constitutes an important modality of pedagogical intervention that manifests itself in different moments of non-school educational action, many of the professional practices of pedagogues enrolled in the three strands presented are not characterized as teaching practices.

It became important to raise some characteristics of institutional dynamics that influence the practices developed by the pedagogues participating in the research, in the condition of contextually situated processes. These subjects reported that in 26 (68%) cases, their practices are not regulated by some type of specific normative document on how the pedagogue's performance should occur, while in 12 (32%) cases this document exists and it works as a guideline for competences and professional attributions. This data is interesting from the point of view of the criteries that are applied, institutionally, to regulate the pedagogical action in the non-school space. In the wake of the deregulation of non-school education practices in Brazil (Ghanem Junior, 2008), the pedagogical performance in NSE is also confronted by the need to define criteries and organizational frameworks that help to create a solid structure of work for the pedagogue, in order to affirm and legitimize the professional character of the processes related to it.

In this sense, the emergence of regulatory frameworks is considered as an advance in the legitimization of non-school educational practices promoted by pedagogues and that their application collaborates with the recognition of the specificity of this professional action in contrast to those of other professions, a since the presence of multidisciplinary teams in conducting processes in which the pedagogue is inserted is common, as shown in the data.

The data show that 29 subjects (76%) develop or develop activities as part of multidisciplinary teams, alongside 09 (24%) who claim the opposite. As is known, the collaborative aspect between professions is a highly valued element in the world of work and one of the most effective ways of transposing it to the field of practices is the construction of multidisciplinary teams that aim to integrate knowledge from different fields of know-how for the realization of processes with multidimensional reach and more consistent.

Within these teams, it is necessary that the expertise of the pedagogue is evidenced as their specific contribution in the processes of conception, management, promotion and investigation of practices in the non-school context. This seems to be an important demand, as some professions already have strong traditions of action with a socio-psycho-educational focus in the social and organizational field, such as those with which the pedagogues who participated in the research mentioned acting directly: social workers, psychologists, nurses and administrators. The pedagogues also mentioned working with physical educators, lawyers, art educators, nutritionists, journalists and occupational therapists.

The data on the professional practices of pedagogues in a non-school field reinforce the understanding already given about the strong complexity and heterogeneity of the demands and models of pedagogical action and the wide spectrum of possibilities for teaching, management, counseling and research in the spaces that the configure. This aspect draws attention to the need for continuing education as an important institutional policy so that professionals can add new knowledge and skills and deepen the level of quality in their actions (Imbernón, 2010). However, more than half of the subjects participating in the research stated that their institutions do not provide them with continuing education activities. While 24 (63%) subjects stated this, only 14 (37%) reported having participated in these activities.

The considerations made about the professional practices of the pedagogue in the NSE spaces and some of the institutional conditions directly linked to work regulation, involvement with other professionals and continuing education initiatives introduce aspects of pedagogical practice outside the school that they must be continually reflected upon so that such practices may be improved.

It is from this perspective that information on the practice of pedagogues in non-school spaces, in the light of critical references, allows us to think of a Pedagogy curriculum that provides moments of meaningful praxis for students in light of the characteristics of the pedagogical action in those spaces. This should lead them to the exercise of theoretical-practical reflection as a motto so that they can be inserted in a more qualified way in the different processes with the potential to choose appropriate instruments and strategies for organizing their professional work within the scope of the NSE.

REFERENCES

Ball, S. (2005). Profissionalismo, gerencialismo e performatividade. Cadernos de Pesquisa. 35 (126), 539-564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-15742005000300002 [ Links ]

Miguel, C. F. S. & Picatoste, B. R. A. (2016). La pedagogía laboral como especialidad profesional en el siglo XXI. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 1(265), 559-577. Recuperado de https://revistadepedagogia.org/lxxiv/no-265/la-pedagogia-laboral-como-especialidad-profesional-en-el-siglo-xxi/101400005743/ Links ]

Morales, P. J. S., & Moncera, F. V. (2019). Pedagogía laboral: antecedentes históricos y situación actual de los profesionales. Etic@net, 19(2), 74-99. Recuperado em https://revistaseug.ugr.es/index.php/eticanet/article/view/11850 Links ]

Fernandez, F. S. (2006). El aprendizaje fuera de la escuela: tradición del passado y desafio para el futuro. Madrid, ES: Ediciones Académicas. [ Links ]

Frizzo, G. F. E., Ribas, J. F. M., & Ferreira, L. S. (2013). A relação trabalho-educação na organização do trabalho pedagógico da escola capitalista. Educação, 38(3), 553-564. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/198464448987 [ Links ]

Gil, A. C. (2008). Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social (6a ed.). São Paulo, SP: Atlas. [ Links ]

Ghanem Junior, E. G. G. (2008). Educação formal e não-formal: do sistema escolar ao sistema educacional. In V. A. Arantes (Org.), Educação formal e não-formal (p. 54-96). São Paulo, SP: Summus. [ Links ]

Hämäläilen, J. (2003). The concept of social pedagogy in the field of social work. Journal of Social Work, 3(1), 71-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017303003001005 [ Links ]

Hill, D. (2003). O neoliberalismo global, a resistência e a deformação da educação. Currículo sem Fronteiras, 3(2), 24-59. [ Links ]

Imbernón, F. (2010). Formação continuada de professores. Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed. [ Links ]

Libâneo, J. C. (2019) Finalidades educativas escolares em disputa, currículo e didática. In J. C. Libâneo, S. V. Rosa, M. V. R. Suanno, & A. D. L. Echalar (Orgs.), Em defesa do direito à educação escolar: didática, currículo e políticas educacionais em debate (p. 33-58). Goiânia, GO: CEPED/Espaço Acadêmico. [ Links ]

Lima, L. C. (2012). Aprender para ganhar, conhecer para competir: sobre a subordinação da educação na ‘sociedade da aprendizagem’. São Paulo, SP: Cortez. [ Links ]

Pérez Serrano, G. (2007). Investigación cualitativa: retos e interrogantes. Madrid, ES: La Muralla. [ Links ]

Pérez Serrano, G. (2009). Pedagogía social - educación social: construcción científica e intervención práctica. Madrid, ES: Narcea. [ Links ]

Pimenta, S. G. (2010). Epistemologia da prática ressignificando a didática. In M. A. S. Franco, & S. G. Pimenta (Orgs.), Didática: embates contemporâneos (p. 12-56). São Paulo, SP: Edições Loyola. [ Links ]

Rodriguez, A., Bernal, A., & Urpí, C. (2005). Retos de la educación social. España, ES: Ediciones Eunate. [ Links ]

Serrano, F. J. P. (2013). Educación social para la salud: proyección, acción y profesilionalización. Revista Médica de Risaralda, 19(1), 75-80. [ Links ]

Severo, J. L. R. L. (2015). Educação não escolar como campo de práticas pedagógicas. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Pedagógicos, 96(244), 561-576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-6681/345513545 [ Links ]

Severo, J. L. R. L., & Queiroga, N. (2020). Atuação do(a) pedagogo(a) em práticas de promoção da saúde em contextos educativos não escolares.Interfaces Científicas -Educação ,8(3), 55-68. [ Links ]

Tardif, M. (2000). Saberes profissionais dos professores e conhecimentos universitários: Elementos para uma epistemologia da prática profissional dos professores e suas conseqüências em relação à formação para o magistério. Revista Brasileira de Educação , 1(13), 5-24. [ Links ]

Trilla, J., Gros, B., López, F., & Martín, M. J. (2011). La educación fuera de la escuela: âmbitos no formales y educación no-formal. Barcelona, ES: Editorial Ariel. [ Links ]

Zayas, E. L. B. (2012). Antropologia, epistemologia e inovação da educação permanente. In Zayas, E. L. B. (org.), O paradigma da educação continuada (p. 10-32). Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed . [ Links ]

4This research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Center for Health Sciences at UFPB, having been approved under the record Nº 30259514.5.0000.5188.

5The data were initially produced in the thesisof PhD research and later expanded into an unfunded research.

Received: July 09, 2019; Accepted: August 23, 2021

Creative Commons License Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto sob uma licença Creative Commons