Introduction

To understand higher education teaching in the contemporary context, affected by the tensions arising from the pandemic scenario and the forecast for the post-pandemic, it is important to have as reference the critical perspective, which has been accompanying the reflections and studies on such a singular theme. Interacting with this field presupposes reflections that denounce pedagogical practices that were demanding significant changes for a considerable time.

The 20th century brought philosophical and epistemological understandings that questioned the assumptions of modern science, so dear to the tradition of knowledge and to the school and academic culture. However, this process was slow and of late repercussion as far as higher education is concerned. Even today, we have not completely surpassed the phase of criticism and denunciation of a schooling strongly marked by the dominant epistemology, in which there are advances in the science of education in another direction.

This epistemology, understood by many as traditional, is based on the dichotomous definition between teaching and learning, and between teaching and discourse. It assumes that the student is a blank sheet of paper in which the teacher will fill in calligraphically with knowledge organized into units and topics. And the teacher as the depository of knowledge, the executor of the pedagogical task. Such premises strongly impact the organization of curricula, as modern science preaches, because they follow a linear and progressive ordering in time and complexity. There is an increasing order in the organization of contents, with theory being the assumption of practice.

This process brings us back to the teaching models that are conveyed in many educational spheres. Even in higher education, where the discourse of indissociability of research, teaching and extension, made by legal orientation and based on the 1988 Constituent Assembly for Brazilian universities, has made little progress in the reconstruction of another epistemology, in which teaching incorporates the understanding of research knowledge and the contexts about and towards which it is directed, having extension as a starting point and point of arrival of knowledge production and academic training.

This perspective, although late in coming into the university arena, has been questioned by studies and research, as well as by specific management experiences, whether institutional, course or even disciplinary. Even so, we are far from a more intense innovative practice, which responds to the new student profiles that arrive at higher education, bringing multiple knowledge, cultures and diversity, characteristic of emerging contexts, which demand the construction of emancipatory processes in the institutions.

The analysis of this scenario has imposed questions about the repercussions on professional life in times of uncertainty and temporariness, which characterize the complex contemporary scenarios. This process is intensified with the Covid 19 pandemic, urging us to expand our understanding about teaching and formative processes in the face of an unforeseen situation. Thus, the (in) visibilities manifested in and by pedagogical work from the transposition of face-to-face teaching activities to digital activities circumscribe the institutional dynamics, requiring a multiplicity of pedagogical designs that trigger alternative practices capable of mobilizing students and teachers. Certainly, many uncertainties will permeate the reflections explained here; but we understand that it is necessary to make an effort to understand what is lived so that we can come to constitute a post-pandemic scenario.

To problematize this perspective, we organized this article in three related parts. Initially, we present vectors of a macro-political scenario and its implications on academic management policies. Next, we highlight the multiple teachings and the emergence of learning to be a teacher, questioning the (in)visibilities manifested in and by the pedagogical work in face of the pandemic scenario. Then, we reflect on the teaching and training movements, showing that the ongoing transition processes circumscribe the way pedagogical work is understood, demanding new institutional designs. And, finally, we work on the final notes that resume the contexts and their emergences in the direction of defending institutional policies capable of propelling formative movements and necessary disruptions, to the insurgent contexts, favoring generativity and the protagonism of teachers and students in institutions of higher education. Certainly many factors are not new, nor do they originate in the year 2020, but they are becoming more acute or are covered with new demands as they present themselves to the educational scenario.

The macro power scenario and academic management policies

It is true that there are different levels of academic management, ranging from the central governing bodies to the different institutional places where decisions are made and movements responsible for the execution of the educational act are generated. However, with greater or lesser impact, all these decision-making spheres are susceptible to what happens in the macrostructure of power. In the scenario analyzed here, we see four vectors as susceptible to the changes now being experienced.

The impacts on globalization, manifested by greater social isolation and counting easily on exacerbated nationalism. Closed borders between countries are part of our daily life, and if there were already visa requirements and transit difficulties between many of them, this condition is likely to become more acute. Sanitary arguments can be respected, but they can also, in the medium term, disguise other concerns such as labor market reservation and security. Unfortunately, there are racial and religious prejudices present in these contexts, besides political-ideological issues that interfere in scientific agreements. Economic competitiveness tends to intensify, reducing agreements and partnerships between countries at different stages of development, which is likely to increase social inequality.

Another important aspect in the scope of educational policies and management refers to religious conservatism and the denial of science. Antônio ^{Nóvoa, in a recent conference (XX ENDIPE, RIO, 2020}), drew attention to the trend, strengthened by the pandemic, of the domestication of education, which argues that children and young people can learn at home, depriving them of the components of citizenship and coexistence that are fundamental to a man of solidarity. The defenders of this thesis also justify the reduction of costs and investment, both national and international in education, strongly affecting the teaching profession and its condition in the democratic society scenario. With this ideology, society loses the fundamental socializing role of school education, which is responsible for the construction of values dear to the idea of what is common, proper to the public space that involves different cultures and different perspectives in interaction. It is worth pointing out that the denial of science has also been taking on proportions previously unimaginable. In the Brazilian national context, we witnessed the impact of a ministerial representative defending terraplanning. The pandemic has been a favorable scenario to highlight perceptions that deny science, in a political arena that highlights and opposes unimaginable opinions of government authorities. How has higher education been affected by this phenomenon? What responses are expected?

In the same direction, it is worth exploring the question of commodification in relation to citizenship that requires a balance of adherence and, at the same time, resistance to modes of production and the world of work. Considering that higher education prepares for work, a relationship with society and how it reacts to professional demands is inevitable. However, this does not mean a link to the so-called labor market, since the latter is volatile and obeys rules different from the epistemological bases of the profession. Listening and being aware of what professionals do and what challenges them in specific fields can qualify the dimension of training. But, especially in post-pandemic times, there is a bet about a planetary awareness that may call into question market positions. And, as a result, the formation processes will need to deepen discussions about their formats and perspectives.

More than ever before, the reverse effect of the pandemic has brought positivity to the environment. Pollution rates have been significantly lowered by the slowdown in consumption in different sectors. The ecological issue assumed a positivity in the world scenario and, without ignoring the effects on the economy, alerted, once again, to the urgent need for a new development agenda. The human dimension has assumed a significant protagonism, both in the emergency need to care for the other (enhanced in the pandemic context) and in the dimension of the planet, with the commitment to its global survival. Education is key in this historical battle, and the teacher is irreplaceable as the epistemic subject of an education committed to collective life. The tension between mercantilization and citizenship assumes a special relevance, even though it encounters the traditional resistance of economic forces. These will certainly replicate themselves in the higher education arena, especially in the careers that are more directly linked to the productive world, and will have a greater impact on the teaching profession.

The technologicalization or academic digitalization presents itself as a second vector of the most visible during the pandemic process, either by the emergence of knowledge and skills of teachers to use it quickly and efficiently, or by the denunciation of the lack of structural preparation of investments, so that students and teachers would be able to respond adequately to the demands of digitalization. The understandings derived from this experience are still maturing. There is much evidence of progress, despite the limitations encountered. Teachers had to be trained in the use of technologies; governments had to move with resources to schools and universities. If the positive balance that seems to exist with the expansion of digital competencies is undeniable, it is necessary to be very cautious, because the idea of individualization and the greater facility for the global industry of education, already prepared for a consumerist relationship that interests capital, remains. When materials and information and communication technologies are produced outside educational spaces, outside the teaching profession, as ^{Nóvoa (2020}) warns, much caution is needed. The craft dimension of the educational process presupposes the mediation of the subjects of the practice, teacher and students, mediated by culture. It does not do without situated and subjective understanding. This is the basis of the teaching profession that technology does not replace. The challenge is to incorporate the digital cultures in education in what they have potential for, without dispensing with the human and cultural mediation that is established between teacher, student, and knowledge. The forms of production are contextual and presuppose human intervention in their interpretation and decoding in a given time and space. The experience of pandemic times has been affecting the classic scenarios of the university classroom and, certainly, will occupy a centrality in later pedagogical disputes, affirming unquestionable contributions. We cannot, however, leave aside the analysis of the broader scenario and the commercial interests that may also be present in this arena.

Internationalization will probably be among the aspects most affected by post-pandemic policies and practices, due to arguments already exposed in this text. Coexistence and social relations, still strongly present at local and national levels, will take time to return to the usual, if we consider, as a reference, the present scenario until 2019, even if its restrictions are not universal. Besides this factor, the economic impoverishment is leading to cuts in funding for programs and scholarships, keeping only some areas as priorities, with obvious losses for the humanities and social sciences. In the case of Brazil, the government's policies are explicit in rare areas of investment, with deep cuts in the Ministries of Science and Technology and Education. The press denounces brain drain with irreversible loss for the country. The HEIs are trying to live with the crisis by betting on the so-called internationalization at home, which means bringing curricula and activities closer to universities in partner countries, offering courses in foreign languages and research groups articulated with colleagues abroad. Certainly, internationalization with mobility is hampered, even though the use of digital technologies has been favoring communication, the creation of research communities and joint classes with international groups. However, the evaluation and accreditation agencies continue to value academic internationalization in their speeches, as a reference of quality. This is a movement that at times can stimulate creative measures within the institutions, and at other times can constrain genuine possibilities regarding internationalization. Digitalization helps the virtual crossing of borders and this may be the new perspective to be adopted. In any case, a cultural impact is foreseen on the expectations that have marked the tradition of this field in institutional policies and that only the future will answer.

Teaching: the emergence of learning to be a teacher

Thinking about teaching implies understanding the multiple singular reconfigurations that are produced, taking into account the subjective and objective conditions of this professional exercise. However, especially the emerging scenario, in face of the pandemic in 2020, has required teachers to build new ways of operating, making flexible the guidelines provided by the curricular dynamics. Experiencing different interactive and mediational processes is fundamental, once the learning spaces and times are different and the reconfiguration of teaching is urgent. Therefore, it is necessary to build "new" ways of teaching and learning, because we are facing a dynamic that has not been experienced so far.

The emerging (trans)formations of pedagogical work make it evident that the digital transition is the basis of the current organizational dynamics, requiring the redesign of the academic programs that were in place until now. The curricular matrices with a progressive, linear character lose in the pandemic scenario the possibility of achieving it, without assessing how to reach the formative demands proposed until then. Since we were led to interrupt the presential activities, a kind of suspension of the daily routine we had been producing was established. This suspension placed us, at first, before the challenge of finding other ways to operate in the organization of the pedagogical dynamics, which were no longer presential and started to be established via remote teaching¹. Thus, a question arises: how to strengthen the role of the teacher facing the challenge of working with emergency remote learning? We know that digital devices will never replace relational work, but technology cannot be ignored, learning depends on interactive processes. Therefore, there is no time to lose, we need to find alternatives, since the urgency imposed by social distance requires us to (trans)form the pedagogical work, seeking dynamics capable of involving and mobilizing students for new learning. When we are surprised by the pandemic circumstance, we need to immediately problematize the new situation: what does it mean to work remotely, how to organize these activities?

We have a new scenario, the public (the teaching space at the University) invading the private (the teachers' and students' home and family space), spaces being used/invaded, in a way never experienced before. Teaching activities at home require a rearrangement of the family and domestic environments and organizations, as well as the reorganization of the time demanded by the pedagogical work to be developed in the virtual class, students without access conditions, either because of the lack of computers or the lack of resources to obtain internet plans, the occupation of spaces in their homes that need to be shared with other family members, the absence of an adequate study place, in which there is no interruption or interference, are some of the most common factors highlighted by those students who believe that it is necessary to dedicate themselves to some kind of study activity.

In this direction, the (in)visible in teaching reveals itself: plans and programs need to be adapted, academic times/spaces are no longer the same, interaction becomes more complex, once everyone accumulates functions in the same available space at the moment, that is, the private space of the residences. How to mitigate this circumstance, considering the particular contexts of each subject, be it a teacher or a student? How to manage the family space, the care of the family and the children, who are in remote teaching situations, besides the basic daily needs of food, hygiene, and meeting school demands, in the case of teachers who have children of school age or even in higher education? How to keep students interested in learning, bringing them "inside" the pedagogical activity, since the spaces/time they occupy are no longer those of the classroom? The initial effort was to establish some kind of bond, even if virtual, to promote activities, seeking greater autonomy for the students, involving them in academic activities in a way that they could feel mobilized to learn. For the teachers, this was a moment of reorganization of their routines, in order to meet personal and family demands, without, however, neglecting the classes and orientations, as well as the research under their responsibility. However, we know that this did not happen in a linear fashion, because each context had its own specificities, overloading the teachers who began to have three shifts, besides the many different situations with their classes, both undergraduate and graduate. We observed, therefore, that this process was not easily established. Many hours of conversation, questioning, and problematizations were proposed throughout the semesters. There was no possibility of a return to face-to-face contact on the horizon. How to motivate them to continue? How to motivate ourselves in the face of so many challenges and confrontations?

We are neophytes in remote learning, an activity that is neither distance nor hybrid learning. It was necessary to construct meaning and significance for remote/virtual teaching, developing technological fluency. Thus, we observe new scenarios shaping up, because the changes, which have mobilized society as a whole, have also required teaching reconfigurations. These changes resulted from the need to make more intensive use of technological advances and take advantage of the globalized experiences that the various university and school institutions have been experiencing, using these elements as a motto to think of strategies capable of producing new teaching designs. The knowledge networks have been important in reconfiguring teaching, since the opportunity to share these processes has produced new meanings for academic solidarity, as well as broadening the teaching generativity. Such processes can be made more dynamic through the expansion of inter-institutional knowledge networks at local, regional, national and international levels, consolidated through the construction of alliances, established by what we call shared knowledge, producing a culture of collaboration. This culture of collaboration, in turn, becomes one of the pillars of this "new" design. For this, it is fundamental that teachers have the willingness to learn, as well as to develop their creativity, empathy, and understanding of contemporary issues, and their ability to cooperate.

In this sense, we evidence a set of transformations in the occupational structures of institutions, as well as the search for the reorganization of pedagogical work, which has required from teachers to find alternatives to learn in an autonomous and informal way, through a diversity of experiences and self-training processes. This, undoubtedly, has been one of the biggest challenges that has been produced from remote teaching; the teacher takes another place, building new relationships about learning and teaching, since both (teachers and students) are learners and teachers in this process, which is not exhausted, but multiplies and expands, even though there is a certain asymmetry of roles (AUTHOR 1, 2020). The set of students and teachers, during virtual activities, can assume the role of support or auxiliary stimulus in the relational processes that are established. This, in turn, is characterized as a device capable of providing the others with advances in their learning, because by accessing their previous knowledge, the subjects make decisions about the paths they will take and the degree of adherence to the information offered (AUTHOR 1, 2020). Therefore, exploring

[...] the cognitive potential of individuals means considering their possibilities to interact with sources of information and organize them, making the educational process a constructive, everyday process that depends on established intersubjective exchanges and cultural resources and practices that enable the individual to appropriate the tools and intellectual skills of the cultural environment where it is inserted. (AUTHOR 1, 2020, p. 60)

Being a teacher, in pandemic times, has been a great challenge, because we are urged to overcome the idea of the transposition of the face-to-face pedagogical work to the digital, understanding that both perspectives are two sides of the same coin. Therefore, the essential thing is to develop technological fluency as a condition to qualify the proposals of teaching activities²to be developed.

In these circumstances, in which the screen is the means to get closer to the students and remote experiences are imposed in their daily lives, it is necessary that we bring the theoretical studies and make them accessible to the world of life, that is, it is necessary that we organize a set of activities that combine variety of resources with the topics under study, favoring the students' technological fluency. There must be an intentionality in the pedagogical organization of the proposed activities for the development of remote teaching, so that everyone feels committed to the resulting learning.

In remote teaching, the absence of the elements of the face-to-face experience, such as class exchanges, daily interaction, camaraderie, and interactions, in general, so present in the face-to-face classroom, are subsumed in this new context; the activities, via the screen, take on other colors. Therefore, it is necessary that the teacher be sensitive to this moment. It requires his understanding of the whole scenario, which is not always close, since many students have returned home and do not even live in the city. They may be in rural areas, which can hinder or prevent an effective participation and involvement in the proposed study activities. It is necessary, then, to have as a horizon a multiplicity of ways of doing and thinking about possible teaching, understanding the multiplicity of scenarios that are being designed.

Therefore, one of the necessary challenges is to put teachers in a situation of solving problems, reflecting, drawing conclusions and proposing courses of action, through technological fluency. Learning implies social and emotional challenges, besides the appropriation of knowledge and the mastery of technologies. There are certainly evident limits about virtual practices, since they, by themselves, do not generate the capacity or conditions for reorganization, understanding and reflection on the pedagogical work that the teacher does, nor do they guarantee the involvement of students in the study activities.³

It is worth mentioning that teaching is not only a cognitive and rational activity, since, when we teach, we generate emotions that serve to express/communicate ideas that may reach and be part of other subjects. We observe that teachers involved in remote teaching are strongly committed to the academic and/or school knowledge they need to teach, but they cannot lose sight of the fact that students, first of all, are people, just like them. They are men and women who rejoice and suffer with what is around them, and for this reason we need to understand emotions as one of the most challenging and formative dimensions so present in this moment. We need to learn to deal with this circumstance that has vividly emerged in the scenario of virtual activities: cameras that are not opened, muted voices, sadness, fear, insecurity, many feelings, the diverse that is present. What to do in the face of this? Develop sensitive listening, tune out silences.... Understand the specificities of each context and stand firm in the face of this scenario.

There are necessary changes, which concern the possibilities of concretizing other action strategies capable of involving the students, valuing their autonomy and their protagonism. To do so, we have to get out of ourselves, moving from personal points of view to different points of view. The teacher's role has been to signal the importance of the learning spaces that, for now, have become virtual to some extent, without forgetting that diversity, in this context, is a very present element.

Therefore, as teachers, we have been challenged to deal with the uncertainty and unpredictability that the pandemic context has imposed on us. We are urged every day to think about disruption possibilities. Thinking about disruption can be a way of reflecting about possibilities, that is, trying to do something different from the usual, in a radical, different, revolutionary way. When we assume this position, we are facing a disruptive, disturbing proposal, which, undoubtedly, has been a challenge. This perspective makes us reflect about the relationship between the improbable and the possible, which means thinking that informal learning and self-training processes emerge as unofficial categories in formal education, in view of the new scenario that is emerging. We observe that such learning is established through networks of knowledge from learning communities. New ways of valuing knowledge are being recognized through exchanges of experiences that are being resized between teachers and students.

Peer-to-peer training activities favor the appropriation of knowledge and capacities generated by processes of greater autonomy, based on the [re]signification of common experiences and new ways of interaction. Dealing with uncertainties has become commonplace in our daily teaching activities, permeating our actions and revealing that the protagonism belongs to students and teachers simultaneously. We are building ways of learning and teaching and, for this, there is still a long way to go, since the pandemic is still present.

In the words of ^{Freire (2008}), "the path is made by walking", therefore, we need to understand that we live in an experimental moment, in which urgency forces us to leave the place of taskmasters and assume the place of protagonists. To build other learning possibilities, at this moment, is a great challenge to those who participate in the formation of other subjects. We need to co-opt the attention of students and teachers. Cooptation is a kind of strategy that involves getting out of the common place and effectively contributing ideas and thinking about who can be reached with them in this circumstance. It is essential to adapt to the new circumstances and produce other practices, recreating and reinventing ways of operating in life and in the university itself. To take the context in hand and examine it carefully is to produce a movement of pedagogical alternation⁴, because we are not physically in the university, but we are developing pedagogical work beyond its walls. We are entering other environments, not previously thought of as training spaces.

In fact, we are historically and socially marked by the pandemic moment. This is why we have been provoked to break with a certain teaching tradition, in which teaching was placed as a guarantee for learning. We believe that the role of education has changed, and this change can be qualitative, that is, we need to increase and broaden the horizons of students and teachers, opening spaces for critical reflection, producing social transformations, so that the (in) visible becomes power, taking education in other directions, without crediting technologies and digital formats with the solution to educational problems. It is undeniable that education, for being relational, cannot do without presence in the development of pedagogical activity, even if we can make use of hybrid experiences.

We know that the Emperor is naked, and inequalities are more evident every day. The opportunities to access remote education have not been equal, not even among teachers. Equity involves more than equal opportunities, it implies "conditions that enable access and permanence in the system, thus mitigating dropout" (^{ISAIA; AUTHOR 1; MACIEL, 2011}, p. 363). It is related to the idea of sociocultural, economic and gender diversity, the equal conditions of learning for students, so that the entire order of disparity is subsumed to a resulting equitable distribution of opportunities, ensuring benefits capable of overcoming such disparities in the acquisition of cultural goods, considering the diversity of subjects. With this, we highlight that there is a clear need to ensure equity in a society marked by inequalities of all kinds, even though it is evident that understanding this circumstance is not capable of mitigating the complexity of social problems that are structural, and, therefore, demand from society a civilizing emancipation.

Therefore, the emphasis needs to be on the critical understanding that education needs to be dedicated to the freedom and recognition of subjects in different social contexts. The multicultural aspects that are revealed can be good elements to indicate that the technological advances made available are not accessible to everyone and that, in the middle of the globalization era, the transformations in the way of understanding the world, of perceiving the occupational structures and the organization of work are quite different.

Therefore, it is necessary to think of project-based methodologies capable of putting students and teachers in front of practical situations in which knowledge gains new meaning. In addition to considering that learning involves cognitive, emotional, and social processes that go beyond the realm of the scientific field. The search for knowledge can be expanded and the variety of experiences can be enhanced, that is, we are faced with the opportunity to include work activities, such as volunteering, literary readings, study groups involving several themes, as well as research that allows the deepening of knowledge and themes of personal interest, and that is no longer restricted to the subjects and curricular matrices foreseen for face-to-face training designs.

The field of multiple learning gains great potential for reflection around pedagogical work and implies a hierarchy of experiences on the field of learning. Thus, our focus should be on the progress that the training subjects can build by promoting their personal development, as well as stimulating their investigative capacities from the rigorous analysis of the educational contexts.

Obviously, we still do not know the results of the choices made so far, however, we need to consider that the virtual interactions established, for now, are the main evidence of success or failure of the work we undertook through the teaching we problematized. Certainly, there is still much to reflect about what is happening, but it is too early to give answers to the new scenarios that are being generated. We need to listen carefully and, of course, learn a little more about this new way of operating teaching.

In this way, teaching emerges and becomes more dynamic through the tension outlined in the face of the pandemic moment, which provokes, awakens, instigates, and sharpens the production of new movements of learning how to be a teacher; these possibilities are established and favor the pedagogical protagonism⁵. Here the boldness and the intensity of the actions can be good bets. Teaching is summoned to reinvent itself!

The re-invention of teaching and educational movements

The processes that weave the configuration of teaching allows us to evidence challenges and tensions that drive the reinvention of teaching in the face of emerging contexts. The confrontations experienced by teachers reveal the need for connections with the knowledge and practices produced in everyday teaching, with the social, political and cultural dimensions that affect the teacher's work, revealing the leaps of everyday life as a way to emerge the necessary protagonism for the present confrontations in contemporaneity.

The pandemic context challenged us to suspend the future and amplify the present with an intensity never felt before, impelling us to reconfigure many dimensions of everyday life. The spontaneity and analogies⁶ present in many ways of operating were interrupted, leading us to the need for a differentiated projection of the actions we needed to produce. The usual anticipations marked by previous experiences proved to be insufficient, because the interactions, the spaces, and the times were different, showing the contours of a necessary disruption with what had already been lived. However, the need to maintain a certain organicity of daily life challenges us to many pragmatic and economical⁷ decisions, because meeting the demands is necessary, for which the time for action and for understanding are, many times, in an intense mismatch.

Certainly, the hierarchy of daily life needed to be reconfigured, making emerge with even greater power the need for technological fluency and insertion in the digital culture⁸. An insertion that was already presented as necessary and, many times, proclaimed as synonymous with innovation in educational processes.

synonymous with innovation in educational processes. However, with the pandemic, the continuity of the work in HEIs was put in check by the institutional and personal/professional conditions of teachers and other institutional players. The organization of classes in institutional virtual platforms (which was unknown to many professors), the dynamics of the meetings, of the selection processes, of the defense and qualification panels in virtual platforms, and the reorganization of research and extension actions needed to be urgently reconfigured. Daily challenges of breaking with what we were used to in face-to-face work, tinged by the dramatic situation of mourning for the millions of people affected by the virus. As ^{Santos (2020}) well says, the Cruel Pedagogy of the Virus, which demands us to think critically about what we are living. It summons us to think about what we have been producing to maintain the organicity of our daily lives? How to produce consciously directed actions, equating the time for administration and the time for formation? How to subvert the speed of everyday actions? What formative movements do we need to produce? What emancipatory relationships do we need to enunciate? Certainly, what it allows us to see and how it will be interpreted and evaluated will imply the post-pandemic scenario to be built.

It is important to consider that the speed and unpredictability with which we were urged to think and promote new perspectives of work led us to an experimentation of ways of operating, for many, not yet experienced, leading us to the increase of immediatism in teaching.⁹ However, we need to move forward, giving up immediate practices, and thus be able to build emancipatory perspectives from elements that have challenged us and demanded a more intense look at the pandemic scenario. Our entry into remote teaching was untimely, but the continuity of our activities requires us to think about how it will be from now on? In this sense, it emerges as necessary to give ourselves time and suspend the automatism of actions; we need to stop to think, to look, to listen, especially to talk about what happens to us, to cultivate the art of the encounter, so that the necessary protagonism to the clashes that are present in our society can emerge (^{BONDIA, 2002}).

We need to build a conscious hierarchy that projects emancipatory perspectives of the teaching work, which represent assertive choices and in accordance with an institution committed to a project that has social quality¹⁰ as the horizon of its educational work. It is essential to strengthen the understanding that, in our choices, we trigger values, world views, views of society and education, which maximize or minimize individual and collective benefits. To this end, it is important that we consider the global/local regulations and their impact on the multiple educations in action. We need to make visible the tensions that have been produced and, especially, how teachers understand and mean them.

It is true that the reflections and crossings that affect the teacher's work can be observed in the daily teaching routine, both in the micropolitical scope linked to policies and regulations at local, regional, and institutional levels, and in the macro-political scope. However, the way in which regulations and crossings are understood by teachers results from the amplitude of objectifications that are produced in the construction of teaching, which reveals the knowledge and actions that are mobilized by teachers, as well as the institutional environments on which many of the possibilities of meanings about teachers' work are based, in terms of demands and challenges involved in their performance.

The fragility of the collective processes in the institutions was already a present reality and, with the social distance, this condition seems to have worsened, especially when it comes to institutional decisions and directions, which cannot do without the debate and the participation of the collective. At every moment we are surprised by norms and regulations that need to be accepted in the teaching practice, intensifying the regulatory dimension of the teachers' work. An example, in this direction, are the practices of follow-up and validation of teaching plans, which many institutions are proposing as a way to regularize and certify the work that has been developed. In times of attacks on universities, this seems to constitute a form of resistance to possible attacks on the effectiveness of the work done. However, the space that could be for debate and fostering of sharing is installed under the perspective of control. Issues related to the adaptation of curricula, evaluation processes, as well as students' conditions and learning, seem to remain under the individual responsibility of each teacher. It reinforces a kind of private jurisprudence about the ongoing pedagogical mediations. Thus, mistakenly, in the name of supposed autonomy, the collective responsibility for educational processes is placed in the background.

We believe that these issues impose reflection about the dimension of privatization/domestication of educational processes in HEIs, in the perspective that ^{Nóvoa (XX ENDIPE, RIO, 2020}) proffered, referring to the tendency of emptying the public and collective dimension about educational practices in contemporaneity. A situation that finds fertile ground in the perspective of hyper-specialization and the productivist dimension that affects the teacher's work, since we have in our studies evidenced this condition as favoring the movements of particularization of teaching. A dynamic that is developed by selecting particular points of view, without a critical and empowering distance about the reasons, mobilizations and, especially, the social impact of the work done (^{HELLER, 1991}, 2008). This perspective reveals itself as a process that restricts the professionalization of teaching, by having as predominance the instrumental reason over the ethical dimensions and social responsibility involved in the teaching work.

Certainly, the understanding about the challenges and demands of the teaching profession in HEIs is not something given, but is gradually constructed and resized from different formative experiences established throughout the exercise of teaching. In this sense, the emancipatory perspectives of what teachers do involve the possibilities of taking off from everyday life, characterized by consciously directed and mobilized processes for a more accurate understanding of the situations and the regulations that affect the everyday life of teaching. It translates into efforts directed to qualitatively different objectifications of the everyday sphere, favoring the progressive awareness about the conditions and regulations of the teaching professional practice (AUTHOR 3, 2012).

The profusion of lives that we have witnessed throughout the pandemic period may be an indication generated by the need established in school and academic contexts, characterizing possibilities of take-offs from the everyday life. The sharing among peers, researchers and expertises has been a reality intensified during the pandemic period. The established networks of knowledge and collaboration have favored the understanding of the impacts of the pandemic in different contexts, whether local or global, revealing in greater detail the urgency of a global pact. The unusualness of this experience at a global level has allowed us to move towards a planetary consciousness, highlighting the urgent need to put the world on a sustainable path. However, it is important that we think about how much this has provided for the reinvention of our everyday life.

In the scope of pedagogical practices, the lives have revealed themselves as the imminent possibility of continuity of interactions and mediations closer to the face-to-face practices, which are usual in HEIs. Thus, remote teaching has been constituted from the alternation of asynchronous and synchronous moments, with lives as virtual/presence moments capable of boosting students' studies. However, it is important that we are able to carefully observe how this alternative represents models that are centered on the unilateral transmission by the teacher as the depository of knowledge. Commonly, the alternation of synchronous and asynchronous practices has been considered as hybrid teaching as it contemplates a certain diversification of pedagogical practices. However, the perspective of personalization implied in hybrid teaching, even though it has advanced driven by the invasion in private environments, is not a perspective present in pedagogical practices. The priority element, in remote teaching, remains centered on the content to be developed. In hybrid teaching, the teacher is not the center of the process, but the one who promotes the mediation between the students and the objects of knowledge, outlining experiences that can eventually count on the explanation of a content, but this is not his role alone. Certainly, the experience with remote teaching has required the reinvention of the teaching work, however, it is important, as we have already said, that we problematize the simple transposition from the presential to the virtual. The transformation of remote teaching implies supporting a process that considers students as protagonists and that enables the development of autonomy (^{BACICH, et al., 2015}).

The reinvention of teaching has not been an easy process, especially because it requires the inadaptation of the subject in relation to the actions he or she performs, emerging from these needs and desires for transformations, because "[...] the being that finds himself or herself fully adapted to the world that surrounds him or her, could desire nothing, would experience no desires and certainly could create nothing" (^{VYGOTSKI, 2003}, p. 35). A formative dynamic that demands openness and questioning about one's own thoughts and conceptions, encompassing a complex network of relations linked to appreciations that have a long history of elaboration, often crystallized in modeled practices. We emphasize, in this perspective, the need to break with particularistic perspectives of teaching production, characterized by individualistic and reproductivist processes that affect the teaching activity.

To this end, it is essential that we are able to confront and question the models and routine practices, from the sharing of teaching experiences, which we consider important devices of take-offs of everyday life, by allowing the thought and ideas to expand and reorganize themselves on the basis of particular experiences. A dynamic that requires reflective work about the ways of teaching, encompassing a dialectical relationship between the spheres of everyday life and the non-everyday life. Investigating the meanings attributed to the actions produced in everyday teaching is a complex task, since it challenges the subject of teaching to intervene in processes often naturalized by teachers in everyday life (AUTHOR 3, 2012). In this sense, the take-offs of everyday life rest on the condition that teachers understand that their performance needs to go beyond the immediate and particularistic needs of teaching in the direction of linking their performance to broader integrations that move towards social emancipation.

It requires a permanent process of construction, elaboration, reflection, and critical analysis of the global and local context, re-elaboration of conceptions and production of knowledge, in order to rebuild it in specific situations and contexts such as the one we are experiencing through remote teaching. It involves the production of an emancipatory knowledge, having as basic principles dialogicity and the renunciation of monopolies of interpretation (^{SANTOS, 2000}). To this end, this is a perspective that cannot be solitary; groups of teachers need to support and sustain each other.

We consider the improvement of intellectual tools fundamental to the epistemological and political confrontations that are established in the context of teaching. The complexity of the contemporary educational panorama requires an ethical-political commitment, demanding analysis and understanding of the contradictions that are present in this peculiar type of social practice that is the educational work. Thus, we evidence the clear need for qualification of pedagogical work, which demands constant updates of personal and professional skills that teachers undertake to achieve conditions to develop in the profession, depending, at least in part, on how each teacher understands the world and what it means. To this end, it is fundamental that we all focus on possible activities, taking into account the multiple facets of daily life, both of the institutions and their subjects (teachers and students), so that we can think about the new scenario of teaching, developing activities capable of promoting closer dialogue between the subjects of this process and collective work with social responsibility, capable of having repercussions on the formative processes, which are the valuation measure of the teaching profession.

Final Observations

It is still premature to predict with certainty the post-pandemic scenario regarding teaching activities in higher education. Some say that teaching will be a trend that is here to stay and that there will be substantial changes in the teaching and learning processes. Others are exhausted with the condition of dealing exclusively with digital instruments and yearn to return to face-to-face spaces. With these considerations, we can see that there are multiple predictions and that we can only work with hypotheses, based on the reading of the contextual experience. Certainly, there is a multiplicity of realities that involve previous expertises of teachers and students, instrumental availability with the media, nature of the subjects, teaching and learning styles, and other conditions that interfere with the success of the experience lived in the pandemic period. In an attempt to problematize some aspects of the teaching activity, we listed

It is likely that significant losses by failing or dropping out also inform the effects of the pandemic. But the return to face-to-face may suggest forms of resistance.

The production of the discourses in the pandemic context, however, is unanimous in calling for the condition that the experience is not exhausted in the denunciation and is committed to the enunciation of new times. We certainly need to observe slowly what happens to us, but beyond that, it is fundamental that we are capable of overcoming the immobility that seems to have accompanied the surprise with the pandemic moment and the tensions that resulted from it.

Among so many provocative vectors of this enunciation, ^{Nóvoa (2020}) distinguishes the importance that the field of education values what is part of its essential nature: sharing, which involves the collective, causes the construction of an attitude of greater cooperation, promoting a culture of collaboration. For all these reasons, our learning cannot remain clandestine, we need to share it, even if to some extent we cannot measure its impact. We believe that the horizons that are opening from this experience demand from us a careful research about the impacts that this period has imprinted on men and women, teachers and students in Brazil and in the world, because a restricted look, in this emergency moment, may make what is essential invisible. Therefore, the formative movements will demand that the distinction between the emergency and the essential be placed in the center of the debate, mobilizing actions capable of enunciating confrontations to the current civilizing crisis, reversing particularistic tendencies in educational practices. May the leaps of everydayness provoked by the context allow us to intensify reflexive actions committed to the public and collective dimension of education, so that both criticism and action become the necessary disruptions, to the insurgent contexts, favoring generativity and protagonism in institutions of higher education.