Introduction

Conceptualizing learning assessment is a difficult task, as it involves the educator's conceptions, the guidelines and the instruments made available by researchers in the area to analyze the path of internalization of knowledge by the student about a particular skill or content. In this perspective, it is relevant to mention that the planning of the evaluation process needs, above all, to take into account specificities and/or limitations evidenced in the teaching-learning process, as well as to consider the intercurrences found in the country's own socio-historical and educational context. Therefore, discussing the experiences of the undergraduate student's training for evaluation is relevant in order to identify the weaknesses and the activities that were successful, i.e., those that allowed the achievement of the objectives listed by the educator.

In view of the above, the following questions arise: what are the teaching experiences that interfere in the construction of the concept of learning evaluation? How does this knowledge of experience interfere in the activities aimed at the formation of the undergraduate student to carry out the evaluation of learning considering the variables (conceptions, strategies and instruments)? Thus, the purpose of this report is to analyze the experience lived in the subject Learning Assessment, offered in the day and night shifts, to the students of the Pedagogy course, 5th period, from the Centro de Formação de Professores (CFP) (Teacher Training Center), Cajazeiras campus, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande (UFCG). The subject is based on the theoretical assumptions of Cipriano Carlos ^{Luckesi (2011}, 2018), Maria Teresa ^{Esteban (2000}), Celso dos Santos ^{Vasconcellos (1995}) and Jussara ^{Hoffmann (2018}). As specific objectives we listed: analyze the relationship of the educator's training with the careful choice of practices and theorists to organize the subject; discuss the experiences of the educator with the students during the proposed activities in the curricular component, considering the students' prior knowledge and the knowledge that was built from the activities developed in the light of the aforementioned theorists.

The research is configured as an experience report and, based on the classification of ^{Silveira and Córdova (2009}), the text presented here is the result of a study with a descriptive objective and the data come from bibliographic studies, observations and records in the class diary, field diary and photographs collected by the teacher. The data were organized in two axes, namely, the experiences of the teacher and the experiences with the students. These data were analyzed in a qualitative approach.

This text is divided into the following axes: Evaluation and educator's formation, relationship between educators' conceptions and practices; Methodology; Evaluation in the Pedagogy course of UFCG/ Cajazeiras campus - PB, which is subdivided into analysis of the students' previous knowledge: variables between conception and diagnostic evaluation; Interlocutions with other educators; Unfoldings of the discipline: research and extension activities, followed by the Final Considerations.

2 Evaluation and Educator Training

The evaluation of learning has a predominant role in the educational process, considering that it is configured as an indispensable tool to identify the student's path in the process of knowledge construction and, thus, enable the teacher to resize the teachinglearning process. In this sense, the researchers of this article defend continuous studies of teachers who teach the subject Educational/Learning Evaluation, among other nomenclatures, in a formative perspective, in order to broaden the reflections about the complexity of the theme with the students. In other words, the researchers defend a continuous, diagnostic and formative evaluation both in the Pedagogy course, as well as in the graduation courses in general, because this modality allows teachers and students to observe the challenges and pedagogically respect the rhythm and differentiated learning processes of each student.

^{Vasconcellos (2004}, p. 73) states that: "the evaluation as a pedagogical process should be an instrument for the production of learning, for the qualification of the educational work. Thus, we understand that the different conceptions involved in understanding the meaning of the concept of evaluation, whether to classify, to diagnose, to reward or to know how to improve teaching and learning as an overcoming of school failure, interfere directly in the quality of results and pedagogical objectives.

Thus, this section seeks to weave the theoretical bases that guide our analysis as we discuss the relevance of assessment in a diagnostic, procedural, and formative conception that questions assessment experiences based on memorization, reproduction, and classification of students based on the reproduction of the content worked by teachers, an experience that can be experienced by students and/or teachers in schools and universities.

In higher education, we notice that undergraduate students, even before entering university, construct conceptions about teaching and the practices associated with it in their relations with previous experiences in educational environments. This also occurs with assessment, a moment of learning that can be developed, as ^{Luckesi (2011}) explains, from the perspective of examination or reorganization of the educational path. For the author, the evaluation as an exam aims to classify the student by assigning grades to the performance presented and, for this, it uses only the response to a given instrument of measurement of knowledge. Such action inspires an evaluation that prioritizes selection, classification, competition and, finally, the exclusion of those students who do not get the minimum score that guarantees their approval. This evaluation practice, in the understanding of ^{Charlot (2000}), stimulates students to develop survival strategies for school that may lead them to a mediocre performance, considering that they are restricted to memorization to obtain the grades for approval instead of giving meaning to learning.

In the diagnostic assessment approach, discussed by ^{Luckesi (1996}), this moment of learning aims to identify what the student has learned, how he or she has learned, as well as what he or she needs to learn and these data serve for the educator to reflect on didacticpedagogical situations (planned by him or her and applied in the classroom with the group) as well as the effectiveness of assessment instruments and teaching strategies, so that there is learning for all students. From this conception of evaluation, it is possible to put into practice an evaluation of learning based on cooperation, in which the student and his learning become the center of the teaching process, thus favoring all students.

These perceptions about assessment, which come from teachers and are reflected in their practices, generate in students, beliefs about assessment and direct their views on learning, especially those students who seek training for teaching. ^{Hoffmann (2018}) explains that these teachers' beliefs about students' abilities and about the function of assessment interfere in the evaluative model employed with a given class. In the same sense, ^{Luckesi (2011}, p. 25) warns that:

The beliefs that consciously or unconsciously direct our educational action constitute political-pedagogical criteria that guide our daily actions. Unfortunately, most of the time our beliefs act in an unconscious way, in the form of common sense, resulting from beliefs and habits acquired and sedimented throughout our personal history.

Given this, ^{Luckesi (2011}) highlights that the individual and the professional function as a whole, inseparable, as the experiences obtained throughout life can influence the view on education and the processes inherent in the teaching practice, in the choice of conceptions that the undergraduate will use when finalizing the initial training for teaching and when exercising the function of educator.

^{Hoffmann (2018}) explains that a belief of learning assessment as a sententious practice prevails in education, and that this understanding is not limited to the educator's perception, but extends to other members of the school community, so it is a vision woven and socially reproduced. Thus, when the student enters the university in undergraduate courses, such as Pedagogy, this understanding of evaluation is internalized by their experiences and needs to be reconstructed by the educator. Therefore, it is a challenge to the higher education teacher to re-signify this knowledge coined in the experience with the mediation of other knowledge built by the students, either in moments of theoretical discussion or in the experiences in research and extension activities offered by the university.

About the internalization of beliefs and practices built by the undergraduates, ^{Tardif (2002}) lists five sources of knowledge that need to be recognized, because through them it is possible to reinforce or question the legitimacy of certain teaching practices. The first source is called teachers' personal knowledge; the second comes from knowledge arising from previous schooling and comprises the understandings forged in the experience and in the internalization of beliefs built in contact with the practice of other educators; the third corresponds to the knowledge obtained in professional training for teaching - the focus of this article - which involves the reflections provided by the teaching activities proposed in undergraduate courses, in internships, in free courses, etc. The fourth involves the interaction with educational tools and the teachers' analyses of the conceptions, the didactic organization, and the educational purposes present in different instruments, such as books, evaluation sheets, and other resources; the fifth source of knowledge is the teachers' experience in didactic and pedagogical situations experienced in their professional career and the knowledge derived from these reflections.

It is relevant to point out that the term experience has many meanings, since it can be approached by several fields of knowledge. The common meaning attributed to the term is found in dictionaries, such as the Online Portuguese Dictionary (2021, s. p.):

Knowledge or learning obtained through practice or experience: life experience; work experience. Test made in an experimental manner; proof, trial: Mode of learning obtained systematically, being improved over time. All knowledge acquired through the use of the senses.

Given the above, we note that this is the analysis of particular experiences, lived from the interaction between individuals and between individuals and the environment, which generate unique impressions about a particular context or phenomenon, as they relate to their prior knowledge on the subject. However, our focus is to discuss the knowledge of experience lived by a teacher and the analysis of these experiences from the standpoint of theories that deal with learning evaluation, therefore, we use here the idea of experience linked to the understanding of knowledge of experience advocated by ^{Pimenta (2012}, p. 22) by pointing out that:

[...] the knowledge of experience is also that which teachers produce in their daily teaching, in a permanent process of reflection on their practice, mediated by that of others - their colleagues, the texts produced by other authors. This is where they gain importance in teacher education in the processes of reflection on their own practice.

When considering the above-mentioned sources of knowledge, we identify that undergraduate training is situated in the middle of a personal experience for professional practice, thus allowing the educator who acts as a teacher trainer to promote, based on prior knowledge, discussions and reflections that favor a perception and practice of democratic evaluation.

As ^{Pimenta (2012}, p. 21) highlights. "The challenge, then, posed to initial training courses is to collaborate in the process of passage of students from seeing the teacher as a student to seeing themselves as a teacher". In view of this, we argue that these actions should be considered in the undergraduate courses, whether those dealing with learning evaluation or others that address teaching-related content, because we understand that teaching and learning evaluation are inseparable.

When relating the sources of knowledge listed by ^{Tardif (2002}) and the statement of ^{Pimenta (2012}) on initial training, we identify that the undergraduate degree is located in the middle of a personal experience for professional practice. In this path, it is up to the educator, who acts as a teacher trainer to promote, from the student's previous knowledge, discussions and reflections that favor a perception and practice of a democratic evaluation. Therefore, we argue that these actions should be considered in undergraduate courses, as well as in other educational moments proposed by the university, such as events, mini-courses and workshops, so that students, in contact with teaching materials and when asked to perform assessment practices, select instruments and strategies that build a democratic and inclusive assessment.

^{Hoffmann (2018}) says that a quality school needs to identify the sociocultural conditions of students and, from there, outline goals and plan strategies that enable learning in order to build a democratic and inclusive practice. For the researcher, the effectiveness of this evaluative approach is not based on the absence of objectives, but on the flexibility and destandardization of these objectives so that the students' advances according to their possibilities are valued and encouraged. In this sense, the author refers that learning needs to be conceived as "[...] the succession of constant and dependent acquisitions of the opportunity that the environment offers them, assuming the pedagogical commitment in the face of individual differences" (^{HOFFMANN, 2018}, p. 55). In view of this, for the school to change, teacher training needs to highlight the practice of assessment as an examination and develop activities that encourage the learner to rethink the knowledge built in previous experiences with learning assessment and re-signify them so that they develop activities aimed at development and learning instead of serving the classification and exclusion.

From this perspective, being democratic does not imply only offering the same condition to all students, but also promoting equal opportunities of access to mechanisms that enable the construction of knowledge, either by the variety of instruments and languages used in the assessment or by the implementation of large or small curricular adaptations (^{BRASIL, 2000a}).

^{Ferreira (2009}) states that the teacher is the agent who can implement the change in education, but that, for this, he or she needs to have a consistent foundation, to be based on a learning theory and, consequently, on assessment proposals that consider human diversity, in addition, he or she must use the data from this pedagogical moment to promote other learning. Still according to the author, this change is urgent and necessary in order to overcome the classification of the student based only on the systematized knowledge and, thus, promote the full development of the student.

Based on what has been discussed, in the next topic we will describe the methodological design with which we conducted this study.

3 Methodology

The research consists of an experience report of a higher education teacher in the teaching of the subject Learning Assessment for Pedagogy undergraduates, in which the formative experiences of this educator and the teaching practice are intertwined. ^{Daltro and Faria (2019}, p. 231) explain that the experience report is a methodology that allows the construction of scientific knowledge and "[...] that circumscribes the researcher's political, epistemological, and temporal positioning, but also involves his exposed internal world, and in exchange with his environment". Therefore, the relationship with the authors and the experiences that constituted the teacher's learning about the theme have influence in the choices of conceptions, in the planning of strategies, and in the selection of instruments used for the construction of the students' knowledge about learning evaluation. According to the research classification of ^{Silveira and Córdova (2009}), this report, is characterized as a descriptive research regarding the objectives and the data are analyzed in a qualitative perspective.

^{Daltro and Faria (2019}) state that this methodology, by its discursive constitution, does not propose to build a universal or replicable knowledge, given that it reveals unique variants built in the relationship of the object with the researcher, therefore, the data analysis is performed in a qualitative approach. For ^{Silveira and Córdova (2009}, p. 32):

Researchers using qualitative methods seek to explain the why of things, expressing what should be done, but they do not quantify values and symbolic exchanges, nor do they subject themselves to the proof of facts, because the data analyzed are nonmetric (elicited and interaction) and make use of different approaches.

As the authors point out, in this research, researchers maintain a very high level of proximity with the object and the objective of the investigation is to discuss the dynamics of social relations. In this research, this characteristic is expressed when we prepare the report based on the data from the class diary, field diary, and photographic record of the activities developed by the teacher of the subject. In the field diary, besides the records on the teacher's evaluation of the proposed activities, the considerations expressed in the students' speeches about their previous perceptions on the evaluation and those that were built during the formative process were also reported.

In light of the above, we seek, in the next section, to present the path that brought the teacher of the subject closer to the object under discussion and the influences of her training in educational practice.

4 Evaluation in the Pedagogy Course at UFCG/Campus Cajazeiras -PB

When considering the perspective of ^{Tardif (2002}) that addresses the relationship of previous experiences as a source of knowledge for the formation of the educator, we weave a report permeated by the testimony of one of the authors in which it is highlighted the initial contact with the academic discussion about the evaluation of learning. This reflective moment occurred during her graduation in the Pedagogy course at the Federal University of Goiás (UFG), Catalão campus - GO until her practice as a university teacher. About the role of the researcher in the experience report, ^{Daltro and Faria (2019}, p. 231, emphasis added) say that:

(...) From his place of speech and, in the narrated speech, he also demonstrates his encounters with the units that are prior to him, such as the economy and geopolitics that surround him. These units will be taken as critical elements, this exchange triggers his way of narrating his ethos with its respective analytical possibilities and responsibilities.

This narrated speech begins in the undergraduate course in Pedagogy, in the period between 1999 and 2002, with the approval as a scholarship holder of the Undergraduate Scholarship Program (PROLICEN¹ ), an opportunity in which he developed a research on learning evaluation. According to the information available on the site of this scholarship program, the PROLICEN has been implemented since 1980, as a Program of the Secretary of Higher Education of the Ministry of Education (SESu-MEC), aiming at the valorization of undergraduate studies and the interaction of the University with the public teaching network (PROLICEN, 2002).

In the research work developed in 2001 by PROLICEN, during the first stage of the investigation, students from Physical Education, Geography, History, Mathematics, Pedagogy and Literature courses at UFG were approached to identify, through informal conversations, how the teachers of these degrees were perceived by the students. These students classified the professors in two categories: "smithy" and "more human" based on the evaluation methodologies and perspectives they offered in their educational practices, thus corroborating to raise perceptions of evaluation concepts to the students. In this context, the expression "smiths" was attributed by the students to the professors who offered only expository classes and, thus, proceeded in their evaluations in the model of tests, examinations, and standardized tests, in which the grade and the threats of approval and disapproval were recurring practices of these professors. The educators mentioned by the students as "more human" were those who offered dynamic classes, provided continuous monitoring of the students, answering their questions during the activities developed, and their evaluations were characterized by presenting the criteria in a transparent way.

After the interviews and data transcription, the participants' speeches were analyzed. For this analysis, it was necessary to conduct an advanced search for texts and readings of authors who dealt with the theme in order to support the understanding of the data collected, such as Jussara Hoffmann and Cipriano Luckesi². Thus, this was the first contact with specific studies on educational evaluation and encouraged the educator to continue to study the subject and, based on these readings, seek others that would expand the understanding of the subject.

The second moment of contact with studies on educational evaluation occurred through participation in the Research Group Educational Evaluation (GEPAE), at the Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU), in 2003. According to the group's page on the social network Instagram - @gepaeufu (2020) - GEPAE³ is composed of university professors, teachers of Basic Education and evaluation researchers.

The active participation in this group allowed the educator to reflect on the theme with the different readings and interpretations of the group members, mature them and prepare a master's project, which sought, when approved, to problematize the commodification of higher education and the impacts on citizen training in Uberlândia - MG. The problematic of the research was to understand what the criteria were and how the evaluation carried out by the Ministry of Education (MEC) officials to approve the accreditation of private college courses occurred.

In 2017, with the admission to the Evaluation Research Group (GA⁴), linked to the line in Policy and Education Management of the Graduate Program of the School of Education of the Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), it was possible to deepen the conceptual aspects on the theme and broaden the discussion to educational evaluation following the theoretical and methodological advances related to its implementation.

The reflections shared with this group were important for the development of the research conducted by the course teacher in order to understand how the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Capes) promoted the training of researchers while maintaining, concomitantly an external evaluation of stricto sensu graduate programs in which the control of production/publication of articles in journals and periodicals with Qualis A1 and A2 and decreasing stratifications (from B onwards) and the awarding of research scholarships to those programs that achieved better grades in the triennial evaluation offered by the referred agency prevailed. The theoretical maturing provided by the meetings favored the elaboration of the doctoral project in education with a theme focused on the analysis of the evaluation of the educational system, especially in higher education, with a research proposal that problematized the diversification of criteria among educational areas and Brazilian regions.

Thus, the considerations, reflections and analyses developed in academic life accompanied and still accompany the researcher in her continued teaching education, as well as in her praxis as an adjunct professor in the Pedagogy course at the Cajazeiras - PB campus of UFCG. Upon assuming the teaching position in the Academic Unit of Education (UAE), she was assigned the subject of Learning Assessment in the semester 2017.1, a moment in which she discussed with the undergraduate students’ contents related to learning assessment, encompassing historical and practical issues.

The assessment subject at UFCG - Cajazeiras campus - presents as its menu:

Assessment of learning: historical, sociopolitical and pedagogical implications. Conceptions and evaluative practices. The evaluation and different approaches to teaching and learning. The evaluation and the educational project of the school (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE CAMPINA GRANDE, 2009, p. 53).

In order to fulfill the menu, we elaborated the following objectives: understand the meaning and the evaluation process in the context of the system and the school; discuss the evaluation category and its centrality in the capitalist school; distinguish and understand the functions of formal and informal evaluation; and investigate evaluation practices of the teaching-learning process developed in basic education school.

Numerous activities were carried out to work on these objectives in a connected way, that is, from the perspective of observing the nuances of the object of study from multiple perspectives and, in this paper, we discuss some of them.

Final Considerations

The analysis of the experience report presented, lived in the discipline Learning Evaluation, offered to the students of the Pedagogy course, 5th period of the Center for Teacher Training, Cajazeiras campus, UFCG, allowed the researchers to identify that the educators' experiences of teaching, learning and evaluation are woven and reconstructed continuously from the contact with the other's vision (in the meeting with students, discussion with other educators or in the reading of theoreticians who spoke about the theme) as well as in the analysis of our daily practices.

The analysis of the experience report presented, lived in the subject Learning Evaluation, offered to students of the Pedagogy course, 5th period, Teacher Training Center, Cajazeiras campus, UFCG, allowed the researchers to identify that the knowledge of educators' experiences in teaching, learning and evaluation are continuously woven and reconstructed from the contact with the other's vision (in the meeting with students, discussion with other educators or in the reading of theoreticians about the theme) as well as in the analysis of our daily practices.

In this way, we consider that the objectives listed throughout the text were achieved, since we analyzed the relationship between the educator's post-graduation stricto sensu training with the careful choice of theorists on the theme and the pedagogical practices to organize the course taught.

We noticed, during the analysis, the relevance of promoting activities that encourage dialogue and the connection between the subject matter and the students' previous experiences in order to promote the articulation between their previous knowledge and the literature. Given the above, we consider pertinent to discuss the theoretical assumptions of Cipriano Carlos ^{Luckesi (2011}, 2018), Maria Teresa ^{Esteban (2000}), Celso dos Santos ^{Vasconcellos (1995}), Jussara ^{Hoffmann (2018}) to support our action-reflection-action about this difficult and necessary debate in favor of a procedural, mediating and humanizing evaluation. This is because these theorists have in common the indication of assessment as a moment of learning aimed at redirecting the paths of teaching and, thus, promoting the learning of all students.

This perception of evaluation was worked on not only by the educator who taught the course, but it was also shared in the activities that presented themselves as an unfolding of this curricular component, such as the mini-course and the round table, which aimed to deepen the undergraduate students' knowledge in this area. Regarding the other activities listed in this text, we highlight that they aimed to socialize the knowledge built with the interactions between students and students with the academic community, either through the participation of students in oral communications, publication of articles and presentation of mini-courses on Learning Assessment.

We believe that these activities and strategies may favor student learning about the variables of assessment (conceptions, strategies, instruments) in order to support the teaching practice of these students who are in the process of initial training and to encourage them to seek continuing education at the end of the course. However, the learnings of the educators who participated in these experiences should also be highlighted, because in a dialogical activity, other ways of perceiving reality are socialized and internalized by the educators, allowing other knowledge to be built.

Therefore, we defend and emphasize that this relevant theme and debate around learning evaluation should continue to permeate the studies and research of educators at all levels of education and that there may be developments with students as well, in an attempt to deconstruct practices that adopt exams and value only the result.

In this sense, we want this article to provide an opportunity for theoretical and practical reflection for educators to expand the conceptions of evaluation/examination/selection and its implications for the teaching-learning process, that is, to contribute to the discussion of the specificities of the construction of multiple instruments selected by teachers in their evaluative practices, highlighting the possibilities of advances in student development and in the aggregate knowledge of each one.

The challenge and the invitation are posed to everyone interested and imbued with the desire to investigate educational assessment.