1 Introduction

This text aims to build up a theoretical-analytical analysis of the possible impact of the new curriculum guidelines for teacher education in teaching courses in Brazilian universities. This research starting point is the recognition that the teacher education policy, enacted by the National Education Council and Full Council (CNE/CP, Brazilian acronym for Conselho Nacional de Educação e Conselho Pleno) pursuant to Resolution Nº 2, of December 20, 2019, which provides for the implementation of the National Curriculum Guidelines for the Initial Education of teachers for Basic Education (BNC- Formação) (BRASIL, 2019b), emerges as the expression of a broad agenda of curriculum reform carried out by the state, disciplined by and obeying the current hegemonic relations operating in the country, therefore, deeply characterized as a space of struggle.

Such disciplined and obeying movement of the Brazilian state can be identified by the policies imposed such as the high school reform, via Provisional Measure, regulated by the Law Nº 13.415, of February 16, 2017 (BRASIL, 2017a), which promoted great impact on the basic education curriculum organization, consequently, with direct outcomes in the teacher education policy.

The high school reform is accompanied by an express dispute in the elaboration of the National Common Curriculum Base (BNCC, Brazilian acronym for Base Nacional Comum Curricular) (BRASIL, 2018a), requiring constant formulation and reformulation movements, as well as the alteration of the CNE composition, and the format of public consultations, to guarantee the approval of the proposal final version, via enactment of Resolution CNE/CP N^o 2 , of December 22, 2017, which sets and guides the BNCC implementation within the Brazilian education policy environment (BRASIL, 2017b). Such Resolution, was complemented on 17 December, 2018, by the Resolution CNE/CP N^o 4, which instituted the BNCC in the high school phase (BNCC- EM) (BRASIL, 2018b), complementing the curriculum reform process, started with the said high school reform of February 2017 - Law Nº 13.415/ 2017 (BRASIL, 2017a).

The BNCC policy and the high school reform are, therefore, curriculum reforms integrated to the basic education national policy and is able to promote a deep transformation in the Brazilian education. Its transformation potential is validated by the Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2017, whose art. 15 provides for the BNCC direct incidence on the curricula of education institutions and teaching networks. Other provisions with the same impact are those of art. 16, about reference matrices of evaluations and exams; art. 20, about the National Textbook Program; and, art. 17, which addresses the teacher education policy and is the central object of this study (BRASIL, 2017b).

However, art. 62 of the National Education Bases and Guidelines Law (LDB, Brazilian acronym for Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional) - Law Nº 9.394, of December 20, 1996, provides for the education of teachers to work on basic education in the Brazilian education system by teaching courses at the higher education level. It also sets forth that as a state public offer and based on Art. 207 of the 1988 Federal Constitution, such courses must guarantee inseparability between teaching, research and outreach, and the principle of didactic-scientific and administrative autonomy (BRASIL, 1996).

This legal characterization indicates that the new curriculum guidelines articulated to the BNC-Formação, binding the teacher education to the scope of the curriculum policy expressed in the BNCC, affects even the constitutional achievements regarding teacher education. This might occur due to the loss of the didactic-scientific autonomy of Brazilian universities, which are obliged to shape their education projects according to centralized and external guidelines. Another aspect of such policy is the disciplining of the university education purpose, which should articulate teaching, research and outreach as inseparable education pillars, by restricting the access to the scientific culture and intellectual development of teachers in universities.

Thus, this analytical exercise starts from the recognition of the impact of the current proposal of curriculum reform, characterized by the BNC-Formação, on the university education proposal for teacher education, as a struggle regarding the education of teachers as intellectuals, defined in this study as the organic intellectual category proposed by ^{Gramsci (1968}).

The methodology employed is an analytical-critical exercise, based on the historical- dialectical materialism, an “[...] exercise situated in the reality plan, in the historical plan, in the form of a thread of contradictory and conflicting relations, construction laws, development and transformation of facts” (^{FRIGOTTO, 1997}, p. 75), as well as a theoretical possibility and a logic instrument of interpretation of the reality, one that is able to indicate an epistemological way for the exercise of interpretation of the proposal under analysis (^{BENITE, 2009}). According to ^{Saviani (2015}, p. 79), this is na exercise “[...] that goes from empirical observations (the whole figured in intuition) to the concrete (a rich totality of numerous determinations and relations) by mediating the abstract (analysis, concept, and simples determinations)”, as a dialectic process of knowledge production.

The text is divided into three main sections: initially, we work on the concept of organic intellectual and the education of teachers as intellectuals, from ^{Gramsci’s reflections (1968}, 2002). Next, we seek to clarify the methodological scope of the education pedagogy found in universities regarding teacher education. Finally, we report the effort of analysis of the impact of the new curriculum guidelines on the education of teachers considering the political-pedagogical proposal of educating teachers as intellectuals.

It seems relevant to mention that this study is the product of collective research linked to the project: National Common Curriculum Base and the discourse of education quality as inducer of basic education policies and teacher education in Brazil, supported by the Coordination for higher Education Staff Development (CAPES, Brazilian acronym for Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior)¹.

2 Organic Intellectuality as Theoretical-Methodological Background

The ongoing curriculum reform of the Brazilian education system are clearly addressed to public schools as a promise of a qualified intervention, with the purpose of building up a fairer, egalitarian, and high-quality school (BRASIL, 2017b). Public schools in Brazil attend the children of the great mass of workers and the poorer population, those called the children of the subaltern classes in Gramsci’s conception.

Subalternity, in this study, is not represented by hierarchical distinction relations, belonging to lower levels of command, or even, the pure marginal segregation from organized society, but rather by class, social class, category of perception of social subalternity of groups facing the hegemonic group dominance, which can be characterized as the class of those who live off their work. Therefore, although the subaltern classes, according to ^{Gramsci (2002}), are disaggregated, they show a tendency to unification, constantly surveilled and interrupted by the dominant group. That author pointed out that: “Subaltern groups always suffer with dominant group initiatives. [....] Even when they appear to be triumphant, subaltern groups are only in an alarmed state of defense.” (^{GRAMSCI, 2002}, p. 135).

Thus, education policies such as the curriculum policies, express both the dominant class tension over dominance production through consensus on the subaltern classes, and contradictorily the opportunities of unification and production of emancipatory strategies in the construction of a new hegemony. That is, the dominant class needs cultural agency - education - for the production of consensus and constant reproduction of their technical, moral, and ideological hegemony over the subaltern classes. The latter, in turn, understand the access to the hegemony private apparatus - school - as an opportunity of access to the elements of the dominant culture for the construction of another hegemony perspective.

This tension is even more expressive when the subaltern classes manage to organize themselves and be represented from the organic intellectual organization. This movement confers political-pedagogical intentions to the efforts of emancipatory unification able to produce technical, ethical, and cultural guidance to a hegemonic proposal from their social praxis. Thus, subaltern classes produce conditions of organizing their social praxis, mediated by work, as an education principle, since from the concrete material standpoint, it comprises the class of those who depend on work to live.

It seems relevant to emphasize that social praxis, in the theoretical-methodological tradition adopted in this study, is understood as the human praxis, which according to ^{Kosik (1976}), is not limited to the human social practice in itself, in the direct and formal relation between theory and practice, or even in the human being’s cognitive exercise on the practice in an abstract way, but is that “[...] objectively and practically acting being, a historical individual who conducts his practical activity related to nature and other people, and realizes his own ends and interests, within a particular complex of social relations” (^{KOSIK, 1976}, p. 9). Therefore, praxis is understood as a dialectical creative action that transcends reality, instituted by the human existence as an elaboration of reality and thus active, a producer of the social human in its entirety.

The privileged locus for such political-pedagogical realities in the education system, from the social praxis conceptual mark indicated in this study, rests on the intellectual agents of the historically produced culture, that is, teachers, who inevitably and contradictorily need to dialogue and promote the demands of subaltern classes. Therefore, their adaptation and organization abilities. Taking that into consideration, we consider that the debate and definitions about teacher education policies convey a technical and ideological load in dispute, since their education is expressed as an intellectual education, which can serve either the hegemonic organicity or the organization of subaltern classes in the perspective of building up a new hegemony from the work and workers’ self-management. However, before understanding teacher education as intellectual, it seems relevant to promote an understanding of the organic intellectual, in this work supported by Gramsci’s conception, as an intentional and propositional exercise of political organization of subaltern classes before the state, their emancipatory and therefore hegemonic organization.

The historical marks of what is imposed as hegemonic in contemporary society are characterized by technical, ethical, and cultural dominance of the liberal bourgeois sociability, which moves the state in its theoretical and practical complexity in the pursuit of functional and adaptive consensus by the classes that are subaltern to its ideology. The possibility of historical affirmation of subaltern classes, beyond the ongoing hegemonic sociability, as indicated, depends on their organization capability, and therefore, on their organic intellectual production of their reality and their social and historical praxis.

An intellectual, in this sense, cannot be defined from intrinsic or abstract features, but rather as an expression of the world conception produced and organized that each new class develops and that is at the service of their progressive development. As pointed out by ^{Gramsci (1968}, p. 7), “[...] all men are potentially intellectuals in the sense of having an intellect and using it, but not all are intellectuals by social function”. In other words, not every individual confers materiality and historical and social adherence to the intellectual exercise from a classist world view.

The organic intellectuality founding element refers to its capability of organization and political direction in the world conception that is hegemonic, consequently, marked by the historical and dialectical critique of the conceptions it moves. In such direction, its function is directive and organizational, and such organic intellectual should systematize the fundamental elements of the class, and, in this way, promote the appearance of new organic intellectuals in this group. Therefore, such organic intellectual should not only master knowledge and expertise, but should rather understand the demands of the new class, in this discussion, this is the class represented by those who live off work, and establish an intellectual language that can give rise to this class social and historical action. “The new intellectual can no longer consist in eloquence, which is an exterior and momentary mover of feelings and passions, but in active participation in practical life, as constructor, organiser, “permanent persuader” and not just a simple orator” (^{GRAMSCI, 1968}, p. 8). This conception considers these intellectuals as persuasive agents that lead popular masses to criticize their own awareness of the world.

The scope of action of such organic intellectuality merges with world conceptions, with ascribing meaning to the interpretations that move and modify organized society and disseminated in the particular and social view of organic groups. Rooted in these values, organic intellectuals dialogue with the basis, express their wishes and promote a pedagogical movement (educational) that creates opportunities for revolutionary conditions to the working class. Thus, these intellectuals’ actions are deeply marked by economic peculiarities that characterize each period of time, that is, the specificity of material conditions of the subaltern classes that see themselves as hegemonic.

Every social group, coming into existence on the original terrain of an essential function in the world of economic production, creates together with itself, organically, one or more strata of intellectuals which give it homogeneity and an awareness of its own function not only in the economic but also in the social and political fields (^{GRAMSCI, 1968}, p. 3).

For this reason, ^{Gramsci (1968}) ascribes centrality to school education. The hegemonic sociability needs the school as a space of social reproduction of the conditions of its reproduction and historical maintenance. Such reproduction, dialectically and contradictorily, enables the possibility of intellectual promotion of the subaltern classes via access, management, and representation of the historically systematized culture through the intellectual teacher’s organic action. This assumes the recognition that schools, used by the hegemonic classes as a private apparatus of their hegemony reproduction, contradictorily, confirm the intellectual construction process of the subaltern classes, mainly through the education of teachers as culture agents. The education principles of other political, social, and cultural organizations around schools are the foundation of these individuals’ development. According to Gramsci (1968), recognizing the dialectics of school spaces as privileged spaces of intellectual exercise and consequent historical-cultural development of society is necessary. Thus, the school education appears as an essential space of articulation of organic intellectuals - those that keep and articulate with their original class -, with the academic and cultural demands that operate as driving forces of reflection and active conduct before the hegemonic sociability.

This finding implies an analysis of teacher education and their education as intellectuals linked to the hegemony private apparatuses - school - deeply affected by the dispute between requirements of the hegemonic sociability reproduction as specialized intellectual of the state apparatus, and as interlocutor of counter-hegemonic processes. This is better explained by Gramsci as processes of construction of a new hegemonic block, whose perspective is the human activity affirmation - social and historical praxis - of the subaltern classes.

Thus, teachers as organic intellectuals join the theoretical and practical production efforts aiming at the construction of a broad intellectual and moral reform of the subaltern classes. Contemporary authors such as ^{Giroux (1997}), assumed to recognize the need for a radical pedagogy, that is, to understand teacher education as intellectuals in the dialogue with the school social praxis as a concrete and material human activity that builds up the school. In this sense, the school would be a representative of the subaltern class social praxis, enabling these intellectuals to promote political, pedagogical, and methodological intentions, aiming at social transformation through hegemonic dispute. In such perspective, Giroux (1997, p. 161) assumed that “[...] one way to rethink and restructure the nature of teacher work is to view teachers as transformative intellectuals”; thus, their ability to dialogue, produce knowledge, and act in society in a critical manner is intertwined to counter-hegemonic political- pedagogical processes.

Such positioning is similar to that of Gramsci in which every human being is intellectual since they are able to guide themselves from a world view, even if it is not specialized. According to ^{Giroux (1997}, p. 154), regardless of “[...] social and economic function, all human beings perform as intellectuals by constantly interpreting and giving meaning to the world and by participating in a particular conception of the world”. The intellectual position that teachers adopt before teaching and political-pedagogical scenarios of the hegemonic school apparatus results in subsidies to a critical emancipatory action through the displacement of diffuse and abstract school knowledge towards a constant exercise of world interpretation. As pointed out by Giroux (1997, p. 37), “[...] transformative intellectuals need to understand how subjectivities are produced and regulated through historically produced social forms and how these forms carry and embody particular interests”. Thus, disputes involving the education of these teachers are usually central and, consequently, the dispute regarding their intellectual education, either in the spectrum of training for maintenance and reproduction of the ongoing hegemonic sociability, or in the spectrum of cultural promotion aiming at the possibility of organizing another hegemony.

In the Brazilian context, the legal prerogative set forth in Art. 62 of the LDB (BRASIL, 1996) guarantees that teacher education be provided by higher education institutions, which as a state public offer, is recognized as university courses organized pursuant to Art. 207 of the Federal Constitution, and integrating teaching, research, and outreach activities (BRASIL, 1988). In this sense, both the analysis of the scope of this pedagogy model in teacher education as intellectuals and the system efforts, via curriculum reform, seem to be necessary to discipline such pedagogy in face of the prospected ideology of a teacher as cultural agent of production of ideological conditions for the reproduction of the hegemonic sociability. However, before analyzing the impact of the curriculum reform provided for in the BNC- Formação (Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019) on the pedagogy applied at the university, in light of the theoretical background presented in this study, it seems relevant to clarify the theoretical-methodological scope of such pedagogy (inseparability of teaching, research, and outreach) for the education of teachers as intellectuals.

3 The Pedagogy employed in Brazilian Universities and Teacher Education as Intellectuals

We start this item assuming that educating teachers as intellectuals, in the organic intellectuality conception, as an exercise of elaborating and clarifying the human praxis of subaltern classes, implies an education that understands and embraces the social, historical, and political praxis of the individuals in development, including their schooling. Thus, their education, goes beyond the formal and pre-defined processes of education-training, and has to be based on political-pedagogical programs of broad cultural promotion, understanding culture as the set of historically systematized human production (^{SAVIANI, 2015}), accessed by continuous processes of socialization and production. This requires the recognition of these continuous processes of socialization and cultural production dialogue theoretical and methodologically with the qualified promotion of the teacher technical, scientific- pedagogical, and sociopolitical education. In the Brazilian education system, this phenomenon mirrors the understanding of the scope and possibility of development of a pedagogy for teacher education that is marked by the political-pedagogical inseparability mediated by the categories teaching, research, and outreach.

It seems relevant to emphasize that the defense of a qualified promotion of the teacher technical, scientific-pedagogical, and sociopolitical education refers to the position of those defending the promotion of a cultural intervention in the social praxis of subaltern groups. These are in constant dispute for the institutional character of the pedagogy employed at university (teaching, research, and outreach) as a strategy for the teacher intellectual promotion from the organizing mediation of their sociability ideology, that is, their concrete human activity as an educational-formative principle.

The constitutional achievement regarding the institutionalization of teacher education from a pedagogy based on the principle of inseparability between teaching, research, and outreach alone does not translate as a guarantee of teacher cultural promotion in an organic way in relation to the demands of the subaltern classes. Therefore, the dispute for the objective organization of such pedagogy, as well as its practices and political-pedagogical and curricular rituals is still necessary. The positioning previously mentioned, however, does not neglect the historical contradictions found in the pedagogical tradition of higher education in Brazil, since it must operate on them. According to ^{Masetto (2003}) and ^{Prota (1987}) the Brazilian university is a late institutionality, it resulted from the republican period, more specifically from the 1920s onwards, and was based on the positivist pedagogical experience, fragmented, and the higher education professional training implemented as a state policy by the Brazilian empire from 1808 onwards.

Therefore, a demand for the teacher technical qualified education (teaching) as a socially approved access and management of the culture produced by human beings in their area of study in the early period of the Brazilian university at the beginning of the XX century is observed. Such requirement conflicts with the pedagogical traits of the practice and curriculum structure continuation of a higher education experience focusing on the concerns of producing and socializing knowledge that are technically materialized.

The maintenance of the professional training character in the pedagogy employed at the university tends to mark its cultural, epistemological, and political dimensions (CUNHA, 2 005). This validates rituals and pedagogical practices that, on the one hand, result in a cultural functional control education to be confirmed and socialized in the Licentiate courses; on the other hand, discipline the social praxis of the learners, restricting it in the formal expression of the theory/practice relation. In other words, it disciplines teacher education in the scope of the organic intellectuality of the ongoing hegemonic sociability.

Recognizing the limits of such pedagogical model that tends to restrict teacher technical education, binding teaching to the restrictive logic of mere transmission of knowledge and experiences, bases the need for a pedagogy that is able to consider political, economic, and social conditioning factors that permeate the education action, as well as the epistemological discussions found in this process (^{MASETTO, 1998}; ^{SEVERINO, 2003}). This finding indicates, in the perspective of the teacher intellectual education committed to the social praxis of subaltern classes, the need for a new theoretical-methodological and epistemological approach. Such approach would result in the promotion and development of an investigative and collaborative political-pedagogical posture, and the recognition of the formative process present in the learners’ concrete relations.

In this study, the claim and search for a broad and qualified technical education (teaching) need to be understood in complementary and indivisible association with a qualified and broad pedagogical-scientific teacher education (research). Therefore, the teaching-learning process developed at the university in teacher education licentiate courses must consider the mastering of a cultural background as a way of overcoming the cumulative logic of pre-elaborated information. This background must also cater for the assimilation of the knowledge production process, mediating a broader conscientization process (^{SEVERINO, 2003}).

This approach requires a political-pedagogical proposal that recognizes research as the guiding axis of formative times and spaces at university. The recognition of research as a guiding axis, beyond the categorical hierarchy between what is taught and what is researched, refer to the recognition that the teacher technical education (teaching) is nurtured by their pedagogical-scientific education (research). This also implies the recognition that the cultural capital guiding their teaching action is in constant dialogue with their intellectual exercise of production and social and historical meaning of this cultural capital, under the mediation and organization of the social praxis of subaltern classes.

This study regards the institutionality of the pedagogy developed at the university for teacher education, the inseparable relation between teaching and research, that it, the dialogical relation mediating cognitive subjects around the object of study and the social practice, as a central condition for teacher education as organic intellectuals. This link of the pedagogy employed at university with the commitment to teacher technical and pedagogical- scientific education requires the recognition of its sociopolitical dimension (outreach) since it aims at teacher education that is committed to a critical dialogue with social praxis. In this sense, outreach ascribes materiality to the teacher intellectual education project as political education, which is able to recover the integrating condition of the technical and pedagogical- scientific dimensions of such pedagogy in the organic dialogue with the social praxis of subaltern classes.

According to ^{Masetto (1998}), this conception requires the recognition of the university outreach as a model of university claiming pedagogical practice, mainly in teacher education courses. Such recognition includes the social and historical contexts as education principles, in the perspective of the teacher organic intellectual education. However, seeking the construction of a teacher education pedagogy characterized by the inseparable association of its technical (teaching), pedagogical-scientific (research), and sociopolitical (outreach) dimensions is not an activity separated from contexts of struggle with the hegemonic agenda. In this study, such agenda is characterized by the system continuous effort, via curriculum reform, to discipline this pedagogy according to its ideology of teacher education as a cultural agent of production of the ideological conditions for the reproduction of the hegemonic sociability.

From this theoretical-methodological background, we understand how timely and central de analysis of the Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2, of December 20, 2019 is. This resolution defines the National Curriculum Guidelines for the Initial Education of teachers for Basic Education (BNC- Formação) in the teaching courses of Brazilian universities, and its analysis seeks to identify its impacts on the pedagogy employed at university, considering teacher education as the education of organic intellectuals.

4 Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2 and the Teacher Education Pedagogy

It seems relevant to highlight that the theoretical-methodological approach of this study considers the state a positioned institutionality, as a structure of management of conflicts and social contradictions promoted by the interests of the dominant social class seeking hegemonic consensus. Therefore, it is seen as the institutionality that makes policies, including education policies that are linked to the dominant political-economic rationality.

The teacher’s education policy, provided for by Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019 (BNC- Formação) is not detached from this political-economic characterization, but it emerges as a specific expression of a broad agenda of curriculum reform carried out by the state, which is disciplined by and obeys the hegemonic relations in Brazil. Thus, it is developed in deep alignment with the ongoing reform movements in the Brazilian education system started in the constitutional movements of the 1980s.

Such curriculum reform conducted by the Brazilian state within the education policy since the Federal Constitution of 1988, focuses on curricula reforms that are carried out employing strategies of centralization, parametrization, and control. These characteristics in the Brazilian education system are mirrored in disputes around the curriculum parametrization found in the education policies set forth by the National Curriculum Parameters (PCN, Brazilian acronym for Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais) (BRASIL, 1998), the National Curriculum Guidelines (DCN, Brazilian acronym for Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais) (BRASIL, 2015), and, more recently, the BNCC (BRASIL, 2018a), and its respective outcomes for the set of education policies.

It seems necessary to recognize that the hegemonic rationality that seeks to implement the current policies of curriculum standardization and control by the BNCC policy, consequently by the BNC-Formação, is not different from the rationality found in the curriculum parametrization policy, which started in the 1990s and is represented by the PCN policy. The latter was already part of policies such as teacher education, textbook production, and the centralized evaluation and external do the school, namely, the National Basic Education Evaluation System (Saeb, Brazilian abbreviation for Sistema Nacional de Avaliação da Educação Básica) and the High School National Examination (Enem, Brazilian abbreviation for Exame Nacional do Ensino Médio).

Studies based on Gramsci’s theoretical tradition such as ^{Falleiros (2005}) demonstrated that those are not cultural promotion policies, or in relation to teacher education, a policy of teacher intellectual promotion. They are, in fact, policies of regulation of the agenda and constitutional principles of education as a civil right in the modern expression of capitalist sociability. The enaction of such policies demands a type of education that is able to shape the ‘new individual’ according to the technical, psychological, emotional, moral, and ethical- political values of this time.

The resistance process to this model of curriculum parametrization and control resulted in the CNE decision to adopt the PCN as a complementary document, and the consequent creation of the policy of guidelines, which is known as the DCN policy. However, this does not represent a rupture with the existing political-pedagogical ideology. According to ^{Ciavatta and Ramos (2012}), the DCN policy neither represents a rupture with external, standardized, and controlling indicators nor a displacement regarding the objective of educating the so-called new individual.

Thus, ^{Ciavatta and Ramos (2012}) pointed out that the Curriculum Guidelines policy becomes a satisfactory answer to the repositioning demanded from the teaching system by the hegemonic sociability, which is currently expressed in a more conservative fashion by the curriculum reform movements. These movements also promote the BNCC policy as an education reform agenda guided by the entrepreneurial agenda for education. Therefore, it also represents a new reform effort based on hegemonic political-pedagogical principles, in the perspective of reconfiguring and/or reproducing the hegemonic rationality.

This reform movement is legally characterized in the Brazilian state by the approval of the Resolution CNE/CP N^o 2/2017 and the Resolution CNE/CP N^o 4/2018, which establish and guide the BNCC implementation in the Brazilian education policy environment (BRASIL, 2017b, 2018b). The BNCC, as a curriculum reform integrated to the basic education national policy appears as a policy that is able to promote deep transformation in the Brazilian education, as expressed by the Resolution CNE/CP N^o 2/2017, which provides, as already mentioned in this text, for its direct incidence on the curricula of institutions and teaching networks (Art. 15); on the evaluation and examination reference matrices (Art. 16); on the Textbook National Program (Art. 20); and on the teacher education policy (Art. 17).

In 2019, the CNE approved the BNC-Formação proposal, by enacting the Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019, which defines the National Curriculum Guidelines for the Initial Education of teachers for Basic Education and institutes the National Common Base for the Initial Education of Teachers for Basic Education (BRASIL, 2019b). This is an explicit effort to shape-adjust the teacher education pedagogical projects in Brazil to the basic education BNCC political- pedagogical principles.

The Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019 is characterized as the CNE legal-normative reaction to the management proactivist action of the Education Ministry (MEC), which from a self-centered exercise of its Secretariat for the Education and Development of Basic Education Professionals produced a document called “National Common Base Proposal for the Education of Teachers for Basic Education” in 2018 (BRASIL, 2018c). That document induced the production of guidelines able to promote the adjustment of the Licentiate courses in the Brazilian education system to the BNCC policy.

With recognized contribution of the research on the hegemony private apparatuses and their organic intellectuality, at the local or international level, namely, the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation (OEDC); McKinsey & Company; Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV, Fundação Getúlio Vargas ); Center of Studies and Research on Education, Culture, and Community Action (CENPEC, Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Educação, Cultura e Ação Comunitária) - the BNC-Formação proposal is structured from a broad normatized language in the hegemonic rationality spectrum, which includes: contemporary transformations; uncertain and always new world; new citizenship; knowledge society; technological revolution; and sustainable development, among others. Its narrative, in addition to justifying, shows a marked concern with the education quality upon the mediation of external-parametrized indicators of evaluation of the education system.

The central concern with result evaluation, following the model of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and the curriculum matrix organized by competences and abilities, gathers a set of instructions for teacher education in the Brazilian education system, guided by training guidelines, protocol, program standardization, referential development, evaluation and accreditation mechanisms, development map, and self-assessment. This must be achieved “[...] by means of accreditation and evaluation of the initial education programs by independent agencies and based on reliable and valid evidence” (BRASL, 2018c, p. 22).

Such managerial repertoire implies disciplining the teachers’ remuneration and career progression policies. In this way, according to the BNC-Formação proposal,

[ ...] when the competence matrix is complete, four levels of proficiency might exist: 1 ) initial (for the undergraduate student who concludes the course, for the students’ performance national examination - ENADE, and for the entrance in the career); 2) probationary (for the ones entering the career and who shall present new competences and abilities); 3) highly efficient (those more advanced in the career and who shall present more complex competences and abilities); and 4) leader (those at the highest level of the career and whose responsibilities and commitment are broader). (BRASIL, 2018c, p. 39).

Consequently, it advocates a political-pedagogical intervention in the teachers’ action in a conservative and systemic way, in which they are educated to see the teaching-learning process as the zeal for the students’ learning as their central task; the social praxis as an education process must be substituted with the practice epistemology, focusing on the development in the practice context; the theory must be based on instrumental knowledge for the development of competence to learn how to solve common problems of the teaching activity to be able to teach (BRASIL, 2018c).

This proposal of cultural-intellectual emptiness in teacher education, in the perspective of subaltern classes seems to seek legitimacy and consensus from that document, by announcing learning as a right and focusing on practice as its objective. This, aligned with the BNCC curriculum policy, represents the exercise of education as a teacher training for the execution of learning objectives from preset competence indicators, which in practice suffocates the intellectual teacher education process marked by the hegemonic sociability cultural mediation. Such movement represents a teacher education pedagogy, via university, centered on a model of teaching focused on training and restrictive to the direct and pragmatic function between what is learned and what is taught. Even when proposing more analytical processes, these are induced “[...] for an analytical-conceptual work that helps the future teacher to give meaning to the academic knowledge in the practice context” (BRASIL, 2 018c, p. 34, our emphasis).

The epistemology of an hegemonized practice, in this sense, does not appear only as the teacher education central objective, but rather as a frame for their own professional horizon. For this reason, the document is taken as the teacher education central matrix in the Brazilian education system, resting on the so-called professional competences, which must be regulated by the logic of general competences already set forth in the BNCC, and now aligned to the BNC-Formação.

The technical Opinion CNE/CP Nº 22, of November 7, 2019, which provides for the Common Base and the National Common Base for the Initial Education of Teachers for Basic Education (BNC-Formação) (BRASIL, 2019a), follows these instructions and devises a resolution project able to accommodate these principles, which shows its deep alignment with the managerial strategies of the hegemonic rationality in the Brazilian education policy context. Thus, on December 20, 2019, the CNE approved Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019, which defines the and instituted the BNC-Formação (BRASIL, 2019b). This document resulted from a management exercise with the minimum participation of the basic school, or even their representatives such as research organizations, professional associations, and unions.

The Resolution shows deep alignment with the discipline proposed. Although it defines new guidelines for teacher education and, consequently, requires adjustments to the Pedagogical Projects of the Licentiate Courses in Brazilian Universities, the document has a single and isolated reference to the pedagogy employed at university from the constitutional principle of inseparability between teaching, research, and outreach. The reference is found in item V of Art. 6. and the central effort resides in ascribing centrality to the teacher education as “[...] development, by the graduate, of the general competences provided for in the BNCC - Basic Education” (BRASIL, 2019b, p. 2).

Binding the teacher education at university to the preset competence indicators, aligned to the BNCC - Basic Education general competences, raises the possibility, as previously mentioned, of a training pedagogy, in which the cultural education of the future professional is expressed as the ability to react in a suitable way to the indicators, parameters, and preset objectives, focusing on practical problems of a mediated social practice.

The Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019 provides for the university students’ education from a formative workload of at least 3,200 hours, distributed in 1,600 hours of knowledge for the direct management of the BNCC demands; 800 hours of teaching practice; and 800 hours of common base knowledge, which must be developed within the norms related to “[...] articulations with systems, schools, and educational practices” (BRASIL, 2019b, p. 6). The precedence of the practice epistemology becomes quite evident, and even the 800 hours destined to the common base knowledge related to the fundamentals of education, must be fully focused, from the first year of these teachers’ initial education aiming at “[...] integration of the three dimensions of the teacher professional competences - professional knowledge, practice and commitment - as organizers of the curriculum and the content, according to the competences and abilities set forth in the BNCC -Basic Education” (BRASIL, 2019, p. 6).

The Resolution CNE/CP Nº 2/2019 also presents inspection strategies that induce its ideology by indicating both a broad process of production and adjustment of assessment tools within the policy, and the detailed definition of the reference matrix regulating the offer and assessment of the teacher education policy, whose reference is the BNCC - Basic Education general competences, currently known as BNC-Formação. Evaluation is addressed in the Resolution, as an internal and external process, which points out a plan of “[...] reinforcement related to learning and development of competences”, which must be complemented by the organization, under the responsibility of higher education institutions, of “[...] a process of assessment of the graduates in a continuous and articulated way with the learning environments” (BRASIL, 2019b, p. 11). The external process, in turn, is provided from two movements, both under the responsibility of the Anisio Teixeira National Institute for Education Studies and Research (Inep, Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira). The first one is the elaboration of “[...] a teacher education course in loco assessment tool”, and the second movement is the elaboration of a “[...] new format of evaluation for the Students Performance National Examination to be applied in teacher education courses” (BRASIL, 2019b, p. 11). It seems redundant, but at the same time relevant to point out that this new format means adjustment of the external assessment tool to the matrix of competences and abilities that structure the education offer via BNCC.

The reference matrix, in turn, is a broad document attached to the Resolution and is called National Common Base for the Initial Education of Teachers for Basic Education (BNC-Formação). This document translates in detail and with deep parametrization the possible cultural promotion of the teachers being educated, which for organizations such as the National Association of Education Graduate Courses and Research (ANPEd, Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Educação) ends up being a formatted cultural- formative promotion (ANPED, 2019).

Reediting the logic of the curriculum organization already expressed in the BNCC- Basic Education, the BNC-Formação starts from the so-called teachers’ general competences to reach the organization of professional competences - professional knowledge, professional practice, and professional commitment. It structures practical definitions of specific competences and abilities for each one of these professional competences, structures and provides details to the requirements of control of the cultural flow and social practices possible in the formative process of the new teacher.

Thus, the theoretical background employed in this study indicated that the rituals, language, strategies, tools, and the whole theoretical-methodological background and political-pedagogical intentions expressed in the BNC-Formação proposal are in tune with and obey the demands mediated by the capital hegemonic rationality for education. More specifically, in the teacher education policy, it aims at the development of adjustable professional personalities, which are flexible and resilient. A homogenizing logic is observed, which is produced from the capital organic intellectuality and focused on a pedagogy of results that does not leave any space for considering teacher education with a cultural promotion perspective, of expression and organization of the social praxis of the human activity of subaltern classes. Such logic also prevents the development of a pedagogy that is able to promote an inseparable articulation between the technical, pedagogical-scientific, and sociopolitical dimensions of teacher education.

5 Final Considerations

The critical analysis of an ongoing process, whose results are still unknown, is, in fact, a challenge. Investigating the possible impacts of the new curriculum guidelines for teacher education in Brazil is currently a cautious exercise. To accomplish such task with seriousness, a historical study on the material conditions of the Brazilian public school in the last few decades must be carried out.

In the scope of this paper, we opted to place the discussion around certain conception of teaching, namely, the one that advocates the education of teachers as intellectuals, subjects of history and social movements. These professionals are aware of the reality they live in, informed of the direct or implicit relations established between education and society and able to promote changes in the school structure and functioning, and also be qualified to transform the reality in a conscious and collective way.

This conception, in contrast with the homogenizing logic guiding the current education policies, allows the identification of education processes in dispute and their developments in the licentiate courses, while certain pedagogical conception of a neoliberal, pragmatic, and neo technicist foundation informs the curriculum reform in the country. In this sense, the understanding of society, human being, and education is decisive so that the school social function and the teachers’ role in this process become clear.

With the BNCC consolidation as the guiding document for the basic education curricula, attention is drawn to the Licentiate curriculum reform. However, the word ‘reform’ in itself can also be scrutinized since considering that the BNC-Formação proposes substantial alterations in the Licentiate courses, based on different principles, values, and conceptions, this is not a reform, but rather a substitution. A movement from a broad education project, with a progressive and humanizing view, provided for in the DCN 2015 - Resolution N^o 2, of July 1, 2015 (BRASIL, 2015) to a standardized reduced and reductionist curriculum is observed, one that is guided by the development of abilities and competences aiming at results measured by numbers and the control defined by the job market demands in times of extreme instability and precariousness. Such process, however, as previously mentioned, despite its intensification in the last few years due to certain factors such as the ideological apparatus of the official decision makers such as MEC and CNE, must be understood as part of a set of measures to adjust schools to the neoliberal agenda.

At the same time, the university is invited to revise their principles and adjust the teacher education offered in teaching undergraduate courses (licentiate) to the new market requirements. Thus, a pedagogy supported by the tripod teaching (technical education), research (pedagogical-scientific education), and outreach (sociopolitical dimension) is dismantled, while a teacher formative project emerges focusing on the competent, committed, dynamic, flexible, competitive teacher, who is only responsible for their own professional qualification and their students’ academic success or failure.

The capital organic intellectuality, as verified, is articulated to establish a pedagogy of competences and results, through which the organization of the social praxis, a condition for the emancipation of marginalized classes, becomes impossible. Facing this scenery, and the challenge of the analysis of the short-term future, seeking support in history and academic reference that allow the understanding of teaching in its entirety, that is, beyond the activity mere technical dimension, is necessary. This is the only way to react positively, as education professionals, from conceptions that are guided to the construction of new human, work, and learning relationships, which are favorable to the exercise of democracy in these dark times.