1 Introduction

The object of study of this research is the University for All Program (PROUNI) and aims to analyze the scientific productions about the experience of Prouni students. Since the creation of the Program in 2004 and its institutionalization in 2005, by Law 11.096, it has granted full and partial scholarships in private institutions to Brazilian students without a college degree and this program has benefited countless students in the access to higher education (BRASIL, 2005). However, there are difficulties for these individuals to remain in higher education, arising from the very structure of higher education institutions and from others that are not restricted to the economic field, which are analyzed by ^{Bourdieu (1998}, 1984, 2001, 2010) and Bourdieu and Passeron (1975, 2014) in their studies on field, habitus, symbolic violence, and especially on cultural capital.

Brazilian higher education has developed in a markedly exclusionary and unequal way. Historically, higher education ratified and reproduced the inequalities found in society, instead of transforming society and allowing social ascension, a fact that is also observed in the current context. Universities, in turn, ignore sociocultural differences, selecting and privileging in their theory and practice the cultural manifestations and values of the dominant classes. Universities favor those who already dominate this cultural apparatus and not another portion of young people and adults who enter the universities through the University for All Program (^{BOURDIEU, 1998}; BOURDIEU; PASSERON, 1975).

[...] the school system fulfills a legitimating function that is increasingly necessary for the perpetuation of the "social order" since the evolution of the relations of force between classes tends to exclude more completely the imposition of a hierarchy based on the brute and brutal affirmation of the relations of force (^{BOURDIEU, 2001}, p. 311).

^{Bourdieu and Passeron (1975}) emphasize that within a class society there are cultural differences, and, in turn, these classes differ in their cultural heritage, which is made up of norms, behaviors, values, among others. Bourdieu (1984) analyzes how individuals incorporate into the social structure, legitimize, and reproduce it. For his understanding, he built three concepts: field, habitus, and capital, besides distinguishing between economic, social, symbolic, and cultural capital.

The economic capital is related to the goods and services to which it gives access, as well as the social capital, which is the set of influential social relationships maintained by the family. Cultural capital, in turn, constitutes the element of family inheritance that would have the greatest impact on the definition of a subject's school destination. It is the set of intellectual qualifications produced by the school system or transmitted by the family and whose existence takes three forms: in an embodied state, as a lasting disposition of the body (such as the facility of expression in public, the command of language); in an objective state, as a cultural asset (such as the possession of paintings, books, dictionaries, instruments, machines); in an institutionalized state, that is, socially sanctioned by institutions (such as school titles). And finally, symbolic capital is the set of rituals linked to honor and recognition. It is the credit and authority that confer to an agent the recognition and possession of the three other forms of capital (economic, cultural, and social) (^{BOURDIEU, 1996}; 1998; 2014).

The social space is constructed in such a way that agents or groups are distributed there according to their position in the statistical distributions according to two principles of differentiation that [...] are undoubtedly the most efficient - the economic capital and the cultural capital. It follows that the agents have the more in common the closer these two positions are and the less the more distant they are in them (^{BOURDIEU, 1996}, p. 20).

The field, as a symbolic space in which agents and institutions are inserted, is where confrontations take place and representations are legitimized. It is an autonomous space, a microcosm endowed with its own laws. The habitus is the capacity of individuals to incorporate a certain social structure, being the producer of actions and the product of historical and social conditioning (^{BOURDIEU, 2004}, p. 20 and 28).

According to ^{Nogueira and Nogueira (2002}), all subjects are characterized by a socially inherited baggage. Higher education, in the case of young people and adults coming from culturally favored backgrounds, is considered a kind of continuation of family education, while for other young people and adults from less favored classes it would mean something strange, distant, or even threatening (^{BOURDIEU, 1998}; BOURDIEU, 2010).

Most of the time, economic and social capital function as auxiliary means for the accumulation of cultural capital. For example, economic capital allows certain subjects to have access to certain educational institutions and cultural goods (^{BOURDIEU, 1998}; BOURDIEU, 2010). Therefore, young people and adults with lower economic capital also draw from lower benefits in the university environment and from a lower diversity of opportunities within it (such as access to congresses, exchanges, extra courses, among others).

Symbolic violence" becomes inherent and unavoidable in higher education institutions. This unperceived violence is veiled, founded on recognition, obtained by the inculcation of legitimacy by the dominant over the dominated, and which ensures the permanence of domination and social reproduction. The transmission of school culture, which conveys the norms of the dominant classes, is a symbolic violence exerted on the popular classes (^{BOURDIEU; PASSERON, 1975}).

It can be thought that for the Prouni scholarship students, who fit into the working classes, since they declare to have a low income, the university represents a rupture when it comes to the values and knowledge of their practice, which are despised, ignored, and deconstructed in their cultural insertion. That is, these students need to learn new patterns or models of culture within the university environment (^{STIVAL; FORTUNATO, 2008}).

Where we used to see equality of opportunities, meritocracy, and social justice, Bourdieu starts to see the reproduction and legitimization of social inequalities. In Bourdieu's theory, education loses the role it was given as a transforming and democratizing instance of societies and starts to be seen as one of the main institutions through which social privileges are maintained and legitimized (^{NOGUEIRA; NOGUEIRA, 2002}, p. 17).

Thus, for working-class students, achieving academic success becomes much more challenging, as they need to unlearn a culture to learn a new way of thinking, speaking, moving, creating a new way of seeing the world (^{STIVAL; FORTUNATO, 2008}).

[...] as always, the school excludes: but from now on, it continuously excludes [...] and keeps in its midst those it excludes, contenting itself with relegating them to the devalued branches (^{BOURDIEU, 1998}, p. 224).

Prouni students suffer a much greater "bombardment" when entering university than those who come from the elite. In reality, scholarship students have the impression of being in an unknown cultural environment. Symbolic violence permeates the university context in a subtle way that is difficult to perceive by those who conduct the actions, generating an environment of daily tension and hegemonic discourse.

Considering this, the interest in learning about the experiences of Prouni scholarship students arose, and for this we defined as a question that guided the study: What are the contributions of the studies about the experience of Prouni students, and how do they contribute to the study?

The text is structured in four sections: the first one contemplates the context of this article, a study about the University for All Program based on Pierre Bourdieu's writings. In the second section the methodology is presented, the research protocols for the systematic review and procedures; in the third section the results about the experiences of Prouni students are discussed and finally, in the fourth section some considerations about the study are presented.

2 Method

The protocol for the systematic review proposed by ^{Schiavon (2015}, p. 54-72) was used, in its following phases: 1- Validation about the existence of the review on the topic; 2- Preparation of the review protocol; 3- Application of the review protocol; 4- Analysis of the collected studies. The protocol created in this study was as follows:

In the application phase of the review protocol, the following procedures were carried out: 1) searching the database; 2) exporting the studies (references and abstracts), creating Excel spreadsheets; 3- analyzing the titles; 4) analyzing the abstracts; 5) building the list of included and excluded studies; 6) re-analyzing the excluded studies; 7) confirming or refuting the exclusion.

In the analysis phase of the collected studies, the following procedures were carried out: 1- downloading the studies in their entirety; 2- importing the studies into the Mendeley software; 3- coding the studies (author; date; title; type of publication; objectives; method; keywords; theoretical contribution; participant; technique; place of research; results); 4- data collection and creation of spreadsheets; 5- analysis and organization of the collected data; 6- construction of spreadsheets, charts, graphs with the analysis of the data; 7- description of the results found. The accounting of publications that involved the whole process is shown in Figure 1.

Source: the authors, systematic review study (2020).

Figure 1 Flow chart of the systematic review 

3 Results

Thirty-one publications were found in this study and, of these, nine were doctoral theses and 22 master's dissertations. It was also verified that this phenomenon begins to be investigated between the period of 2007 and the year 2017. The largest number of publications was found in 2011, with seven publications.

The thematic areas of these publications included Sociology; Social Work; Social Psychology; Educational Psychology; Clinical Psychology; Public Policies and Management of Higher Education; Education; Economics; Social Sciences; Human Sciences; Evaluation of Public Policies. Thus, there was a great predominance of studies in Education, with 14 publications, as shown in Graph 1.

Source: the authors, systematic review study (2020).

Graph 1 Scientific production by subject area 

Of the number of publications by state, São Paulo had the highest number, with 16 publications, followed by the state of Rio Grande do Sul, with five publications. Of the research institutions, the one that published the most studies were the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUCSP), with seven studies, followed by the Federal University of Ceará (UFCE), which published four studies.

Source: the authors, systematic review study (2020).

Graph 2 Scientific production by institution 

In the analysis about the objectives of the publications in relation to the experiences of the scholarship students of the University for All Program, it was found that the investigation of access and permanence together were identified in six publications; the investigation of access only was identified in four publications; the investigation of permanence only was identified in two publications; the studies that investigated the entrance were three publications and two publications were concerned with investigating the insertion.

About the objects of study, the investigation of social signification and meanings, the university experience, and the students' perception stand out, both identified in three studies. The construction of identity was identified in only one study, as well as the dynamic exclusion/inclusion, the phenomenon of social inclusion, and the personal, institutional, and public policy actions. The educational trajectory was identified in two studies.

The thoughts, views, and opinions of the students were identified in two studies; the political, economic, pedagogical, and social point of view, as well as the historical context, family and work conditions, and the conditioning factors of motivation were identified in only one study. The practices students develop, as well as the limits and possibilities were identified in only one study; the changes and/or impacts on their lives were identified in two studies. Social change and the role of the program were identified in only one study.

The subjective dimensions were identified in two studies; the multiple dimensions, the meaning of the experience; the factors that interfere with access and permanence, as well as the risk and protection factors and the stimulus and course completion were identified in only one study; the difficulties were identified in three studies; the difficulties along with the strategies were identified in only one study, as well as the profile of young people and the choice of the course; the research on black ethnicity was identified in two studies; and the research on students from public schools was identified in one study.

Regarding the methodological approaches that were used to conduct the publication, eighteen authors identified their study as qualitative; eight authors identified their research as quanti-qualitative and the remaining approaches were used by only one author as being quantitative approach; using Propensity Score Matching; multifocal approach; multidimensional approach; and biographical method.

Of the types of research, five authors named it as descriptive; two authors named their studies as exploratory and the other types of research were named by only one author as interpretive, transversal, and transdisciplinary. Regarding the research procedures, six authors used the case study, 14 used the bibliographical research, six authors used the documental research as a procedure and 12 authors used the field research, with only one author using the survey research.

Regarding the keywords of these publications, it can be seen that the most used term was "Prouni", in 26 studies; followed by "Higher Education", in 19 studies; and "University for All Program" and "Public Policies" in five studies each. The terms "Social Inclusion" and "Social Inequality" were found in three studies; followed by "Higher Education and the State"; "Affirmative Action"; "Permanence"; "Democratization of Education"; "Inclusion"; "Exclusion"; "Education"; "Youth", being found in two studies each.

It was not possible to identify the theoretical framework in 17 studies. Of those who identified the theoretical referential, the most cited was Edgar Morin, cited in four studies; followed by Pierre Bourdieu, cited in three studies. The theorists Bernard Lahire and Paulo Freire were cited by two studies. The following authors were cited by only one author each:

Bernard Charlot; Merleau Ponty; Antônio Joaquim Severino; Alain Coulon; Jean-Claude Passeron; György Lukács; Francois Dubet; Axel Honneth; Jacques Simmwl; Antônio Gramsci.

The authors Afrânio Mendes Catani; Alípio Márcio Dias Casali; Maria José Viana M. Mattos; Ana Mercês Bahia Bock; Antonio Carlos Caruso Ronca; Cristiane Pereira de Melo Oliveira; Dermeval Saviani; Júlio César Godoy Bertolin; Cristina Firenze; Ligia Carvalho

Aboes Vercelli; Luiz Fernandes Dourado; Maria Laura Puglisi Barbosa Franco; Marta Arretche; Mitsuko Aparecida Makino Antunes; Otaíza de Oliveira Romanelli were mentioned once by the same author. The most cited data analysis referential was Laurence Bardin's, cited by four authors, and its procedure "content analysis" cited by seven publications.

Of the techniques used to conduct the research, it is perceived that 15 authors only make use of one instrument; only one study uses five instruments; and the other authors make use of two instruments to construct their research.

It was identified that 21 authors indicate the use of questionnaires, and the same number of authors indicate the use of interviews. The focus group was used in three publications. The life history technique was used in two studies. And observation, mapping, and group discussion were used by only one author each.

From the analysis of these data, only two publications were not able to identify the number of participants. From the other 29 publications, it was found that the sum of the total participants involved in all publications was 5,077, with an average of 175 participants.

We found that the application of the life history technique involved 12 students; the documentary analysis of student data and records involved 1,429 students; the focus group involved 17 students; the interviews involved 227 students; and the questionnaires involved 3,502 students. Only two studies mentioned the use of software to tabulate the data from their analyses, and both used the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences - SPSS.

Of the research sites, the most researched institution was the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo, cited in four studies. The following institutions were mentioned in three studies: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais; Universidade Bandeirante de São Paulo; Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. The following institutions were cited by two studies: Paulista University; National Union of Private Higher Education Institutions; Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul.

The following institutions were cited by only one author: Universidade Anhembi Morumbi, Universidade Santo Amaro, Universidade Cruzeiro do Sul, Universidade Castelo Branco, Centro Universitário Ibero-Americano, Faculdades Integradas Brasileiras Renascença, Faculdade São Camilo, Centro Universitário Uni Sant'Anna, Faculdade Santo Agostinho, Universidade Católica Dom Bosco, Centro Universitário de Campo Grande, Anhanguera Educacional, Universidade Anhanguera, Universidade Católica de Pernambuco, Faculdade Maurício de Nassau, Faculdade Pernambucana de Saúde, Faculdade São Miguel, Faculdade Jose Lacerda Filho de Ciências Aplicadas, Associação Caruaruense de Ensino Superior, Faculdade do Vale do Ipojuca, Faculdade Osman Lins, Instituto Superior de Educação de Floresta, Faculdade dos Guararapes, Instituto Superior de Ciências Aplicadas, Centro Universitário do Norte, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, Universidade Nove de Julho, Centro Universitário Belas Artes, Universidade Católica de Brasília, Universidade do Planalto Catarinense, Faculdades Sumaré, Paraíso Faculty, Pitágoras Faculty, Claretiano Faculty, Asser Faculty, Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense, Unigranrio University, Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul.

Of those who identified their research institutions, only one study involved 10 institutions; one study involved eight institutions; two studies involved six institutions each; three studies involved three institutions each; one study involved two institutions; and most researched only one institution, which was found in 17 studies.

Seven authors kept the name of the researched institutions confidential, but six presented their region, state, or city, among these: two studies corresponded to the city of São Paulo - SP, and one study to the state of São Paulo. One study referred to the state of Minas Gerais; one study referred to the state of Rio Grande do Sul, and one study referred to the city of Fortaleza - CE. Only one study maintained complete confidentiality, not presenting the institution or its location data.

4 Final Considerations

The objective of this work was to analyze the existing scientific productions about the experiences of Prouni scholarship students. The study made it possible to know the Program from the perception of students and made evident the difficulties faced in relation to the insertion in a strange and, at times, even hostile environment.

The studies analyzed on Prouni students, made it possible to gather unique experiences regarding the educational trajectory, the family context, and the university experience of the researched students. In the results of the researches selected in systematic review, which point out realities from all over the country, it is possible to visualize brief scenes of the life of these young people, the difficulties faced by students to remain in college, the strategic behaviors performed by students to remain in college, and the main factors that may influence college permanence, thus contributing with reflections that are urgent in the context of higher education institutions and in the formulation of educational policies.

It was verified that the authors surveyed in this review study pointed out several opinions and views about the University for All Program, however, it is seen by most publications as a program that does not democratize Brazilian higher education. Some of these authors even use the term "pseudo-democratization", since this educational policy only enables access to higher education but does not present actions for the permanence of these students, nor does it guarantee the universality of the right to higher education for all young Brazilians.

It can be concluded that the students who receive a Prouni scholarship belong to a working social class and that they face several difficulties to remain in the university environment. These difficulties go far beyond the economic realm but have implications on the subjectivities of the students. Most of the publications analyzed in this study corroborate Bourdieu's criticism of education, pointing out that Prouni has become a social program that helps maintain the existing inequalities in Brazilian society, because the subjects of less favored social classes are offered courses of less social prestige, fewer opportunities in the university experience (such as access to exchanges, national and international conferences, among others), facing numerous difficulties to complete their courses, including economic, pedagogical, family, relational and subjective. Bourdieu and Champagne (1998) emphasize that ethnic minorities and the most disadvantaged social classes are disinherited and excluded from higher education, and, with this study, it was glimpsed that in face of this reality, many students adopt an adaptive behavior of resilience to succeed in completing their undergraduate courses.