Public Education: not a priority of the public power or disinterest of society?

Authors

  • Elias P Marques USP; Faculdade de Saúde Pública
  • Maria C F Pelicioni USP; Faculdade de Saúde Pública
  • Isabel M T B Pereira USP; Faculdade de Saúde Pública

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19844

Keywords:

Elementary education, Quality education, Health promotion, Teacher, Public power, Qualitative research

Abstract

Brazilian society does not have high-quality public education because it is not a priority of the public power. On the other hand, the State does not prioritize education because it has not been a demand of society. To legitimate any debate on education, it is necessary to involve the real protagonists, the teachers. A qualitative research was conducted with teachers from a municipal elementary school in São Paulo, Brazil. The aim was to identify, through semi-structured interviews, their social representations on the present role of the public school and the public power's initiatives that have been trying to integrate areas like health and environment into the school these days. On the topic analyzed here, "public power and public school", it has been found that paternalism, inefficacy of public policies and governors' lack of knowledge on school practices are evidences of the State's lack of interest in the development of quality schools, which ends up determining that the school is not able to play its social role. The teacher has been feeling more and more impotent, unvalued and uninterested in public education. Therefore, it is now time for society to undertake its responsibility towards public education. The public power, in turn, must not only know, but also experience the school, establishing a true dialog with the teacher. Through education, it must search for a sustainable social transformation based on new human values concerning ethics and justice.

References

Squizato R. Educação: lições por fazer. 2006;2:20-31.

Freire P. Pedagogia da autonomia: saberes necessários à prática educativa. 27. ed. São Paulo: Paz e Terra; 1996.

INEP – Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. Censo escolar da educação básica 2006 [base dedados na Internet]. [acesso em 06 de jul 2007]Disponível em: http://www.inep.gov.br/basica/censo/Escolar/resultados.htm.

OECD – Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Education at aglance: OECD Indicators. Paris; 2006.

Cunha C. Fundeb falha ao não definir metas, afirma especialista. Folha de São Paulo, 2006dez 11; Caderno Cotidiano: 4.

Paro VH. Políticas educacionais: considerações sobre o discurso genérico e a abstração da realidade. In: Paro VH. Escritos sobre educação. São Paulo: Xamã; 2001. p. 121-39.

Minayo MCS. Ciência, técnica e arte: o desafio da pesquisa social. In: Deslandes SF, Cruz Neto O, Gomes R, Minayo MCS, organizadores. Pesquisa Social: Teoria, Método e Criatividade.24. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes; 1994. p. 9-30.

Lefèvre F, Lefèvre AMC, Teixeira JJV. O discurso do sujeito coletivo: uma nova abordagem metodológica em pesquisa qualitativa. Caxias do Sul: EDUCS; 2000.

Moscovici S. A representação social da psicanálise. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar; 1978.

Michelat G. Sobre a utilização da entrevista não-diretiva em sociologia. In: Thiollent MJM. Crítica metodológica, investigação social e enquete operária. 5. ed. São Paulo: Polis, 1987.p. 191-211.

Bardin L. Análise de conteúdo. 70. ed. Lisboa;1979.

Lefèvre F, Lefèvre AMC. O discurso do sujeito coletivo: um novo enfoque em pesquisa qualitativa (desdobramentos). Caxias do Sul: EDUCS; 2005.

Góis A, Takahashi F. Escolas próximas têm médias distantes. Folha de S. Paulo, 2007 mar 31; Caderno Cotidiano:5.

Zagury T. O professor refém: para pais e professores entenderem por que fracassa a educação no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Record;2006.

Philippi Jr A, Bruna GC. Política e gestão ambiental. In: Philippi Jr A, Romero MA, Bruna GC, editores. Curso de gestão ambiental. Barueri: Manole; 2004. p. 657-711. (Coleção Ambiental,1).

Pelicioni MCF. Educação em saúde e educação ambiental: estratégias de construção da escola promotora da saúde. [tese de livre-docência]. São Paulo: Faculdade de Saúde Pública da USP;2000.

Downloads

Published

2007-12-01

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 3 (2007)

Section

Original Research

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis