Por entre rios e florestas, negociações e significações no currículo de formação de professores: o Parfor em Nova Olinda do Norte/AM

Abstract

This PhD dissertation in Education presents a study on the training of tea-chers in Northern Brazil. The research addresses the National Plan for the Training of Basic Education Teachers (Parfor) and the Pedagogy major at the University of the State of Amazonas (UEA). The study observes the discourse produced in the cultural enunciations of this in-service training, where different contexto meet and hybridize in the curricular production, creating meanings other than those expected in the training proposal. The research questions how discursive articulations occur in tensions between the local demands of the teacher training policy and the trai-ning perspective agreed upon in the Parfor/UEA teacher training curriculum. This research contends that the curriculum is a process of cultural enunciation built within an ambivalent tension of ever-contingent meanings, in-between hybrid pro-cesses. Therefore, a teaching identity for/in teacher training cannot be established. The study was conducted in the Brazilian state of Amazonas, in a city that hosts the Pedagogy major, seeking to understand the curricular production process encoura-ged in and by Parfor, in supervised internship experiences in different research con-texts. The research operates under a post-structural, post-colonial framework, incor-porating the perspective of culture and difference discussed by Homi Bhabha and other scholars, as well as the view of the curriculum as a cultural enunciation dis-cussed by Macedo, Lopes, Frangella, and others. This qualitative, autobiographical, post-structural research addresses curricular production as a process of alterity rela-ted to the visibility of the other in a cultural movement built upon the interstitial spa-ces of training. The study understands that problematizing Parfor, as a curricular training policy through the Pedagogy major, implies operating in the ever-contingent translation of the flow of this policy as a possibility of dialogue with and in differen-ce, in the absence of an absolute norm that is never disturbed or interrupted, as well as the impossibility of teacher training as a prescription for a fixed teaching identity.