Cursando BNCC: caminhos da formação docente frente às políticas curriculares no Brasil (2014-2020)

Abstract

This master's dissertation aims to discuss curriculum policies for teacher training in Brazil between 2014 and 2020, with a particular focus on the actions of the Movimento pela Base (Movement for the Core) in this process. To this end, it draws on authors such as Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe, Stephen Ball, Alice Lopes, and Elizabeth Macedo, who dialogue with the following objectives: to investigate political texts related to curriculum and teaching policies; to identify the role of the Movimento pela Base in initiatives aimed at implementing the BNC-Formação (National Common Base for Teacher Training); and to interpret the different meanings of curriculum and teaching that guide recent curriculum policies focused on teacher training, using the concepts of discourse, antagonism, hegemony, and normativity. To support the analysis, Laclau and Mouffe (2015) provide the categories of discourse, antagonism, and hegemony from Discourse Theory. Stephen Ball (2014) contributes with notions of networks and neoliberalism, while Lopes and Macedo (2011) encourage reflection on curriculum from a post-structural and discursive perspective. In addition, the study incorporates political texts such as the National Common Core Curriculum (Brazil, 2018a), the National Common Base for the Initial Training of Basic Education Teachers (Brazil, 2019), the National Common Base for the Continuing Training of Basic Education Teachers (Brazil, 2020), as well as materials produced by the Movimento pela Base. Thus, the research adopts a post-critical perspective, reflected both in the choice of authors who theoretically support this investigation and in the authorial effort to produce this dissertation under this theoretical-strategic positioning. The methodology used is qualitative in nature, based on bibliographic and documentary analyses. The results indicate that the BNC-Formação Inicial and the BNC-Formação Continuada function as instruments aimed at standardizing teaching practices, placing the responsibility for school success solely on teachers. These frameworks promote a curriculum aligned with global governance interests and neoliberal demands. The standardization of pedagogical practices, structured around evaluable competencies, strains the autonomy of educators, consolidating a teaching model that prioritizes efficiency and adaptation to imposed guidelines. However, the analysis also highlights fissures and resistances within the discursive field, demonstrating the precariousness of any attempt at hegemony. The critique of curriculum standardization and the defense of teacher training that values local specificities and the multiplicity of experiences emerge as fundamental counterpoints to dominant policies. It concludes that curriculum and teaching, as fields of ongoing disputes, resist the fixation of singular meanings, challenging the standardization and normatization that characterize the global educational agenda.