AUTONOMY AND TUTELAGE IN THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT

ABSTRACT

The theme of autonomy has been present since the beginnings of education. In today’s society, student’s autonomy in school practices can determine the political and social participation of young people. This study seeks to problematize autonomy and tutelage in formal education from an integrative review of scientific literature. The proposal implies contextualizing these concepts, tracing a historical scenario from which educational practices that relate to autonomy and tutelage are delineated. The work includes the analysis of eleven scientific articles published in the Portal Periódicos Capes database between 2000 and 2019. The results point to three axes: the construction of the concepts of autonomy and tutelage from a historical and philosophical trajectory; critical analysis of society based on political guidelines; and, finally, the relationship between the political character of autonomy and tutelage and the educational practices that emerge from everyday school life.

Keywords:
autonomy; education; literature review

RESUMO

O tema da autonomia está presente desde os primórdios da educação. Na sociedade atual, a autonomia estudantil nas práticas escolares pode determinar a participação política e social dos jovens. O presente estudo busca problematizar autonomia e tutela na educação formal a partir de revisão integrativa da literatura científica. A proposta implica contextualizar os referidos conceitos, traçando um cenário histórico a partir do qual se delineiam as práticas educativas que tangem autonomia e tutela. O trabalho inclui a análise de onze artigos científicos publicados na base de dados Portal Periódicos Capes entre os anos 2000 e 2019. Os resultados apontam para três eixos: a construção dos conceitos de autonomia e tutela a partir de uma trajetória histórica e filosófica; a análise crítica da sociedade a partir de orientações políticas; e, por fim, a relação entre o caráter político de autonomia e tutela e as práticas educacionais que emergem do cotidiano escolar.

Palavras-chave:
autonomia; educação; revisão de literatura

RESUMEN

El tema de la autonomía está presente desde los primordios de la educación. En la sociedad actual, la autonomía estudiantil en las prácticas escolares puede determinar la participación política y social de los jóvenes. En el presente estudio se busca problematizar autonomía y tutela en la educación formal a partir de revisión integrativa de la literatura científica. La propuesta implica contextualizar los referidos conceptos, trazando un escenario histórico desde el cual se delinean las prácticas educativas acerca de la autonomía y tutela. En el estudio se incluye el análisis de once artículos científicos publicados en la base de datos Portal Periódicos Capes entre los años 2000 y 2019. Los resultados apuntan a tres ejes: la construcción de los conceptos de autonomía y tutela a partir de una trayectoria histórica y filosófica; el análisis crítico de la sociedad a partir de orientaciones políticas; y, por fin, la relación entre el carácter político de autonomía y tutela y las prácticas educacionales que emergen del cotidiano escolar.

Palabras clave:
autonomía; educación; revisión de literatura

INTRODUCTION

The history of school education in Brazil expresses, by means of a trajectory line that is not so clear, the relations between two vectors that compose, maybe, the engine of educational purpose. Most of the educational practices observed in the school environment are anchored somewhere between autonomy and tutelage.

From the classic period to modernity, the theme of student autonomy is approached. Since the Athenian paideia, in which its education prescribes the integration between culture and society by means of political formation, up to the illuminist conception of education as a pedagogical proposal for emancipation by reason, especially in Kant, there has been a predominance of the ideal of human development by means of education with an emphasis on the importance of autonomous formation (Mendonça & Filho, 2012). Therefore, the schooling process emerges in Modernity, as an educational proposal that is a result of the Illustration period. It presents itself as promoter of a formation that seeks, by means of reason, full exercise of freedom.

Such accomplishment, made possible by the projection of modern rationality in the realm of science, could be linked to an individual morality development that, as a consequence, would result in social advancements for humanity (Lima, 2002). Modern school would become, throughout history, a place for preparation into adulthood, in which education consists of conducting someone until they become of age. The childhood experience, in this case, gains a pejorative sense regarding the illuminist ideals of emancipation, as it projects the individual’s autonomy in adulthood (Kohan, 2003). In fact, the conception of childhood as a phase, even though it is transitory, unsuitable for public life, is related to the origins of tutelage in education (Mattos, Péres, Almada, & Castro, 2013).

Autonomy is a historical concept that involves the idea of political participation by individuals (Martins, 2002). Studying young people’s autonomy in the realm of education implies considering not only the direct incidence of students on their own formation, but also their participation in the processes of construction and updating of the technology underlying the device for school formation: the educational system. Problematizing the educational system in current society is, perhaps, a necessary consequence, when discussing student autonomy in school practices. The way the relation between autonomy and tutelage influences these practices is the result of the discourse produced by means of the appropriation of concepts that lead to the binomial, in its social and political articulation, that, in turn, is linked to historical construction and, at the same time, man’s moral formation.

According to the study by Saviani (1997), groups of educational theories evolved historically, on opposite sides, concerning school’s social function. Such theories ended up leading to educational policies implemented along the last centuries. In the first group, non-critical theories that advocate traditional pedagogy conceive autonomy in formal education, in the context of a harmonic society, in its function of promoting social equality. A second group includes critical-reproductive theories, that differently, conceive school as a political tool for social exclusion. In this case, school autonomy concerning social transformation shrinks because inequality projects itself as a phenomenon connected to the social, structure itself.

To Veiga-Neto (2008), who works in the field of post-modern studies in education, the institutionalization process is accompanied by the gradual school structuring in human, material, and discourse aspects. Such process constitutes the basis of construction on pedagogical knowledge as well as concepts of education, individuality, and society. In this sense, the line of individual schooling, in combination with its effect in society, has an intrinsic relation with the social role played by formal education.

This article aims at problematizing the concepts of autonomy and tutelage in the school environment, based on what has been discussed in scientific productions. Recent literature includes distinct proposals, which comprehend the conceptual approach, and the practice in the relation between autonomy, education, and society. Based on the discovered corpus, three categories were created, based on the approaches identified in the article, in the following composition: the ones the focus on the construction of the concepts of autonomy and tutelage, based on a historical and philosophical trajectory; the ones that stem from these constructions in order to realize critical analysis of society and, thus, propose a discussion on the theme based on political orientations; and, finally, the studies that aim at establishing the relation between the political perspective on the concepts of autonomy and tutelage, and the educational practices that appear in the everyday life school environments.

METHODOLOGY

The present work consists of an integrative review on the concepts of autonomy and tutelage in education. The study was conducted by the following guiding question: how has scientific literature approached autonomy and tutelage in the school environment? The considered inclusion criteria were: studies that approach the theme referring to autonomy and tutelage in school education, published online in the Portuguese, English, and Spanish language, with a chronological period situated between the years 2000 and 2019. As exclusion criteria, researchers dismissed articles in which the theme approach did not present relation with the scope of this article. Researchers also excluded texts in different formats such as editorials, papers, dissertation, theses, books, book chapters, abstracts, letters, and news reports.

The search process was realized in the second semester of 2019, in the databases of journal portals such as the Portal Periódicos Capes, which included four intersections: Autonomy [and] Education, Autonomy [and] School, Tutelage [and] Education, Tutelage [and] School. As a result of the search, eleven articles were included in this article. Out of these articles, no article was written in the last three years, considering these databases and the data from the realized search, which points at the need for further production in the area.

Results were analyzed by means of theme categories (Souza, Silva, & Carvalho, 2010), defined after a careful reading and interpretation of each discovered article, while identifying major approached topics: historical and philosophical construction of the concept; social and political approach; and implications on school education. Table 1 presents articles related to their respective theme categories and an indication of the philosophical perspective and/or theoretical bases.

Table 1
Theme categories and perspectives/theoretical bases of the analyzed articles.

Theme Category *	Author	Publication year	Title	Perspective/ Theory Bases
1; 2; 3	Martins, A. M.	2002	Autonomy and education: the trajectory of a concept.	Historical/Critical Sociology
1	Nodari, P. C. & Saugo, F.	2011	Clarifying, education and autonomy in Kant.	Historical-philosophical
1; 3	Silva, R. B.	2015	Autonomy and education: reflections and tensions in the routes for human formation.	Historical/ Post-structuralist
1; 2	Dias, A. A.	2005	Moral education and autonomy in child education: teachers’ views.	Critical sociology
1; 2	Fischmann, R.	2007	Injustice, moral autonomy and school organization: exploratoryanalysis of relations.	Marxist
1; 2	Carvalho, M. C. B. de.	2008	The present tutelage view in the education of popular groups in Brazil.	Crítical/Post-structuralist
2; 3	Roschild, J. M. & Ferreira, S. D.	2012	Education and Autonomy.	Marxist
1; 2	Dantas, O. M. A. N. A. & Silva, A. G. M.	2016	Periquillo Sarniento: an account of education as an obstacle to autonomy.	Marxist
1; 3	Petroni, A. P. & Souza, V. L. T.	2010	School relations and the construction of autonomy: a study on the Psychology perspective.	Cultural-historical/ Marxist
1; 3	Oliveira, G. N. B. de.	2013	The political sense of the relations between Education and Autonomy and their different implications.	Critical/ Marxist
1; 2; 3	Mattos, A. R.; Péres, B. C.; Almada, C. V. R. & Castro, L. R.	2013	Careful attention on the teacher-student relation and its political potential.	Post-structuralist

• * 1) Focus on the historical and philosophical construction of the autonomy concept; 2) Based on the historical and philosophical construction to propose a social and political analysis; 3) They go for implications of the autonomy concept in the school education practice.

The theme categories, just like the theoretical-philosophical approaches, were defined in order to provide guidelines to the discussion of results while offering a plot for the text. In order to do so, predominant aspects were taken into consideration in the proposal of each article without, however, being restricted to such aspects. The organization of the table consists of providing an organization for the analysis and a brief synthesis of the results without assuming, thus, the objective of establishing an accurate theoretical classification in the analysis of the articles.

THE HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE CONCEPT

The way autonomy is conceived nowadays as well as its political articulation and, consequently, the educational practice, is the result of a historical and philosophical construction. The result is expressed by means of diverse thought streams anchored on science and on philosophy. Ângela Maria Martins (2002) reinforces this idea in the article entitled Autonomy and education - the trajectory of a concept. By discussing the connections between the autonomy concept and its instrumental use in the education field, the author conceptualizes autonomy as the result of a historical construction, based on the philosophical development and on political, social, and institutional movements.

The autonomy concept is connected to the production of the historical individual, who leads to modernity. Thus, it is a concept that is directly attached to the conception of modern individual, as the product of a society that has relied on humanistic principles, based on rationality ideals. Anchored on the philosophy of awareness and on fundamental concepts such as existentialism, universalism, and objectivism, the period provided the bases for the production of a rational, conscious individual who becomes, at last, autonomous.

Part of the contingent of authors that approach autonomy in the realm of education assumes the individual’s emancipation as theoretical-political orientation. Emancipation becomes, from this perspective, a platform to be reached by means of education. In fact, the idea of emancipation as a fundamental teleological principle of education relies on one of the most consistent pillars of modern thought: the philosophy of Emanuel Kant.

Kant’s thought is the basis of the autonomy conception in authors that discuss the concept in the realm of education. Here, we present a synthesis of how some of these authors conceive autonomy based on this perspective. Starting with Nodari and Saugo (2011), authors propose the concept of autonomy as the way to clarification, that is, as the progressive process for human beings by means of which they are capable of thinking for themselves. For Dias (2005), autonomy consists of a critical, innovative process that seeks answers linked to a moral problem, involving a conscious, free, and responsible individual. Petroni and Souza (2010) relate to the concept of responsibility. The authors compare autonomy to individuals’ capacity to conduct themselves in the formation process concerning other people and the context in which they are inserted, considering the critical conscience of the social, political, and ideological influences they go through in the external environment.

In the same line, based on the Marxist-critical perspective, Oliveira (2013) conceives autonomy as the individuals’ capacity to self-manage, while having the freedom to make their own decisions. The author has a critical opinion on the historically predominant vision of autonomy, which “[...] tends to be guided by an individualistic, subjectivist concept that defines it in an abstract, generic way without any connections to the concrete social conditions in which it is built” (Oliveira, 2013, p. 09). This vision, according to the author, evolves from the very historical and philosophical construction of the autonomy concept. In the context of modern thought, it unites autonomy with morality and with human rationality. The author, thus, distinguishes autonomy from self-sufficiency, while defining the first one as the awareness of social reality, rather than estrangement.

Differently, Dantas and Silva (2016) relie on Lev Vygotsky and Paulo Freire in order to conceive an education for the formation of citizenship. Thus, they understand that the teacher’s autonomy implies a reflection on the context of the students’ social experience. Fischmann (2007, p. 329), on the other hand, associates autonomy, in the realm of resistance, to oppression and to social inequality, while situating it as “[...] substantial action towards the construction of equality by means of justice, which proves emancipating in view of the scenario of domination consolidated by the technicism and bureaucracy [...]”.

Another thought current based on which knowledge is produced and discussed on autonomy in the educational context is the post-structuralist one. Beyond modern perspective, post-structuralism promotes the decentralization of conscience and of the individual in the human, social approach. It also rejects the abstract, universal reasoning and the transcendental conceptions of reality, while proposing the deconstruction of binary oppositions in social analysis, such as liberation-oppression and repression-liberation. Post-structuralism also defends the connection between science and politics, while refusing metanarratives in the construction of theories (Silva, 1994).

In this context, which deals with the way post-structuralism has approached the matter of autonomy in education, Silva (2015), Mattos, Pérez, Almada and Castro (2013), and Carvalho (2008) stand out. The former discusses the matter of autonomy and its relation with human formation based on two distinct moments: the first one, based on the concept of man anchored on the Greek, illuminist philosophies and, finally, on the values produced and disseminated by current society. The task led the author to problematize the way schools handles the autonomy theme, regarding the discourses on the crisis in school education and considering the context of discipline and control in the realm of social institutions. Silva (2015) relies on Lasch and Bauman in order to analyze how contemporaneity, in the context of neo-liberalism, promotes autonomy as an expression of freedom for consumerism. Here, autonomy translates, on the one hand as the amplification of the individual dimension, and, on the other hand, as a further stretching of the thin line between the private and the public spheres, with a subsequent intensification of individualism in the social relations.

Mattos et al. (2013), when discussing the interaction between adults and children in the scenario of contemporary education, situate the educator’s caretaking relation at the level of ethics, when it comes to benefitting autonomy. This caretaking relation involves the political potential by means of affection, which requires sensibility and responsibility by educators regarding the students’ needs. Autonomy, here, differs from tutelage because the latter privileges the position of the responsible adult, who is supposed to know the children’s needs whereas autonomy in the caretaking ethics guarantees the space for speech and expression of the children’s opinions and desires, which leads to a horizontal relation, with active participation by children and adolescents in the school’s decision-making process.

Carvalho (2008), by approaching the education individual’s autonomy in popular groups, also does it via the tutelage concept. To the author, tutelage thought underestimates individuals’ capacity to think by themselves, while limiting the exercise of their freedom. Then, tutelage practices, in the macrosocial context, are rooted into the culture of public service, and associating with welfarism, to patronage, and to clientelism. The next topic approaches how the concepts of autonomy and tutelage, anchored on historical and philosophical knowledge, affect social and political analyses of reality in the realm of education.

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL APPROACH

The theoretical and philosophical foundations of education make up a theoretical arsenal that is the source of distinct readings on a certain society. There are numerous philosophies and lines of thought based on the production of knowledge on education and moral formation. Identifying the relation between a certain line of thought and the philosophical-political aspects of social analysis, in some cases, is no simple task because these themes are characteristically complex and inter-disciplinary. Even without discussing the subtleties included in the differentiation and categorization of lines of thought, in which the scope of this study is not included, it is possible to highlight, in the assessed articles, aspects of Marxist and post-structuralist trends in the autonomy, tutelage, and school education categories as a criticism to Kantism and the modern conception of education.

The analysis of social and political reality, when it comes to the concepts of autonomy and tutelage, very often interconnects with the morality problem. In the article entitled “Moral education and autonomy in child education: The teachers’ views”, Dias (2005) analyzes the way educators in child education conceive autonomy and moral education, while establishing a relation between the two concepts. The author also emphasizes that the traditional conception of moral education undermines autonomous development as a simple discernment capacity based on a specific individual context.

The author relies on Habermas to affirm that autonomous individuals constitute themselves by means of moral conduct when they present themselves as culturally attached to the historical, social, and political context. The author also assumes a conception of moral education based on critical reflection, on dialogical reasoning, considering the experienced rules and overall reality, and on the principles that guide the educational process. The autonomous individual becomes, in this perspective, the protagonist of moral conducts, by assuming a critical stance regarding reality, and at the same time following the guidelines of human conduct in order to contribute to the development of better individuals (Dias, 2005).

In turn, Roschild and Ferreira (2012), by proposing new routes for the autonomy experience in the classroom relations, anchor on Marxism to assess education as an ideological device in the hands of the state. They consider that traditional education, as an ideological teaching conception that does not include the construction of autonomy for individuals in the educational practice, and propose a progressist education as the means to transformation, in the search for autonomy, by means of awareness and critical attitude by individuals regarding the real interest of the societal projects drawn by the ruling class.

In the same line of thought that underlies the aforementioned authors, Dantas and Silva (2016), by exploring the criticism by José Joaquim Fernández de Lizardi, in the novel entitled Periquillo Sarniento to modernity’s educational proposal, debate the impact of education on the students’ autonomy development. The authors use the philosophy of Vigotski, Paulo Freire, Rancière and Contreras to criticize the education that serves the purposes of the current social order, while believing that an educational proposal that is contrary to autonomy might lead to negative social consequences. The negative consequences include the emergence of professionals who work exclusively for money, as an allusion to the students who study for the sole sake of grades (Dantas & Silva, 2016). To the authors, therefore, the promotion of autonomy in the school environment involves the teachers and their relation with students and their connection with society, in the search for citizenship formation. Thus, educators assume a primordial function not only in individuals’ formation but also in the collective construction of a fair, equalitarian society.

Fischmann (2007), also based on Marx, analyzes the aspects of the masking of individuals’ moral autonomy in the institutional context. The author also highlights the role played by school and its relation with democratic construction by means of debate based on diversity and human rights. In this perspective, school does not present itself only as a mediator of access to information, but also as promoter of processes that lead to critical formation, including the capacity for expression and resistance to social oppression. Oppression and injustice emerge in the realm of structuring social order. They are also present and reproduce in the everyday life of social and institutional relations. School is a privileged space in these relations, and it can be the stage for experiences of injustice and inequality. Thus, according to the authors, the school goes beyond preoccupations with curricula and pedagogical activities. It must attempt at promoting an organizational environment where students will be able to establish human relations that will be fundamental for their formation (Fischmann, 2007).

Carvalho (2008), based on a post-structuralist vision, brings authors such as Amartya Sen to approach tutelage thought as an excluding educational and socio-political factor, which is present in Brazilian culture. Tutelage drains the potential of public education policies in Brazil, and reduces their efficacy when it comes to eradicating poverty. Thus, the post-structuralist bias combines with a critical-social posture that is committed to highlighting the importance of the emancipatory character of education in the eradication of poverty and social inequality.

To the author, tutelage appears in culture in opposition to emancipation because it promotes disconnection in the relation between social development and autonomous processes. Contrary to autonomy as an emancipatory proposal, tutelage practices stemming from the action by the state in public policies - such as clientelism, welfarism, and patronage - permeate culture, patronize individuals and promote subordination in view of basic social needs (Carvalho, 2008).

According to this vision, on the one hand we have compensatory processes, that, supported by the logic of compassion, generate dependence and produce little effect on the overcoming of poverty; on the other hand, we have actions based on the argument of the rights that, having rights as the basis for public social action, aim at establishing strategies that lead to the emancipation o individuals and society. Tutelage is, therefore, not only compensatory. It is also authoritarian. The tutelage regime in education does not lead to emancipation. Contrarily, such regime patronizes individuals and makes them dependent on welfare policies. On the other hand, emancipatory processes in education require autonomy, co-authorship, the empowering of individuals, and the appropriation of the school space and of educational services. Such autonomy must be inserted into a wider scenario in public social policies (Carvalho, 2008).

In the critical sociological perspective of Martins (2002), man’s recent trajectory in society highlights a tension between the movements that present themselves as autonomous and the powers that seek the reproduction of production relations by means of a set of social institutions, in the context of capitalist development. The struggle orbits around the dominant ideology and the need to promote autonomy by means of emancipation. The school proves crucial in this relation, as a fundamental instrument for social control. Social analysis presents itself in a macro dimension, and the political attitude of individuals regarding reality aims at structurally transforming society and the current social system.

Beyond the critical social analysis of education and of the function of school in the context of capitalism without, however, a mistaken dismissal from this responsibility, the conception of formal education with a biased towards post-structuralism brings new elements into the discussion, especially by situating the school onto a platform that is more diffuse and unrestricted concerning social control. Mattos et. Al. (2013) emphisize the fact that school does not assume the most central place in education. Not even family plays that role. The media and new technologies have increasingly taken over territory when it comes to individuals’ education and formation, rendering the relations between adults and children more complex, as well as transforming the role played by school in the formation of students.

In the predominating post-structuralist perspective, the relation between autonomy and education gains a fresh outline and, thus, the very concept of tutelage. It is no longer a matter of defending autonomy in the search for the necessary awareness for disconnecting individuals from their relation with the state and the current social system, towards a critical reading of reality and, consequently, propelling emancipation. The exercise of autonomy implies, based on this view, an immanent posture. It means considering social transformation by individuals who insert themselves in the context of social reality and, in such reality, propose resistance practices. These practices situate themselves in the realm of micropolitical engagement, which develop in the everyday life of relations. In the next topic, we will approach the implications, in the context of school education, of the different tendencies based on which autonomy, tutelage and the very concept of education are conceived.

IMPLICATIONS ON SCHOOL EDUCATION

The concept of autonomy was historically appropriated not only for outlining the ideal of individual as object of education and, thus, provide guidance to curricular-pedagogical practices in the schooling process, but also in its trajectory in the conduction of educational policies, after the 1980s, with the movement of decentralization of school administration (Martins, 2002).

Petroni and Souza (2010) entered the context of public schools in order to study the teachers’ vision of autonomy, using as reference the cultural-historical Psychology, the Liberating Education and the premises of Dialectical-Historical Materialism. The authors assume the conception of education for emancipation and exercise of critical thinking, considering the freedom associated to the commitment and to social responsibility. Education, here, is seen as the possibility for liberation, while the teacher is directly responsible for the emancipation of individuals. However, the authors warn us about the difficulties of the educators when it comes to exercising their autonomy in vie of the cultural and historical reality of public education in Brazil, basically for two reasons that are connected to each other: the practice of autonomy is not part of the array of activities and responsibilities attributed to teachers; and the fact that educators do not recognize or take possession of the possibilities of the exercise of autonomy in the school environment.

Roschild and Ferreira (2012) affirm that the school territory, especially the classroom, is submitted to an educational system that is focused on following rules and reaching pre-established goals, which places teachers in the position of protagonists in the teaching and learning process. This described scenario, which involves traditional education and is defined by Paulo Freire as the “banking model” of education, tends to promote an authoritarian teacher-student relation in which teachers restrict themselves to teaching and students are expected to just learn. Thus, it becomes a challenge for educators to promote among students responsibility over their choices and a critical posture in view of the “[...] ideology that tames and trains behavior to serve the commercial purposes of the market” (Roschild & Ferreira, 2012, p. 12).

Oliveira (2013), also of a critical-Marxist basis, approaches the political aspect of the autonomy concept and its implications in the educational practice. Thus, the author critically analyzes the autonomy conception attached to the educational discourse of society nowadays. To the author, the traditional vision of autonomy is subjectivist, individualistic, and abstract when it is appropriated and re-signified by the current educational discourse. It produces distortions concerning individuals’ autonomy and the construction of an ideal of human formation, for the sake of neoliberal ideas and, consequently, at the expense of the exercise of human freedom. The author concludes that autonomy takes an ambivalent expression in the current educational scenario. On the one hand, autonomy is the ambition of educational proposals that present themselves as reformist. On the other hand, autonomy gets underrated due to the distortion of its real meaning by part of the neoliberal discourse, or to the post-modern questioning of the feasibility of its implementation (Oliveira, 2013).

To Silva (2015), autonomy must be understood not as an abstraction, be it in the form of some type of presupposition or starting point, be it obscured by some theoretical models. Autonomy must be understood as attached to social interaction, that is, in the encounter with others. In the realm of education, it means the absence of protagonists or privileged individuals. School becomes, in this perspective, a territory to be appropriated by everyone and, therefore, an educational environment that is suitable for “[...] questioning, in the practices present in our everyday life, the dichotomies at the foundation of oppression and violence acts among human beings (such as, for example, the relations between subject/object, singular and plural, objective and subjective)” (Silva, 2015, p. 49).

Mattos et al. (2013), by approaching care in the relation between educators and students, based on the post-structuralist perspective, defend that the primordial objective of education is to produce citizens, while stimulating a conscience of rights and duties in society. The authors critically alert us against the historically constructed trend to dematerializing experiences in the educational process, in which the final objective of basic formation gets disconnected from practical experiences in the search for universal competences, designed to prepare citizens to follow social rules and enter the job market. The care dimension is linked to the proposal to move away from the tutelage plan in educational practices, contributing to a formation that is committed to the present in the relation that involves affection and otherness.

To the authors, consequently, care brings out the interdependence among all involved ones, and not only among the ones on the receiving end. The dependence relation that involves care is linked to responsibility, and endangers the determination by sovereign, rational individuals. The student-educator interaction, from the perspective of care, becomes a horizontal route, with circulation in both ways because the teachers’ practice also requires zeal. Respect and recognition are attitudes that call for each other. Responsibility, thus, is also shared in the teaching processes, while awakening the students’ active participation in the classroom, in planning, and in the school’s decision-making process (Mattos et al., 2013).

In fact, beyond the discourse of cultural and citizenship-oriented formation, the historical incidence of the political-economic character of education and formal schooling have left determining marks on the social dynamics and on human behavior, less for taking individuals as the ultimate objective of education, and more for social guidance by means of rationalities that are external to individuals themselves. From this perspective, education becomes an instrument for regulation and social control, while affecting the conduct of individuals and populations. In contemporaneity, the society of capital guides such conduct towards productive objectives, while concentrating the scope of formation on the job market. As a result, the autonomy and tutelage practices in education are being ruled by the context and the demands of neoliberal society. According to Silva (1994), education is only one of the devices if the diffuse mechanism for regulation and social control. However, education serves the primordial, in the ethical and political sense, to contribute to the production of new ways of regarding society and, consequently, to the transformation of society itself.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

As we have discussed, the conception of autonomy and tutelage that involves the construction of educational policies and practices is linked to the historical and philosophical formation oof these categories, and is also connected to the very formation of the historical individual. The construction of these concepts is expressed by diverse currents of thought, which are anchored on science and philosophy in order to propose means to understand and analyze education in the realm of society. In the center of the historical construction of the autonomy and tutelage binomial in education, we can identify the Kantian perspective for individual emancipation as theoretical-political orientation, in which autonomy consists of the way to clarification towards the formation of citizenship.

As an answer to the modern conception of education, we can highlight to lines of thought, which are present in the corpus articles if this study. On the one hand, we have the Marxist vision, which aims at formation towards social transformation with a focus on the fight against inequality. Here, the analysis of social and political reality, when it comes to autonomy concepts, permeates the morality problem, in which certain values are taken as suppositions for students’ formation. The tutelage thought, in this orientation, inhibits the critical capacity of the individual, while restricting the movement of awareness and, therefore, the exercise of freedom.

On the other hand, the post-structuralist perspective leads to critical analysis as well as how society nowadays seeks the expression of freedom by means of consumerism, and consequently, in the amplification of the individual dimension. In education, its proposal includes the dimension of care in the teacher-student relation, in the micropolitical sphere, not restricting itself to a vision that is solely macro or dichotomic of reality. Here, the appropriation of the educational territories gets amplified, and protagonism in the teaching and learning process gains territory and the social interaction experience focuses on the dimension of care.

The present article aimed at reviewing, in an integrative, the incidence and the development of the concept and tutelage in the educational scenario, considering the aspects of the historical-philosophical construction and its social and educational implications. On the other hand, the analysis of the implications in the field of school education focused on the consequences regarding the very conceptions of individual education and autonomy in the school territory. Thus, it is important to encourage the production of new studies with an emphasis on the effects, in the realm of administrating pedagogical practices and school management, concerning the different ways to conceive autonomy and tutelage in education.

REFERÊNCIAS

• Carvalho, M. C. B. de. (2008). O pensamento tutelar presente na educação dos grupos populares no Brasil.Psicologia USP,19(4), 487-493. Recuperado de: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-65642008000400007&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt
  » http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-65642008000400007&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt
• Dantas, O. M. A. N. A.; Silva, A. G. M. (2016). Periquillo Sarniento: uma narração da educação como obstáculo à autonomia.Revista Odisseia, 1(2), 124 - 141. Recuperado de: https://periodicos.ufrn.br/odisseia/article/view/10371/7717
  » https://periodicos.ufrn.br/odisseia/article/view/10371/7717
• Dias, A. A. (2005). Educação moral e autonomia na educação infantil: o que pensam os professores.Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica,18(3), 370-380. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722005000300011
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722005000300011
• Fischmann, R. (2007). Injustiça, autonomia moral e organização escolar: análise exploratória de relações.Paidéia(Ribeirão Preto ) [online] 17(38), 321-330. Recuperado de: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/paideia/v17n38/v17n38a03.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/paideia/v17n38/v17n38a03.pdf
• Hamilton, D. (2001). Notas de Lugar Nenhum: sobre os primórdios da escolarização moderna. Revista brasileira de história da educação 1(1), 45-73. Recuperado de:http://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/rbhe/article/view/38750/20280
  » http://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/rbhe/article/view/38750/20280
• Kohan, W. O. (2003). Infância. Entre a Educação e a Filosofia Belo Horizonte: Autêntica.
• Lima, J. F. L. de. (2002). O sujeito, a racionalidade e o discurso pedagógico da modernidade.Interações ,7(14), 59-84. Recuperado de:http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-29072002000200004
  » http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-29072002000200004
• Martins, A. M. (2002). Autonomia e educação: a trajetória de um conceito.Cadernos de Pesquisa, (115), 207-232. Recuperado de:https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-15742002000100009
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-15742002000100009
• Mattos, A. R.; Péres, B. C.; Almada, C. V. R.; Castro, L. R. (2013). O cuidado na relação professor-aluno e sua potencialidade política. Estudos de Psicologia, 18(2), abril-junho, 369-377. Recuperado de: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/epsic/v18n2/v18n2a24.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/epsic/v18n2/v18n2a24.pdf
• Mendonça, S.; Filho, A. L. (2012). A Autonomia do aluno nas concepções clássica e iluminista de educação. Educação e Filosofia 26(51), 25-46. https://doi.org/10.14393/REVEDFIL.issn.0102-6801.v26n51a2012-p25a46.
  » https://doi.org/10.14393/REVEDFIL.issn.0102-6801.v26n51a2012-p25a46
• Nodari, P. C.; Saugo, F. (2011). Esclarecimento, educação e autonomia em Kant. Conjectura,16(1),133-167. Recuperado de: http://www.ucs.br/etc/revistas/index.php/conjectura/article/view/892/615
  » http://www.ucs.br/etc/revistas/index.php/conjectura/article/view/892/615
• Oliveira, G. N. B. de. (2013). O Sentido Político das Relações entre Educação e Autonomia e suas diferentes implicações. Educação: Teoria e Prática 23(42), 05-17. Recuperado de: https://www.periodicos.rc.biblioteca.unesp.br/index.php/educacao/article/view/4661/5085
  » https://www.periodicos.rc.biblioteca.unesp.br/index.php/educacao/article/view/4661/5085
• Petroni, A. P.; Souza, V. L. T. (2010). As relações na escola e a construção da autonomia: um estudo da perspectiva da Psicologia. Psicologia & Sociedade, 22(2), 355-364. Recuperado de:http://www.scielo.br/pdf/psoc/v22n2/16.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/psoc/v22n2/16.pdf
• Roschild, J. M.; Ferreira, S. D. (2012). Educação e Autonomia. Revista Thema, 9(2), 79-93. Recuperado de:http://revistathema.ifsul.edu.br/index.php/thema/article/view/146
  » http://revistathema.ifsul.edu.br/index.php/thema/article/view/146
• Silva, R. B. (2015). Autonomia e educação: reflexões e tensões nos caminhos para a formação humana. Conjectura: Filos. Educ ., 20(1), 38-50. Recuperado de:http://www.ucs.br/etc/revistas/index.php/conjectura/article/view/2929/pdf_349
  » http://www.ucs.br/etc/revistas/index.php/conjectura/article/view/2929/pdf_349
• Saviani, D. (1997). Escola e Democracia: teorias da educação, curvatura da vara, onze teses sobre a educação e política (31. ed.). Campinas, SP: Autores Associados.
• Silva, T. T. da. (1994). Adeus às Metanarrativas Educacionais. In: T.T. da Silva (Ed.) O Sujeito da Educação: estudos foucaultianos Petrópolis: Vozes.
• Souza, M. T.; Silva, M. D.; Carvalho R. (2010). Revisão integrativa: o que é e como fazer. Einstein, 8 (1), 102-6. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1679-45082010rw1134
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/s1679-45082010rw1134
• Veiga-Neto, A. (2008). Crise da Modernidade e inovações curriculares: da disciplina para o controle.Revista Sísifo: Revista de Ciências da Educação Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade de Lisboa , n. 7, set./dez.

• This paper was translated from Portuguese by Régis Lima.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  29 Aug 2022
• Date of issue
  2022

History

• Received
  01 Mar 2020
• Accepted
  09 Jan 2022