IMPACTS OF EMERGING CONTEXTS IN THE UNIVERSITY CLASS: TENSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES

ABSTRACT:

Thinking about the university in emerging contexts requires considering that, if the university of yore was wrong to give excessive emphasis to the past, today's is driven by the inexorable present and the unpredictable future, forcing it to review its conceptions and pedagogical practices in university class. The scope of the study presented here focused on a qualitative analysis of three reports of practices carried out and presented by participants of the XI Seminário Internacional de Educação Superior (XI SIES) of the South Brazilian Network of Higher Education Investigators, held in 2018 at the Universidade Federal de Pelotas. The selected works obey the selection criterion of presenting, at least, two of the most prominent and related dimensions of innovation, they are: Break with the traditional way of teaching and learning and Reorganization of the theory/practice relationship because we understand that an innovative practice must present at least two of the dimensions proposed by Cunha (2006). The authors who supported this work were mainly Santos (2010), Franco (2012), Didriksson (2008), Cunha (1998, 2006), Morosini (2014), Tardif (2002) and Shulman (1989), guiding the intended analysis, whether in the understanding of emerging contexts, or in the field of pedagogical practices and innovation. The challenges are many, but the study showed the interest and protagonism of teachers and students in the direction of a more significant and emancipatory.

Keywords:
university pedagogy; innovation; pedagogical practice

RESUMO:

Pensar a universidade em contextos emergentes requer considerar que, se a universidade de outrora errou por dar excessiva ênfase ao passado, a de hoje se vê impelida pelo presente inexorável e pelo futuro imprevisível, forçando-a a rever as suas concepções e as práticas pedagógicas desenvolvidas na aula universitária. O recorte do estudo que aqui apresentamos se deteve a analisar de modo qualitativo três relatos de práticas protagonizadas e apresentadas por participantes do XI Seminário Internacional de Educação Superior (XI SIES) da Rede Sul-brasileira de Investigadores da Educação Superior (RIES), realizado em 2018 na Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel). Os trabalhos selecionados obedecem ao critério de apresentar, pelo menos, duas das dimensões de inovação, pois entendemos que uma prática inovadora deve apresentar, pelo menos, duas das dimensões propostas por Cunha (2006). Os trabalhos elegidos apresentaram duas dimensões relacionadas e com maior destaque, são elas: Ruptura com a forma tradicional de ensinar e aprender e Reorganização da relação teoria/prática. Os autores que sustentaram este trabalho foram, principalmente, Santos (2010), Franco (2012), Didriksson (2008), Cunha (1998, 2006), Morosini (2014), Tardif (2002) e Shulman (1989), orientando a análise pretendida na compreensão dos contextos emergentes ou no campo das práticas pedagógicas e da inovação. Os desafios são muitos, mas o estudo evidenciou o interesse e o protagonismo de professores e estudantes na direção de uma prática pedagógica mais significativa e emancipatória.

Palavras-chave:
pedagogia universitária; inovação; prática pedagógica

RESUMEN:

Pensar la universidad en contextos emergentes exige considerar que, si la universidad de antaño se equivocó al dar excesivo énfasis al pasado, la universidad de hoy se ve impulsada por el inexorable presente y el imprevisible futuro, lo que la obliga a revisar sus concepciones y prácticas pedagógicas en la clase universitaria. El corte del estudio que aquí presentamos, se detuvo a analizar cualitativamente tres informes de prácticas protagonizadas y presentadas por los participantes del XI Seminario Internacional de Educación Superior (XI SIES) de la Red Sur Brasileña de Investigadores de Educación Superior (RIES), realizado en 2018 en la Universidad Federal de Pelotas. Los trabajos seleccionados cumplen el criterio de presentar, al menos, dos de las dimensiones de la innovación, porque entendemos que una práctica innovadora debe presentar, al menos, dos de las dimensiones propuestas por Cunha (2006). Los estudios seleccionados presentaron dos dimensiones relacionadas con mayor énfasis: Ruptura con la forma tradicional de enseñar y aprender y Reorganización de la relación teoría/práctica. Los autores que apoyaron este trabajo fueron, principalmente, Santos (2010), Franco (2012), Didriksson (2008), Cunha (1998, 2006), Morosini (2014), Tardif (2002) y Shulman (1989), orientando el análisis pretendido, ya sea en la comprensión de los contextos emergentes, o en el campo de las prácticas pedagógicas y la innovación. Los retos son muchos, pero el estudio evidenció el interés y el protagonismo de profesores y alumnos hacia una práctica pedagógica más significativa y emancipadora.

Palabras clave:
pedagogía universitaria; innovación; práctica pedagógica

INTRODUCTION

Higher education in the contemporary context has been facing significant challenges. Santos (2010) and Barnett (2005), among other authors, have contributed to this scenario, encouraging a process of self-reflection that results in a change of direction in complex times. Certainly, there are many challenges of different kinds. Social demands, which require a greater commitment from Knowledge production and training devices, are evident and inexorable. The democratisation of the knowledge, the changes in the world of work, the requirement for responses to social and cultural demands and the new student cultures, among other demands, are calling for continuous reflections on the academic practices and on the responsibilities that fall on the millenary institution.

The History informs, with significant data, the changes that have occurred over the centuries and that have impacted the university, in a way that confirms that it is a social cell that is produced and, at the same time, produces civilising impacts. In a contemporary perspective, the crises of the university have been occupying researchers and sustaining studies and research in its various dimensions. The legislation that impacts its actions also brings new perspectives that affect its purposes and cultures. These in turn require new formats and initiatives for the pedagogical practices that it carries out, including teaching, research, and extension.

The comprehension of this context has been responsible for the interest of research groups that focus on themes related to higher education. This is the case of the South-Brazilian Network of Higher Education Researchers (RIES - the entity's Portuguese acronym), which brings together researchers from different institutions and recently took the theme of the University in Emerging Contexts as the object of a Research Project. Each Higher Education Institution (HEI) participating in the Project assumed a focused analysis within this context, including the lecturers, the management, the pedagogical practice, the internationalisation, and the students. The Research Group on University Pedagogy (GIPU), linked to the Postgraduate Programme in Education at the Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel), was responsible for addressing the pedagogic practice that has been affected by the new academic, political, and cultural configurations.

On the understanding that pedagogical practice is manifested by the curriculum and the university class, three cases studies were defined as the purpose of the analysis. One of them analysed the experience of the Veterinary Medicine course with classes of students from the National Programme for Education in Agrarian Reform (PRONERA¹), considering the exceptionality that was attributed to this experience. Another study investigated the impact of the Unified Selection System (SiSU), ²which, due to the cultural and social diversity of the students, would be demanding changes in the university classroom and in the teaching knowledge. The third research, taking advantage of the experiences presented at the XI International Seminar on Higher Education (XI SIES) of RIES, held at UFPel in 2018, analyzed the works presented at the event, indicated by peers, as resulting from potentially innovative experiences. The XI SIES had the Pedagogical Practice as the central theme and the Emerging Contexts as a backdrop.

In this paper, we address the third case and detain ourselves in the Content Analysis they presented, in order to understand their innovative potential and what indicators they showed about this perspective. Using the abstracts as a starting point, we soon expanded the comprehensive reading of the full texts, through Content Analysis. Based on Cunha's contributions (2006), we assume that an innovative practice must present, at least, two of the innovation dimensions proposed by the author. This was the criterion used to select the texts. We took here three statements that indicated potential to discuss the possibility of innovation in the university class. The authors who favored the analyses were, mainly, Santos (2010), Franco (2012), Didriksson (2008), Cunha (1998, 2006), Morosini (2014), Tardif (2002) and Shulman (1989), whose texts helped the intended analysis, both in the comprehension of the emerging contexts and in the field of pedagogical practices and innovation.

THE CHALLENGES OF HIGHER EDUCATION: THE INSURGENCY OF EMERGING CONTEXTS

The concept of emerging contexts is broad and capable of embodying many comprehensions. However, we understand the emerging contexts from the perspective of the analysis of demands that originate outside the university. They may be derived from global policies and technological changes arising from the world of work, as well as from policies of democratisation of access and permanence of new publics in HEIs. These demands are often from the outside of the university's tradition, i.e., they are initiatives that were not born in the academic environment itself, but come from outside, demanding initiatives and reflections on usual practices (CUNHA, 2020).

Higher education has been affected by different training needs imposed by contemporary society and marked by major transformations. Among these, the impact of digital technologies stands out, in which the transmission of information occurs in an increasingly accelerated manner, favouring the globalisation process, not only political-economic, but also cultural. This process places the higher education as a strategic point of consolidation and dissemination of national and supranational guidelines, based on the actions of international organizations. In recent decades, the development of a political agenda has sought to articulate education with national economic concerns and, at the same time, has emphasised education under the control logic of the market, defining it as a private and competitive good. In this context, the university has become one of the devices that insert countries into the globalised world.

In the midst of these challenges, there is also coexistence with the determinations of the Law of Directives and Bases (Law No. 9.394/1996 - LDB), with external assessment policies (National System for Assessment of Higher Education - SINAES) and with the proposals of the National Education Council (CNE), which lead to changes in the curricula of undergraduate courses in Brazil, involving bachelor's degrees, licentiate degrees and upper higher education courses in technology. The alterations allow changes in the composition of the workload of curricular components and units of study. As the determinations set out in the aforementioned documents, the new curricula are characterized by a solid training, articulating theory and practice linked to the world of life and work (KRAHE; SILVA; NESI, 2013).

In accordance with Krahe, Silva and Nesi (2013), the changes are gradually being incorporated by the HEIs and recorded in the institutional documents with the Institutional Pedagogical Project (PPI) and the Pedagogical Projects of Courses (PPCs), which, according to the authors, significantly impacts teaching. To Lucarelli (2000),

In the third millennium, the study of teaching and learning processes in the university class is a field of concern and a challenge for those interested in analysing the university institution, the quality of its practices and its results, in terms of both education and the production of knowledge. (LUCARELLI, 2000, p. 35).

Higher education is affected by transformations in the work organisation and by changes in the economic environment. New demands are arising, and universities are being called upon to face the changing world of professions and the emergence of new specialities that have not hitherto been recognised in the academic field. There is a need for a professional profile which includes and enhances creativity and innovation. These transformations and needs require a higher level of knowledge and the ability to maintain a permanent learning process throughout the professional life. These are issues that require higher education to use different strategies to respond to contemporary social and economic expectations.

Certainly, the changes also require a broad accountability of political agents and university managers and question pose the teaching role and the practices of teaching and learning. Changes are expected to involve the teacher's knowledge and skills, moving away from the historical perspective of information transmission to incorporate the assumptions of research in teaching. To this end, it is necessary to highlight doubt as a starting point for learning, as a methodological principle that constitutes other knowledge. It is also essential to incorporate the leading role of students in the construction of this knowledge, imbricated by cultural, economic, historical, political, and social differences.

To achieve an innovative pedagogical practice in the sense of epistemological rupture, it is necessary to look at the subjects of these practices, teachers and students, and their living conditions and academic performance. In the case of teaching, the policies that deal with teacher training for the exercise in higher education have been negligent, merely talking about a preparation in the space of stricto sensu post-graduation, according to the last LDB. Studies show that these training spaces favour the knowledge of research which, posteriorly, will be prized in the teacher's career and in the prestige that teachers achieve in the academic and social spheres (GARCIA, 2022). They also comply with the imaginary of those who take up teaching at university, understanding it as the place to do research. For the exercise of teaching, the experiential knowledge remains, based on models and historical trajectories that have left their mark on this career. There is a slight assumption of teaching as a profession based on the conditions of teaching and learning.

This scenario, based on the logic of who knows how to do knows how to teach, has been replaced by who knows how to research knows how to teach. This is a misconception, because without relinquishing the investigative condition of the teacher, the knowledge of teaching has a different matrix and, in a professional dimension, it needs to be supported by theoretical bases in dialogue with the practice. Moreover, increasingly the emotional and cultural conditions that involve the teacher-students relationship are becoming drivers of the quality of teaching and pedagogical practice, recognizing teaching as a complex action.

Regarding the students, even though there have been legal incentives to stimulate the entrance and permanence of a larger audience, the policies are weak regarding their permanence and financing conditions. This situation becomes worse in contexts of unequal realities and stable recognitions. Therefore, this framework requires a shrewd reading and a theoretical and practical capacity that many teachers do not bring from their previous training, but that constantly challenge the exercise of university teaching.

Considering this scenario as part of our study, we became more curious to understand the innovative experiences and the contexts and conditions that favoured their existence. The theoretical basis on which their innovations are based is not yet clearly visible. This condition is not explicit, because they know little about the theories, since they are manifestations built from practice and with a dose of sensitivity to propose alternatives. It is also worth mentioning that our sample is differentiated, as it involves teachers who spontaneously enrolled in the event to present their experiences. It is assumed that there is interest and sensitivity towards the teaching area and a desire to share their achievements and questionings, even if not always with the most favourable conditions for this.

THE BRAZILIAN UNIVERSITY AND THE EMERGING CONTEXTS

In these contexts, the mobilising emergences manifest themselves according to the demands of each country, region, and university. In Latin America, they are mainly characterised by a complex, heterogeneous, socially segmented, and constantly expanding and internalising higher education system, as well as by a special social demand for higher education, in addition to the presence of internationalisation (DIDRIKSSON, 2012). In Brazil, the most evident emerging contexts are the outcome of expansion, diversification, and privatisation policies, also marked by democratising tendencies, but articulated by state centralisation. We have higher education with different HEI formats, which have been including a contingent of new teachers and students and reorganising curricula. The demands of society, marked by the market logic and globalisation, live together with the academic tradition and the perspective of citizen education.

Morosini (2014), based on the ideas of Espinoza and Gonzales (2012), characterizes emerging contexts as transitional spaces between two extremes. The first would be a traditional Weberian model of education, in which the university is a space for generating knowledge for society and cultural reproduction of the nation, aimed at the social good, in which science and technology are oriented to scientific development. In the second, a neoliberal higher education model associated with the idea of a university aimed at fulfilling the demands of the profiles stipulated by the labour market, focused on the transfer of technology claimed by the productive sector, with a management characterised by efficiency and self-financing. Rescke, Nörnberg and Costa (2019) emphasize that

thinking about the university in emerging contexts requires considering that if the university of the past mistakenly gave excessive emphasis to the past, nowadays the university is driven by the inexorable present and the unpredictable future, forcing it to review its conceptions and pedagogical practices in the university classroom. (RESCKE; NÖRNBERG; COSTA, 2019, p. 2).

This scenario has been inducing movements which analyse and questions the traditional paradigm of teaching and learning and that seek new references that respond to the condition of complexity. To this end, we have defended the importance of an epistemological rupture which understands knowledge as relative and changing, and capable of diversifying perspectives and comprehensions about the phenomena under study (CUNHA, 2006).

Due to the comprehensiveness of the knowledge that underpins this approach, we question the single answers for universal situations, and we move away from decontextualised models and techniques as a panacea to solve all challenges. We believe in teaching with handicraft competence, understood as the teacher's ability, based on his/her professional knowledge - area of knowledge, Pedagogical Science, and its students -, to establish pedagogical practices with meaning for its leading players. In in this way, even if there is regularity, each experience with the students is unique, although it maintains an expanded support base, which announces the innovation. Pedroso and Cunha (2008) reiterate that

[...] innovation entail changes in the conception of knowledge as assumed by modern science. Therefore, it does not refer only to methodological arrangements or merely to technological apparatuses. It necessarily incorporates a new epistemology that translates into classroom practices [...]. (PEDROSO; CUNHA, 2008, p. 144).

Shulman's studies (1989) point out the different types and modalities of knowledge that teachers master, thereby configuring their own epistemology. His contribution is important because it brings back to the centre of the discussion the issue of knowledge that teachers have of the contents and how these contents are transformed in the teaching, highlighting the structuring role of the educational dimension in this process. The author helps us in the comprehension of how teachers use the knowledge they master to teach the knowledge they teach.

Based on these theoretical assumptions and with flexible approaches that move away from previous models, the scope of this study analysed three reports of practices carried out and presented by participants in the XI RIES Higher Education Seminar, searching for evidence that indicated innovative initiatives to respond to the new times.

STUDY AND METHODOLOGY

The papers submitted to the XI International Seminar on Higher Education of RIES were organized around five thematic axes: a) Pedagogical Practice and Internationalization; b) Pedagogical Practice and Curriculum; c) Pedagogical Practice and the University Classroom; d) Pedagogical Practice and Academic Management; e) Teaching and Emerging Contexts.

Pursuant to the research objective, all 151 abstracts presented at the event were analysed in order to identify evidence of innovative practices in the university classroom. Among these, 53 abstracts were selected according to the criterion of presenting at least one of the dimensions of innovation. In this study, we present the qualitative analysis of three full papers, because, based on the concept of Cunha (2006), we understand that an innovative practice must present, at least, two of the dimensions proposed by the author. For Cunha (2006), the innovation concept

[...] requires a necessary rupture that allows reconfiguring knowledge beyond the regularities proposed by modernity. It involves, therefore, a paradigmatic rupture and not merely the inclusion of novelties, including new technologies. In this sense it involves a change in the way of understanding the knowledge. (CUNHA, 2006, p. 24-27).

Based on this conception, we presented seven dimensions that helped us to highlight the initiatives identified as innovative in the analysis of the papers. According to Cunha (2006), they are: a) Rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning and/or with the academic procedures inspired by the positivist principles of modern science; b) Participatory management, in which the subjects of the innovative process are the leading actors in the experience, from conception to analysis of the results; c) Reconfiguration of knowledge, with the void or reduction of the classic dualities between scientific knowledge/popular knowledge, science/culture, education/work, etc..; d) Reorganisation of the theory/practice relationship, breaking with the classic proposition that theory precedes practice, dichotomising the globalising perspective; e) Organic perspective in the process of conception, development and evaluation of the experience produced: f) Mediation, assuming the inclusion of social affective relationships as a condition for meaningful learning; g) Leadership, breaking with the subject-object relationship historically proposed by modernity, recognizing that both students and teachers are subjects of pedagogical practice and, even in different positions, act as active subjects of their learning.

Due to the complexity of the analysis, some of the dimensions had to be selected in blocks and we considered as criteria those that appeared with more emphasis: Rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning and recast of the theory/practice relationship. This was not a random choice, but rather justified, because in between the dimensions there is a special impact on the experiences presented.

DIALOGUE WITH THE FINDINGS

In order to analyse the data, we focused on the selected papers, looking for a source of evidence indicating the presence of the dimensions that we have highlighted above. As expected, a practice or proposition may comprise several dimensions of innovation, which means that there is no linear relationship between them. We intended to identify the emphases of the dimensions that were most present in the pedagogical practice enunciated in the reports, as a trend to be understood.

Certainly, the study triggered many possibilities for analysis and we understand that it could be unfolded in a various combinations. We selected three analysed experiences for exploration in this article that drew attention for their quality and analytical possibility for the research objective. To identify them, they were named as text 1, text 2 and text 3.

RUPTURE WITH THE TRADITIONAL WAY OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

The educational process in higher education demands the investigation of movements that announce new possibilities for the pedagogical construction and reconstruction of scientific knowledge that are closer to interdisciplinary and complementary perspectives, based on the ethical-existential premise of human condition. This training has changed, because the students who attend university benches in emerging contexts are others, arising from expansion and access policies and demographic changes that have modified the university class. Arroyo (2014, p. 83) corroborates by saying that "[...] the whole educational process, formal or informal, cannot ignore, but must incorporate, the concrete forms of socialization, learning, training and deviation to which the students are exposed”.

This situation is reinforced by the influence of the new communication and interaction technologies, which are increasingly present in everyday life, especially in that of "Homo Zappiens", an expression used by the authors Veen and Vrakking (2009) to describe the current generation and its learning process, which is defined by different educational and works paces. These spaces are in a constant movement of reframing and extinction, as is the case of some professions. Arroyo (2014) provokes us to think new alternatives by questioning ourselves

[...] How can we think about curricula, contents and methodologies, formulate policies and implement the educational programmes without incorporating the close links between the circumstances in which educators reproduce their existences and their human learning? (ARROYO, 2014, p. 83).

The rupture with the traditional way of teaching and the inclusion of innovation in the university class are intersected by the subjective/objective conditions of the teacher, who holds the main role in the teaching/learning process. This movement demands a worldview and epistemological comprehension that distinguishes itself from the positivist perspective of modernity. These are points made in studies conducted by Leite (2001, 2002), Lucarelli (2004), Fernandes (1999), Cunha (1998) and Cunha et al. (2002). However, the authors warned that the curbing of innovative initiatives occurs due to the political and cultural context in the society, based on the pedagogical projects of the institutions and conditioned by demands and educational policies.

However, these conditions occur in a dialectical perspective between the educational macrosystem and the microspace of the university class. I.e. we cannot expect a one-way process, but a back and forth of the energies that emerge from the different starting points. If on one hand the macro policies are fundamental support for the changes, they also require the specific energy of the institutions and their players to materialise.

The experiences reported were an investment in pedagogical changes that, regardless of the arrival point, consider the starting point and contextualise what they have achieved. They cannot be evaluated only with an ordinary indicator but require comprehension of the contexts in which they were produced in order to verify the progress they represent. Santos (1988) warns that the level of the rupture is what measures innovation and not the point of arrival, because an experience can be slightly innovative in one context and very innovative in another. If we consider the cultures of the scientific and professional fields that underpin a variety of university courses, we can identify these differences. And for this reason, at university pedagogies are plural.

REORGANISATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE

We understand teacher training as a social praxis produced and producer of what produces it. It is constituent, constitutive of being a teacher (NÖRNBERG, 2008), that is, the praxis is a human activity. Pimenta (2012) confirms that the praxis is a practice that is made by the human activity of the nature and the society transformation, consolidating itself in an attitude before the world, the society and the man himself, which allows us to say that the teacher training as a human praxis is the elaboration of the reality in determining the existence.

Thus, training represents a privileged dimension of teaching because it requires the merger of theoretical approaches in proposals for practical intervention, or, as Freire (1998, p. 24) states, " the critical reflection on the practice becomes a requirement of the theory/practice relationship unless the theory can become yada-yada-yada and the practice an activism". Medeiros and Cabral (2006, p. 5) state that "[...] the exercise of teaching requires preparation. Preparation that is not exhausted in the training courses, but for which there is a specific contribution as theoretical training in which the unity theory and practice is fundamental for the transforming praxis”. Literature discussing the interaction between theory and practice is vast, however, despite advances in literature, research and studies, there are still challenges to achieve praxis, which requires intentionality and ability to build it. It is through praxis as human activity that teachers modify their world and themselves, creating possibilities of intervention, transforming the principles and regularities, generating new ways of relating and existing. In this sense, teacher training as human praxis is the elaboration of reality in determining the existence, or, in the words of Kosik (2002, p. 240), "man creates his own eternity in praxis [...] and therefore historically in their products”.

Text 1 deals with the insertion of the discipline of Libras in Speech Language Pathology courses. The Brazilian Federal Decree No. 5.626/2005 determines that this discipline is mandatory, not only in teacher training courses, but also in Speech Language Pathology courses. To understand the problem better, we must consider that the history of deaf education is hallmarked by the mastery of actions that aimed to enable the voice and hearing of deaf people, thus denying the importance of acquiring sign language.

In this context, the insertion of the discipline of Libras in Speech Language Pathology courses, from the decree, is presented as a rupturing practice with the traditional way of teaching and learning, because it reconnects two very important areas for the training of speech therapists, which are education and health. The dialogue between these areas changes the curricular comprehension and causes epistemological changes in the disciplinary field, enabling a practice with emphasis on orality that no longer denies the sign language, but articulates with it. The recognition of deaf people as bearers of knowledge and culture facilitates cognitive, affective, social development and, consequently, the learning of the second language. We should emphasize that the inclusion of the discipline of Libras in the courses of Speech Language Pathology aims to train professionals who are ready to dialogue with deaf people through sign language, thus providing the learning of Portuguese as a second language.

Text 1 also brings in its core evidence of the reorganization of the theory/practice relationship, since it causes changes in the practices developed by the Speech Therapist. These practices have spent a long period denying sign language, arguing that its acquisition would impair the learning of oral language. This posture was based on procedures from the clinical field, which occurred through exercises and training aimed at rehabilitating hearing and voice. The insertion of this new curricular component causes the speech therapist to develop his/her work in the bilingual context, which implies in the interdisciplinary connection between the areas of education and health, as previously mentioned. Cunha (2006) alerts that

[...] practice is always unique and multifaceted. It requires, due to this condition, a reflected intervention of the theory in an interdisciplinary view. To understand the relationship theory-practice or practice-theory in its constitutive interface is a fundamental axis of paradigmatic innovation. (CUNHA, 2006, p. 64).

The change reported in the practice of text 1 allows us to think about the importance of the university class in the construction of meanings for those who graduate, causing other ways of being/being a teacher in the dynamization of practice from the problems experienced, which can be expanded to the extent that we break with the traditional way of producing knowledge, "[...] learning how to process in us the knowledge about teaching and for teaching” (ABDALLA, 2006, p. 92). This experience certainly brings signs of innovation, since it adheres to paradigmatic rupture through the recognition of other forms of knowledge production (CUNHA, 2006). In this context, the production of other knowledge surpasses mere reproduction, enabling meaningful processing, which is implied by reflection and enables the production of other forms of existence and humanisation (PIMENTA, 2012).

The author, in Text 2, seeks in the triple bottom line teaching, research and extension the conditions to intend and rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning. Cunha (2011) states that the strengthening of ties between research, teaching and learning requires own knowledge, which considers the student, the culture, and the objective and contextual conditions of learning. The text describes the production of meaning through the realization of social actions proposed to two classes of the subject Introduction to Administration, of Business area courses. The author of the text affirms that social responsibility is a content of utmost importance for the development of professionals in administration and that mostly these are treated in the context of the class, limited to explanations of abstract examples. Moreover, in most cases, this kind of teaching attitude reminds us that this concept is more similar to a theory to be understood than to a practice inherent to the manager's daily life.

The researcher teacher planned the organization and execution of the classes aiming at the concept of social responsibility as a transversal theme to the other contents and to be applied within the social actions. To carry out the social actions, the students were organized in groups and had the responsibility of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling the action. This other way of learning and teaching is where the paradigmatic rupture is generated, for as the outcomes of the text show, the students' work with marginalised communities has enabled them to broaden their understanding of social responsibility as a challenge that is both real and emerging. We realise that experiences that go beyond the walls of the university mobilise and embody the paradigmatic rupture. Gentili (1998, p. 122) corroborates when it states that pedagogical practices, by submerging into reality "soiling ourselves with social life", rupture with the supposed innocence of their doing.

As the practice described in Text 2 approaches the production of meaning using social responsibility as a focusing theme of learning in the discipline of Introduction to Administration, its outcomes show the presence of the innovation dimension of reorganization of the relationship between theory and practice. The embodiment of this dimension occurs in the students' immersion in reality through the development of social responsibility actions. The experience enabled the students to produce meaning related to the practice of administration, learning to review their expectations and to perceive that the contents are present not only in the classroom, in a theoretical manner, but also in the real life of the different communities, having their application according to their respective needs. The concept of unity between theory and practice, reminds us Cunha (2006, p. 67), "[...] is born from the interpretation of reality". Gramsci (1989, p. 21) reinforces this idea when he says that the relationship between theory and practice "[...] is not a mechanical fact, but a historical becoming [...]", which constitutes the formation of the organic intellectual's self-conscience.

Text 3 deals with the topic of extension curriculum, which refers to the National Education Plan 2014-2024, which defined the incorporation of at least ten percent of the total curricular credits of undergraduate courses through extension programs and projects in areas of social relevance. Thereby, it has emphasized the intersection of community demands with academic objectives and has imposed on HEIs the challenge of rethinking their conceptions, practices and extensionist policies. We highlight that this analysis does not focus on conceptualizing and problematizing curriculum development, however, it presents itself as a driver of pedagogical innovation.

Nunes and Silva (2011) and Xavier and Fernandes (2008) explain that, through extension, the conventional perspective of the class is expanded, and the academician can obtain knowledge outside the university and the teaching goes beyond the teacher-student, with everyday subjects and objects. Cunha (2006, p. 66), when referring to the rupture dimension with the traditional way of teaching and learning, which is identified in the extension curriculum proposal presented in the analyzed article, assures that adherence to paradigmatic rupture presupposes " to comprehend the knowledge from an epistemological perspective that problematizes the academic procedures [...]". Elton (2008, p. 148) confirms the statement made by the author and argues that "universities should propose to teaching unsolved problems and, therefore, as a mode of investigation". However, the author points out that this perspective is distant from academic practices.

An epistemological rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning is a process that requires reflections on practice as a starting and finishing point in the construction of knowledge. This dialectical movement is linked to the reorganization of the theory/practice relationship. Text 3, when approaching issues related to the extension curriculum, ends up directly involving this reorganization, which is a fundamental condition for being part of the university curriculum and the academic training of students and, probably, is the most common indicator in pedagogical practices that rupture with a traditional academic logic. According to Cunha (2018), in the traditional perspective, theory invariably precedes practice and adopts a kind of supremacy over it. The curricular extension has been the path to dismantle the idea of an almighty university focused on theoretical supremacy, which keeps "imprisoned in the ivory tower" (SANTOS, 2001) intellectuals oblivious to reality (PAIVA et al., 2018).

The research in the scope of pedagogical practice in the class outlines some conditions including the need to perceive teaching and research as complementary activities which mutually benefit each other, the need to adopt an epistemological stance of uncertainty (BARNETT, 2008), and to build the class together with the students (ANASTASIOU; ALVES, 2004). As Shulman (1989), we agree that the organic relationship with the reference knowledge is the source of examples and ways of dealing with the difficulties of understanding of students in relation to the contents worked.

These demands are also implied in the curricular extension in the university, because it may enable the construction of another way to relate the processes of teaching and learning, contributing to the creation of a new university class, not reduced to didactic and methodological issues, but articulated to education as a social practice and knowledge as a product historically and culturally situated, in a dialectical relationship involving subjects, knowledge and experiences (FERNANDES, 2003). The extension curricula enable the emergence of a "university of the outreach" (SANTOS, 2005), ensuring epistemological rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning and therefore reorganizing theory and practice relationship. Teaching and beauty (FREIRE, 2001) together plotting the sustainability of the human training process, which also takes place inside and outside the university.

When analysing the works that served as reference for the research, we found descriptions of practices in the direction of the non-existence of the dichotomy between theory and practice. Within these conditions, practice is perceived as a constitutive source of innovative processes, as its meaning goes beyond the ideas of confirmation and implementation of theory. Overcoming the dichotomy between theory and practice in the education area demands considering that the epistemological and conceptual aspects involving this relationship are implied in and through the relationship between subjects who are bearers of different knowledge. Freire (1998, p. 24) highlights this idea when he says that "critical reflection on practice becomes a requirement of the theory and practice relationship, without which theory can become yada-yada-yada and practice an activism”.

Modern science has enabled significant knowledge for the process of intellectual evolution, so much so that it has brought us here. However, the time has come to say goodbye to conceptual places, no longer in line with the expectations and necessities of human plurality, thus enabling a qualitative leap in which the search for "knowledge becomes once again an enchanted adventure" (SANTOS, 2001, p. 74). In modernity, the curricula and the very concept of academic training have had this dominant logic that needs to be overcome. In this sense, it is of utmost importance that the university promotes practices that cause the overcoming of the dominant logic, so that students, in the future, develop the role of agents of change, because "education is a social, political and economic instrument, not only to produce, in only one way, the social change, but to serve as an instrument so that social subjects are subjects of the process of change” (BELLONI; MAGALHÃES; SOUSA, 2000, p. 38).

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The sense that stimulated the interest in developing this study was the attempt to identify the innovative pedagogical practices developed by teachers and students who seek to advance towards another epistemology. The aim was to understand these innovative practices, in which the implications of technical rationality in the way of teaching and learning have undergone transformations and the relationship between theory and practice is not dichotomous. Therefore, the analysis of papers presented at the XI Higher Education Seminar of RIES announced the innovative actions that rupture with the traditional way of teaching and learning and reorganize the theory and practice relationship, including elements from the students' everyday life and from the world of life and work.

Certainly, there was little identification in the reports of a theoretical basis from the area of university pedagogy, as was to be expected. Teachers have knowledge that is transformed into practices, such as those analysed by us. However, except for bibliographical indications of their specific fields, authors who are scholars of university pedagogical practice hardly appear. These experiences, if not systematized from provocations as the XI SIES, tend to be lost with fragile systematization and recognition in the academic space.

Hence, movements such as the event that gave us the basis for the study may constitute as an important device for the promotion and dissemination of the methodological field of teaching and learning, within the university, in emerging contexts. It was possible to perceive that the overcoming of the dichotomy between theory and practice seems to be achieved in experiences in which the social and epistemic phenomenon is understood in its entirety. Listening to the teacher and the student to read their daily life, the meanings they attribute to their training path and their life expectations is an important condition for learning, which recognises them as protagonists of their training process.

There is still much to be researched on innovative practices in the university class. But it is also necessary to publicize what is being done, considering that "the critical teaching practice, implying the right thinking, involves the dynamic, dialectical movement between doing and thinking about doing" (FREIRE, 1998, p. 43). A constructive and rupturing critical reflection process conceives the teaching practice as an investigation process in the action, stimulating the more complex intellectual development, softening the reproduction based on listening, copying and repeating (BEHRENS, 2005). There are many challenges, but the study evidenced the interest and leading role of teachers and students towards a more significant and emancipatory pedagogical practice. Our intention is to enhance what has already been achieved in order to stimulate progress towards the pedagogical quality of the university.

Preprint

DOI:https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3539

REFERÊNCIAS

• ABDALLA, M. F. B. O senso prático de ser e estar na profissão São Paulo: Cortez, 2006.
• ANASTASIOU, L. G.; ALVES, L. P. Processos de ensinagem na universidade Joinville: Univille, 2004.
• ARROYO, M. Outros Sujeitos, Outras Pedagogias Petrópolis. RJ: Editora Vozes, 2014.
• BARNETT, R. Para una transformación de la universidad: nuevas relaciones entre investigación, saber y docencia. Barcelona: Octaedro, 2008.
• BARNETT, R. A Universidade em uma era de supercomplexidade São Paulo: Editora Anhembi Morumbi, 2005.
• BEHRENS, M. A. O Paradigma Emergente e a Prática Pedagógica Petrópolis: Vozes, 2005.
• BELLONI, I.; MAGALHÃES, H.; SOUSA, L. Metodologia de avaliação em políticas públicas: uma experiência em educação profissional São Paulo: Cortez , 2000.
• CUNHA, M. I. et al Fontes do Conhecimento e Saberes na construção da Profissão Docente: um estudo empírico à luz da contribuição de Maurice Tardif. In: GARRIDO, S.; CUNHA, M. I.; GUE MARTINI, J. (orgs.). Os rumos da educação superior São Leopoldo: Ed. Unisinos, 2002.
• CUNHA, M. I. A Universidade em contextos emergentes: O Curso de Veterinária do Programa PRONERA em questão. Pelotas: Projeto Universidade em Contextos Emergentes/UFPel, 2020.
• CUNHA, M. I. O professor universitário na transição dos paradigmas Araraquara: JM Editora, 1998.
• CUNHA, M. I. Pedagogia Universitária: energias emancipatórias em tempos neoliberais Araraquara: Junqueira & Marin Editores, 2006.
• CUNHA, M. I. Indissociabilidade entre ensino e pesquisa. Perspectiva, v. 29, n. 2, 443-462, jul./dez., 2011.
• CUNHA, M. I. Docência na Educação Superior: a professoralidade em construção. Educação, v. 41, n. 1, 6-11, jan./abr., 2018.
• DIDRIKSSON, A. Contexto global y regional de la educación superior en América Latina y el Caribe. In: GAZZOLA, A. L.; DIDRIKSON, A (eds.). Tendencias de la Educación Superior en América Latina y el Caribe Caracas: IESALC-UNESCO, 2008.
• DIDRIKSSON, A. Universidad y bien publico en la perspectiva de una sociedad democrática del conocimiento. In: FUENTE, J. R.; DIDRIKSSON, A. (coords.). Universidad, responsabilidad social y bien publico: el debate desde América Latina Mexico: Universidad de Guadalajara, 2012.
• ELTON, L. El saber y el vínculo entre la investigación y la docencia. In: BARNETT, R. (ed.). Para una transformación de la universidad: nuevas relaciones entre investigación, saber y docencia Barcelona: Octaedro , 2008.
• ESPINOZA, O.; GONZALEZ, L. Universidad y bien publico nuevas tendencias en América latina. In: FUENTE, J. R.; DIDRIKSSON, A. (coords.). Universidad, responsabilidad social y bien publico: el debate desde América Latina. Mexico: Universidad de Guadalajara , 2012.
• FERNANDES, C. M. B. Prática pedagógica. In: MOROSINI, M. C. et al Enciclopédia de Pedagogia Universitária: glossário, v. 1. Brasília: INEP, 2003.
• FERNANDES, C. M. B. Sala de Aula Universitária - Ruptura, mediação, memória educativa, territorialidade - o desafio da construção pedagógica. Tese (Doutorado). Porto Alegre: PPGEDU/UFRGS, 1999.
• FRANCO, M. A. Prática pedagógica e docência: um olhar a partir da epistemologia do conceito. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Pedagógicos, v. 97, n. 247. p. 534-551, set/dez, 2012.
• FREIRE, P. Pedagogia da Autonomia: Saberes necessários à prática educativa. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1998.
• FREIRE, P. Política e educação: ensaios. São Paulo: Cortez , 2001.
• GARCIA, J. B. Programas de Pós-Graduação na Área das Ciências Biológicas: problematizando o espaço e o lugar da formação e do pensar para e sobre a docência universitária Tese (Doutorado em Educação). Pelotas: Universidade Federal de Pelotas, 2022.
• GENTILI, P. A falsificação do senso comum: simulacro e imposição na reforma educacional do neoliberalismo. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1998.
• GRAMSCI, A. Concepção dialética da História Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1989.
• KOSIK, K. Dialética do Concreto Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 2002.
• KRAHE, E. D.; SILVA, M. G. S.; NESI, M. J. Reforma curricular do ensino de graduação em uma universidade comunitária de Santa Catarina. In: XXVI Simpósio Brasileiro de Política e Administração da Educação: Anais [recurso eletrônico]. Recife: UFPE, 2013.
• LEITE, D. Conhecimento social na sala de aula universitária e a autoformação docente. In: MOROSINI, M. C. (Org.). Professor do ensino superior: identidade, docência e formação Brasília: Plano Editora, 2001.
• LEITE, D. Innovaciones en la educación universitaria. In: CONTERA, C. Primer foro de innovaciones educativas en la enseñanza de grado Montevideo, Uruguay: Comisión Sectorial de Enseñanza, Universidad de La República, 2002.
• LUCARELLI, E. Una investigación en proceso: la formación de aprendizajes complejos en la universidad. In: Anais do IV Congresso Internacional de Educação São Leopoldo: UNISINOS, 2004.
• LUCARELLI, E. El asesor pedagógico en la universidad De la teoría pedagógica a la práctica en la formación. Buenos Aires: Piados, 2000.
• MEDEIROS, M. V.; CABRAL, C. L. O. Formação docente: da teoria à prática, em uma abordagem sócio-histórica. Revista E-Curriculum, v. 1, n. 2, jun., 2006.
• MOROSINI, M. C. Questões da educação superior e contextos emergentes. Avaliação, v. 19, n. 2, p. 385-405, jul., 2014.
• NÖRNBERG, L. Aprendiz de professor de borboletas no espaço/tempo da memória - (re) conhecendo trajetórias de docente na educação rural. Tese (Tese em Educação). São Leopoldo: UNISINOS, 2008.
• NUNES, A. L. P. F.; SILVA, M. B. C. A extensão universitária no ensino superior e a sociedade. Mal-estar e Sociedade, v. 4, n. 7, p. 119-133, jul./dez., 2011.
• PAIVA, C. et al Para além da “torre de marfim”: O papel da FCLAr-Unesp no apoio ao desenvolvimento econômico e social dos municípios. In: PAIVA, C. (org.). Extensão Universitária, Políticas Públicas e Desenvolvimento Regional São Paulo: Cultura Acadêmica, 2018.
• PEDROSO, M. B.; CUNHA, M. I. Vivendo a inovação: as experiências do curso de Nutrição. Interface - Comunic., Saúde, Educ, v. 12, n. 24, p. 141-52, jan./mar., 2008.
• PIMENTA, S. G. Professor reflexivo: construindo uma crítica. In: PIMENTA, S. G.; GHEDIN, E. (orgs). Professor reflexivo no Brasil: gênese e crítica de um conceito. São Paulo: Cortez , 2012.
• RESCKE, M. J.; NÖRNBERG, L. COSTA, V. B. Práticas Pedagógicas na perspectiva da universidade em contextos emergentes. In: Anais do XCongresso Ibero-Americano de Docência Universitária (CIDU) [recurso eletrônico]. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS, 2019.
• SANTOS, B. S. A universidade no século XXI: para uma reforma democrática e emancipatória da universidade São Paulo: Cortez , 2010.
• SANTOS, B. S. Da ciência moderna ao Novo Senso Comum. In: A Crítica da Razão Indolente: Contra o desperdício da experiência São Paulo: Cortez , 2001.
• SANTOS, B. S. Fórum Social Mundial: Manual de uso São Paulo: Cortez , 2005.
• SANTOS, B. S. Um discurso sobre a Ciência Porto: Editora Afrontamento, 1988.
• SHULMAN, L. S. Paradigmas y programas de investigación en el estudio de la enseñanza: una perspectiva contemporánea. In: WITTROCK, M. (ed.). La investigación de la enseñanza Barcelona, Buenos Aires, México: Paidós, 1989.
• TARDIF, M. Saberes docentes e formação profissional Petrópolis: Vozes , 2002.
• VEEN, W.; VRAKKING, B.Homo zappiens: educando na era digital. Porto Alegre: Artemed, 2009.
• XAVIER, O. S.; FERNANDES, R. C. A. A Aula em Espaços Não-Convencionais. In: VEIGA, I. P. A. Aula: Gênese, Dimensões, Princípios e Práticas Campinas: Papirus Editora. 2008.

• 1
  N.T. The National Programme for Education in Agrarian Reform (Pronera) is a Brazilian government programme that allocates specific funds to provide young people with access to higher education in public institutions.
• 2
  N.T. The system selects Brazilian students based on the score of the National High School Exam (Enem). Until the limit of the vacancies offered, by course and modality of competition, according to the choices of the registered candidates, they are selected in order of highest ranking.

• All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript and guarantee its accuracy and integrity in all aspects.

• The translation of this article into English was funded by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais - FAPEMIG, through the program of supporting the publication of institutional scientific journals.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  16 June 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  14 Mar 2022
• Accepted
  09 Oct 2022