PRESENTATION

At a global level, the number of countries moving towards authoritarianism constitutes twice that of countries moving towards democracy. Around two-thirds of the planet’s population currently lives in democracies in regression or under authoritarian regimes, characterized by growing political polarization, the advance of the extreme right and its organization on a global scale and the increasing difficulty of forming democratic majorities in governments and parliaments (International Idea, 2023).

In this dramatic context, education has often been used as a priority area and a platform for attacks by far-right groups that aim not only to deconstruct advances in the field of educational rights but to attack democracy and policies to combat inequalities, the secularism of the State and environmental preservation, based on morally regressive agendas, anchored in defense of economic austerity, social hierarchies, white supremacy, the nuclear family and the fallacious discourse of gender ideology. This speech was born in the 1990s, was formulated by reactionary sectors of the Catholic Church and mobilized to attack the advances in the rights of women and the LGBTQIA+ population achieved at the United Nations International Social Cycle Conferences. (Conectas Direitos Humanos, 2020; Brown, 2021; Junqueira, 2022; Sentiido et al., 2021).

Given this situation, what are the challenges of education? What is the role of educational policies in defending democracy? What is the task of education systems? The dossier “The Place of Education in Strengthening Democracy” represents an effort of theoretical reflection on the contradictions and fissures of ultra-conservatism in the educational area, understood as a complex, dynamic, multifaceted phenomenon, which has as one of its bases disbelief in institutional policy.

The dossier was created to identify gaps and approaches that contribute to the defense of public policies that guarantee human rights and to strengthening the place of education in promoting democratic cultures that support projects of society committed to racial, social, gender and climate justice, considering the realities of different countries in Latin America. One of its motivations was the instigating results of the national survey Educação, Valores e Direitos (Education, Values and Rights), coordinated by Ação Educativa and Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Educação, Cultura e Ação Comunitária-Cenpec (Center for Studies and Research in Education, Culture and Community Action), developed in 2022 in partnership with the Center for Public Opinion Studies at the State University of Campinas, Plano CDE and the Datafolha institute, in alliance with the Articulação contra o Ultraconservadorismo na Educação¹ (Articulation against Ultraconservatism in Education) and co-financing from the Malala Fund.

The objective of the Educação, Valores e Direitos research was to investigate how reactionary agendas propagated by ultra-conservative groups focused on education are understood and elaborated by the population. The study addressed issues such as the militarization of schools, the proposal for home education, racial quotas, and the implementation of the teaching African and Afro-Brazilian history and cultures, established by Law No. 10,639/2003, which amended the 1996 Law on Guidelines and Bases for National Education; the sexual education, gender and sexual diversity agendas; and the approach to politics and rights at school (Ação Educativa; Cenpec, 2022).

Mobilizing various strategies and acting at a transnational level, primarily on three fronts — rigging State structures, political influence in legislative houses and cultural disputes in the daily lives of schools and communities —we define the actions of ultra-conservative groups in education as those oriented towards manipulation and dissemination of false and prejudiced information, especially during election periods, which encourage persecution of teachers, censorship in schools and moral panic, especially concerning gender, sexuality and race equality agendas, attacking basic principles of critical and dialogic education (Ação Educativa; Cenpec, 2022; Carreira, 2022).

Carried out in the first half of 2022, before the electoral campaign, the Educação, Valores e Direitos research used mixed methods and combined quantitative and qualitative analyses. The qualitative stage occurred through 42 ethnographic mini-focus groups, each consisting of three people who know each other, ensuring that participants felt comfortable expressing their opinions on controversial topics. For the mini-focus groups, people considered average conservatives were mobilized, using a previous form of questions that made it possible to filter participants from extreme right-wing and left-wing profiles. Based on this qualitative study, the instrument used in a national survey on topics related to education was developed and applied in 130 municipalities in the five regions of the country, with 2.090 respondents.

The research revealed that the support of the majority of the population to the far-right education agendas is limited, contrasting with the discourse boasted by such movements of a supposed popular predominance of their positions. It was found that, often, when part of the population adheres to some aspects of the far-right agenda for education, there is none in others, revealing gaps and contradictions.

One refers to the approach to political and rights issues at school. The national survey revealed that 55.6% of people interviewed in the national public opinion survey stated that teachers should avoid discussing politics in the classroom, and 53.5% said that parents should have the right to prohibit schools from teaching topics they disapprove of. However, when asked whether schools should address poverty and inequalities, 92.8% said yes; student rights, 91.9% approved; racial discrimination, 91.2%; and inequalities between women and men, 89.1%. In this way, there is a dissociation between the notion of politics and central issues of democracy and public interest, which are eminently political, something fundamental to be addressed by school curricula.

Through the qualitative stage, it was possible to investigate the meanings of politics handled by a large part of the population, many of which are articulated among themselves. The penetration of negative meanings was identified, such as the understanding of politics as a “mess”, linked to the actions of social movements that question naturalized hierarchies that organize the social order, as a synonym for “politicking”, especially the appropriation of public bodies and resources for private interests by specific individuals and sectors of society; of “disenchantment of politics with the economy” (Davies, 2017, p. 19) linked to the neoliberal discourse that preaches distrust towards public policies and affirms individualist and meritocratic solutions to the problems of social inequalities; as a synonym for party politics, defense of certain political parties; and an abstract sense of politics, often disconnected from decisions and actions that affect everyday life. The research revealed that sensitive issues that mobilize rejection when approached abstractly gain acceptance in everyday situations, and their effects on people’s concrete lives are highlighted.

The above is the case with agendas relating to issues of gender and sexual diversity, manipulated by ultra-conservative groups, especially during electoral periods, intending to generate moral panic. Data from the national survey reveal a promising scenario: 88% believe that it is vital for schools to discuss inequalities between men and women; 81% say that schools should promote the rights of people to freely live their sexuality, whether heterosexual or LGBT; 92.9%, that schools need to teach boys to share domestic work with girls and women; and 96.3%, that students should receive information in schools about laws that punish violence against women.

Sexual Education: Dialogues Between Brazil, Peru,Colombia and Central America

The Educação, Valores e Direitos survey revealed that 73% advocate that sexual education must be addressed in schools; 71% believe that schools are more prepared than parents to explain topics such as puberty and sexuality; 91% that sexual education in schools helps children and adolescents to prevent sexual abuse; 96.1%, that the school must offer information about sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and forms of prevention; and 92.5%, that students should receive information at school on how to avoid unwanted pregnancy. Even parents opposed to sex education in schools expressed needing help to address issues such as sexual abuse, STDs and teenage pregnancy.

Sexual education is defined based on the notion of comprehensive sexuality education, understood as learning that takes place informally in the family and formally through teaching and learning processes in schools guided by a curriculum that considers the subjects’ experiences and cognitive, emotional, physical and social aspects of sexuality (Louro, 2008; Figueiró, 2010; Furlani, 2011). Its objective is to transmit knowledge, skills, attitudes and values to children, adolescents and young people to provide them with autonomy to guarantee their health, well-being and dignity; develop respectful social and sexual relationships; consider how your choices affect your own and others people’s well-being; and understand and ensure the protection of their rights throughout their lives (Unesco, 2019).

The Brazilian research results align with similar surveys promoted by the Colombian organization Sentiido and Latin American human rights groups between 2022 and 2024 in Peru, Colombia and the Central American region. These countries face anti-gender offensives from ultra-conservative groups in education, such as the transnational movement Con mis Hijos no te Metas (Do Not Mess With My Kids).

Created in Lima (Peru) in 2016 by conservative Christian groups in a campaign against the new national primary education curriculum proposed in 2013 by the Peruvian Ministry of Education (Meneses, 2019), the Con Mis Hijos no te Metas movement defends the suppression of “politics” at school, the right of parents to define what content should be covered in the curriculum and the prohibition of the debate on gender equality, sexual diversity and sexual education in educational institutions, understood as an attack on the Christian family. The movement gained transnational strength on the continent, expanding its articulations with far-right groups in Colombia, Ecuador, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Costa Rica, and Mexico, among other countries. (Observatório de Sexualidade e Política, 2021; Quequejana Melo, 2021), Furthermore, it established relations in Brazil with the movement Escola sem Partido (School Without Party), created in 2004.

Despite all the aggressive campaign, which mobilized activist marches in the streets, the public opinion poll carried out in 2022 in Peru (Sensata Ux Research, 2022a) revealed that 76% of people interviewed with children in public schools supported the country’s Ministry of Education and believed that education experts should decide what will be taught in schools. At 94%, young people aged 18 to 25 represented the group of the population that most considered education specialists to be the most appropriate to decide what is taught in schools. Evangelicals were the ones who most defended the idea that this responsibility lies with parents, with 26% of the total people interviewed.

One research found that more than half of the population (56%) believed that the country’s education would deteriorate if mothers and fathers chose Peru’s biology and history content to be covered in schools. Eighty percent argued that the period of armed conflict in the country between the 1980s and 2000s should be covered in history classes, a position contrary to that of ultra-conservative movements in Peru. More than half (54%) of the Peruvians interviewed expressed their opposition to the positions of the Con mis Hijos no te Metas movement. However, 50% warned about the perception that families do not have sufficient spaces for participation in schools.

Regarding the importance of sexual education, 81% and 88% of people interviewed in Peru stated that it contributes to the prevention, respectively, of sexual violence against children and adolescents and teenage pregnancy, the latter being understood by 85% of those interviewed as a priority problem in Peru. However, when asked what is the best place to learn about sexuality, 51% said at home and 45% at school. The responses varied greatly depending on the mother’s age and educational level, with younger people (18 to 25) arguing that school is the most appropriate place (65%).

The research concluded by outlining a profile of the Peruvian population concerning the gender and sexual education agenda in schools, with 42% classified as sympathetic, 27% persuadable, 10% undecided and 21% antagonistic. Supporters are people who defend free and independent education, have progressive values and believe in the importance of sexual education in schools; the persuadable believe in education experts and are undecided about the role of parents, are divided between progressive and traditionalist values and defend sexual education, but preferably at home; those who are undecided want a traditional education but prefer not to get involved directly, have values that tend towards progressives and are in favor of sexual education in schools, but with parental supervision. The antagonists want to control education to maintain the current order, defend obedience and discipline as guiding principles, have traditional values and do not want sexual education nor recognize the problem of gender inequalities.

In 2022, public opinion research conducted in Colombia explored similar questions (Sensata Ux Research, 2022b), aiming to understand the restrictive impacts on the right to education of bills promoted by ultra-conservative groups in the country that are part of the transnational movement Con mis Hijos no te Metas, most of which are linked to the right-wing Colombian party Centro Democratico. As in Brazil and other countries, such movements have been proposing bills in parliament that prohibit a critical approach to the country’s political history, particularly the results of the truth commission on the armed conflicts in Colombia, sexual education, gender and sexual diversity; and other agendas linked to confronting inequalities.

As in Peru, the research profiled the Colombian population interviewed, organizing them into four groups: supporters, flexible indecisive, flexible conservative, and antagonists. Supporters (27%) are people who value rights, freedoms, equality and independent education, approve of sexual education from an early age and believe in the teaching of critical history based on plural perspectives; the undecided flexible (34%) value freedom – with some restrictions on equality – and the participation of families, practice religion in a moderate way, defend sexual education, best carried out at home and at a later age, are indifferent about importance of history classes in schools, but approve of teaching based on plural perspectives; flexible conservatives (28%) value order, authority, formal education and hierarchies, but support gender equality, approve of comprehensive sexual education from an early age, but at home, and value history classes that deal with the different ideologies; and the antagonists (11%) value order and obedience and believe less in freedoms, are more traditional in relation to religion and family, reject sexual education, but when necessary it should take place at home and not address sexual diversity, and they believe in the importance of teaching history that does not deal with different perspectives.

In 2024, a new public opinion survey was carried out in Colombia (Sentiido et al., 2024) on the attitudes of fathers and mothers regarding comprehensive sexual education, gender and sexual diversity, revealing greater population adherence to these agendas. The survey recorded support from 95% of families for the approach to comprehensive sexual education in schools and 90% for equal rights for the LGBTQIA+ population, despite only 58% saying they were in favor of same-sex marriage and 69% saying they would have no problem accepting an LGBT child.

The survey also revealed greater trust towards LGBT people: around 60% of fathers and mothers recognize that gay people are not more likely to abuse children sexually, and 61% agree that a gay teacher does not represent any danger to children. To have a clearer perspective on the population’s positions, the investigation recommends that public opinion polls must be carried out outside the electoral period, a time when ultraconservative movements intensify the process of disinformation to generate moral panic against these agendas to obtain more votes for right-wing and extreme-right candidates.

In November 2023, the research was carried out in Central American countries (Sensata Ux Research, 2023). It revealed a more conservative reality: 81.9% believe in the importance of sexual education, but 88% of the population defends that the home is the most appropriate place to learn about sexuality. Contrasting with research from other Latin American countries, the number of respondents in the region who believe that fathers and mothers know what is necessary to educate their children about sexuality is surprising (58%), and 68% stated that families do not need support to talk about sexuality with children and teenagers. Only 28% of people interviewed value the opinion of experts, and 10% value the opinion of teachers.

The research identified significant differences between countries. Costa Rica had the most progressive positions in favor of sexual education in schools, same-sex marriage, and rejection of the religious State, contrasting with countries such as Panama, Honduras and Guatemala, which had the predominance of more conservative positions. As in previous surveys, four profiles of interviewees were defined: fundamentalists, conservatives pro-comprehensive sexual education, flexible conservatives and supporters of integral sexual education.

Fundamentalists in the Central American region (9%) are against comprehensive sexual education and the recognition of sexual diversity, they consider that the best way to avoid teenage pregnancy is abstinence, and that violence against women is not a priority problem and defend a religious State; conservatives in favor of comprehensive sexual education (38%) argue that it is important to educate girls to be good housewives and spouses, are predominantly in favor of a religious State and believe in the importance of sexual education as a way of preventing teenage pregnancy, believe that fathers and mothers know enough about sexuality and are the group that most prioritizes obedience; the flexible conservatives (29%) are undecided in relation to comprehensive sexual education as a right, the fight against inequalities between women and men and the religious State, but they argue that sexual education is effective in preventing teenage pregnancy, they are against marriage between people of the same sex and justify abortion in specific cases; and supporters (24%) defend education for children’s autonomy, believe that same-sex marriage also constitutes a family, defend the use of contraceptives to prevent teenage pregnancy and the importance of comprehensive sexual education guided by experts .

The survey recorded an apparent contradiction in the responses from all Central American countries, which points to the need for education focused on obedience (61.5%) and creativity (53.5%). Deepening the different meanings of these terms for the population and possible articulations in everyday life poses a challenge.

Recognizing the complex challenges for strengthening democratic regimes in Latin America, under threats from growing far-right activism, the research reveals possibilities, issues and challenges for improving educational policies and the centrality of the sexual education agenda, gender and sexual diversity for the defense of democracy. The manipulation of these agendas has served as a basis for attacking all progressive agendas on the continent aimed at confronting historical inequalities. Considering this threatening situation, what is the role of educational policies in defending democracy and confronting far-right forces? What notion of educational quality should guide educational policies? This text problematizes the incompatibility of the hegemonic idea of educational quality with strengthening democracy.

What is the Notion of Educational Quality for Strengthening Democracy?

Anchored in the neoliberal agenda of the primacy of the private over the public, the hegemonic notion of educational quality, which in recent decades has guided educational systems, is linked to the so-called new public management, a perspective that gained strength in the educational agenda in the 1990s, inducing the adoption of private sector principles and practices by public institutions; reduction in the size and role of the State, based on the discourse of increasing efficiency while reducing costs; and diversification of forms of privatization of public services, rights and common goods (Ball, 2005; 2014; Adrião; Pinheiro, 2012; Laval, 2019; Cóssio, 2020).

The hegemonic notion of quality predominantly centers on economic rationality in favor of the market, on an overvaluation of student performance results in large-scale standardized tests. Such a perspective dominantly privileges merit, individual effort, and competition; naturalizes social, racial and gender inequalities; hijacks schools’ time and priorities; depoliticizes school and educational management in favor of a bureaucratic, meaningless perspective of centralized control and surveillance imposed through the dictatorship of digital platforms (Torres, 2023) and other mechanisms; and devalues educational processes and the formative role of democratic experiences, leading to a contrast between efficiency and active participation.

Around the world, this hegemonic perspective of educational quality has been embraced by governments located in different parts of the political spectrum – from right to left –, updated and given new meanings in various contexts, as occurred in Brazil during the governments of presidents Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003–2010) and by Dilma Rousseff (2011–2016).

In Brazil, although the educational quality referenced in the results of large-scale evaluations has been a hegemonic notion since the government of President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995–2002), linked to the educational reforms of the 1990s, other notions of educational quality have been present, disputed and articulated in recent decades in the educational debate, especially in the Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers’ Party) governments, promoted by different political subjects, including the social movements of education, black, feminist, LGBTQIA+, human rights, Indigenous communities, quilombolas, rural people, people with disabilities, environmentalists (Carreira, 2015; 2019; Gomes, 2017). In other words, by subjects who suffer the effects of the limited democratization process of power, resources and living conditions; discrimination, systematic violence, and necropolitics (Mbembe, 2018); environmental destruction and private appropriation of public goods.

These counter-hegemonic notions achieved essential advances in the Lula and Dilma governments—in legal and normative frameworks, programs and public policies—but they were restricted, with a limited level of institutionalization, and with low systemic impact on the set of educational policies, suffering strong resistance from dissonant education systems concerning assessment policies and other macro-educational policies, generating a profound picture of incoherence that largely emptied their potential for transformation.

During the Bolsonaro government (2019–2022), such advances were subject to attacks, persecution and destruction and are currently experiencing – in the context of the Lula government (2023–2026) – a resumption, limited by the complex challenges of a broad coalition government and by attacks and surveillance by right-wing and extreme-right groups, with a strong presence in the National Congress (Carreira, 2022).

Given this situation, how can we move towards a notion of educational quality that favors the construction and support of racial, social, gender and climate justice projects aimed at confronting inequalities, privatization processes and the destruction of the common good?

Gustavo Pereira (2010), a Uruguayan philosopher who has made efforts to formulate critical theories of justice based on Latin American realities, proposes in his work the fundamental concept of democratic ethics, an egalitarian and democratic ethos necessary for the construction and sustainability – over time – of a social justice project. Democratic ethics is configured in democratic culture, understood as a common basis of values and beliefs, promoted and developed in society, and aimed at stimulating self-realization, autonomy, and solidarity between subjects so that they recognize themselves as having equal dignity. The construction of this democratic ethics mobilizes negotiations and conflicts. It requires intentionality and actions in different dimensions that encompass the institutional level and public policies aimed at promoting intersubjective exchanges and deconstructions in everyday life, committed to confronting processes of dehumanization, discrimination and violence and with the promotion of rights, co-responsibilities and democratic sociability.

Aiming at the development of an egalitarian background and democratic ethics in Brazil, and considering the results of the research Educação, Valores e Direitos (Ação Educativa; Cenpec, 2022), it is understood that one of the urgent challenges for educational policies is the resumption of the importance and meaning of politics as a structuring axis of the notion of educational quality for democracy and for the promotion of the values agenda – hijacked by fallacious speeches by far-right groups – based on the notions of human rights and the rights of nature, enshrined in the 1988 Federal Constitution and international regulations. The research demonstrated that there is evidence that the majority of the population values school as a collective space, beyond the perspective centered on the family and the private sphere and a strong perception of the social function of the school in combating inequalities. These gaps and contradictions create favorable conditions for forming active citizenship and political-democratic literacy in the country.

The definition of political-democratic literacy adopted here dialogues with Rildo Cosson’s proposal (2011) but expands it, involving the process of appropriation and development of knowledge (human rights and rights of nature, democracy, political institutions, inequalities; political subjects and social struggles, legal frameworks, rights and duties, critical perspective on history, functioning of public policies, etc.), capabilities (reflection on one’s practices, re-education of discriminatory thinking and attitudes, approach to controversial topics, participation in collective processes, active listening, dialogue, negotiation, co-responsibility), values (recognition and defense of one’s dignity and that of other people and groups, equity, solidarity, freedom, appreciation of care) and emotions (otherness, respect and self-respect), a process aimed at defending and strengthening democracy: from everyday relationships to the macro instances of society.

In line with this perspective, a notion of educational quality is proposed that values the political-democratic literacy of the population in conjunction with the development of skills and wisdom, in a broad and Freirean perspective of the ability to critically read the world (Freire, 1992); access to humanistic, scientific and rights knowledge and its appropriation and reinvention by different subjects in their various contexts; overcoming colonial epistemicides and valuing denied and invisible knowledge, and experiences produced in popular territories, in everyday life and in different contexts; the promotion of an education for otherness that expands the notion of humanity and is explicitly anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-LGBTphobic, anti-ableism, which mobilizes indignation and intolerance towards any forms of discrimination and inequalities; and that contributes decisively to overcoming the human-nature divide and consumerism, expanding the possibilities for transformative political actions.

A notion that is based on the implementation of changes proposed in the National Curricular Guidelines: Diversity and Inclusion – in Primary Education and Higher Education –, constructed by the National Education Council in dialogue with social movements throughout the first two decades of the 21st century, as well as the revitalization of democratic management as a formative process for school communities and as a factor for improving educational policies from the perspective of guaranteeing constitutional rights – and never using it to restrict or deny these rights. In other words, it is a “high intensity” democratic school management, not only in the “quantity” of participation of school community members but also in building autonomy and redistributing political power.

Still, in this sense, it is necessary to destabilize, provoke and expand what has been understood as “universal” in educational policies, identifying the fixed and restricted references that feed the production of inequalities. To achieve this goal, it is essential to ask questions about any and all policies: What are the references of people, students, families, and communities that support these policies? What differences are recognized and admitted? Which civilizational values and knowledge matrices are prioritized, and which are silenced? What does “good performance” mean in school trajectories and educational policies? How does educational policy respond to and counteract the impact of racial, social, gender, and regional inequalities on people with disabilities, among others, in an equalizing perspective that guides educational financing?

Facing the “Ghost”: Gender Equality, Sexual Diversity and Education

The aforementioned research and those from other Latin American countries points that the defense and promotion of democracy in times of authoritarian advancement require that educational systems effectively commit to policies and programs that promote gender equality and sexual diversity, facing the “ghost” manipulated by far-right forces as a way not only to attack the rights of women and the LGBTQIA+ population but of generating moral panic and destabilizing democratic regimes. To remain silent about these agendas is to open space for them to continue to be captured by authoritarian movements from a regressive perspective. Addressing these agendas in the current context requires that education systems take responsibility for developing programs to promote experiences and training and protection of education professionals – who work in daycare centers, schools and universities – in the face of authoritarian movements that promote misinformation, persecution, censorship and self-censorship, in association with measures aimed at the demilitarization of schools and everyday life.

In the Brazilian context of the construction of the new National Education Plan (Plano et al. 2025–2035), it is necessary to recognize that the perspective of educational quality for democracy requires structural changes in the set of educational policies and the functioning of educational systems and educational institutions, understood in its profound articulation, aiming to overcome the situation of lack of coordination and inconsistencies, which weakens its power of transformation. In this sense, it is urgent to establish a National Education System deeply oriented towards confronting structural racism and other inequalities and promoting democratic cultures and ecological transition in a context of accelerating climate change that configures the so-called “ decisive decade” (Marques, 2023).

This requires the necessary reorganization of time in schools. Associated with the urgent improvement of the material conditions of schools through the implementation of the Initial Student-Quality Cost – which impacts the reduction of children/students per class, on guaranteeing infrastructure conditions and on the appreciation of education professionals –the reorganization of time and the priorities of schools aims to provide conditions for educational institutions to have time to: strengthen collective work, develop continuing education processes, systematize knowledge and experiences built in the school environment, prioritize participatory experiences, training for democratic citizenship, the strengthening relationships with families and the territories in which they are located and actively searching for students who face school exclusion.

The current shortage of time in schools, anxiety, and the feeling of suffocation in the face of the demands of reality result, in large part, from the prioritization of large-scale assessments and the dictatorship of digital platforms for surveillance and bureaucratic control. There is no way to move forward in promoting educational quality for democracy without changing this equation. Hence, there is a need to critically review the digital platformization process and educational assessment policies, drastically reducing the weight of large-scale assessment policies in favor of other forms of assessment, such as participatory institutional assessment, and effectively reorienting them to support policies and actions to combat inequalities and promote effective transformations in everyday life.

The resumption of the construction of the National Basic Education Assessment System, provided for in article 11 of the National Education Plan (2014–2024) – established through Ordinance nº 369/2016, revoked after the institutional coup of May 2016 –, proposes a critical and expanded perspective of assessment policies, based on contextualized approaches, which consider processes, inputs, access and equity, “seeking to make visible what is often made invisible and naturalized in everyday school life and educational management” (Carreira, 2015, p. 438).

The role of educational policies in promoting the population’s political-democratic literacy requires that primary education and higher education policies be planned and developed intersectoral and articulated with policies to promote popular education. It is necessary to advance a perspective of popular education in human rights that dialogues not only with politically organized sectors of the population but with those that are not organized, and that is a perspective that is more attentive to everyday life, to the challenges of the “here and now” (Carreira, 2015). In this sense, the youth and adult education policy, dismantled in recent years, must be reviewed and strengthened in its political-democratic literacy potential from a territorial perspective.

In addition to promoting the ability to critically read power relations and the demand for rights before the State, especially in realities marked by the perverse and intense precariousness of living conditions, the deregulation of labor rights and persistent and new forms of racial and social segregation, the intention is a contextualized popular education, which promotes the “possible agency” of subjects in everyday life, understood as a dimension and political space for building solidarity, care, reflection, resistance; a space for transforming discriminatory and violent practices; a dimension of fabrics of possibilities and hope; and a place to exercise political imagination.

Notes

• 1
  Coordinated by Ação Educativa, the Articulação contra o Ultraconservadorismo na Educação (Articulation against Ultraconservatism in Education) has been working for years to combat the phenomenon of censorship, persecution and self-censorship in schools, promoted by ultraconservative movements. The Articulação em Defesa do Direito à Educação e Contra a Censura nas Escolas (Articulation in Defense of the Right to Education and Against Censorship in Schools) has worked within the scope of the justice system and the National Congress, in addition to promoting communication, training and material production actions such as the Manual de Defesa das Escolas contra a Censura ( Handbook for Schools Defense Against Censorship). It consists of: Artigo 19, Associação Brasileira de Famílias Homotransafetivas, Associação Brasileira de Gays, Lésbicas, Bissexuais, Travestis, Transexuais e Intersexos, Associação Mães pela Diversidade, Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Educação, Associação Nacional dos Centros de Defesa da Criança e do Adolescente, Cidadania, Estudo, Pesquisa, Informação e Ação, Associação Nacional de Travestis e Transexuais, Associação Nacional pelos Direitos Humanos LGBTI, Associação Tamo Juntas – Assessoria Jurídica Gratuita para Mulheres Vítimas de Violência, Campanha Nacional pelo Direito à Educação, Centro de Defesa da Criança e do Adolescente do Ceará, Centro Feminista de Estudos e Assessoria, Cenpec, Cidade Escola Aprendiz, Comitê da América Latina e do Caribe para a Defesa dos Direitos das Mulheres, Conectas Direitos Humanos, Confederação Nacional dos Trabalhadores em Educação, Confederação Nacional dos Trabalhadores dos Estabelecimentos em Educação, Conselho Nacional de Igrejas Cristãs, Frente Nacional Escola Sem Mordaça, Geledés – Instituto da Mulher Negra, Grupo de Advogados pela Diversidade Sexual e de Gênero, Instituto Alana, Instituto Brasileiro de Direito da Família, Movimento Educação Democrática, Observatório Sexualidade e Política da Associação Brasileira Interdisciplinar de Aids, Plataforma de Direitos Humanos, Projeto Liberdade, Rede Nacional de Religiões Afro-brasileiras e Saúde, Sindicato Nacional dos Docentes das Instituições do Ensino Superior and Themis – Assessoria Jurídica e Estudos de Gênero.

Referências

• AÇÃO EDUCATIVA; CENPEC. Pesquisa Educação, Valores e Direitos São Paulo: Ação Educativa, 2022. Disponível em: https://generoeeducacao.org.br/mude-sua-escola/pesquisa-educacao-valores-e-direitos/ Acesso em: 10 maio 2023.
  » https://generoeeducacao.org.br/mude-sua-escola/pesquisa-educacao-valores-e-direitos/
• ADRIÃO, T.; PINHEIRO, D. A presença do setor privado na gestão da educação pública: refletindo sobre experiências brasileiras. Educação e Políticas em Debate, v. 1, n. 1, p. 55-66, 2012. https://doi.org/10.14393/REPOD-v1n1a2012-17363.
  » https://doi.org/10.14393/REPOD-v1n1a2012-17363
• BALL, S.J. Profissionalismo, gerencialismo e performatividade. Cadernos de Pesquisa, São Paulo, v. 35, n. 126, p. 539-564, set./dez. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-15742005000300002
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-15742005000300002
• BALL, S.J. Educação global S.A. novas redes políticas e o imaginário neoliberal. Ponta Grossa: Uepg, 2014.
• BROWN, W. Nas ruínas do neoliberalismo: a ascensão da política antidemocrática no ocidente. São Paulo: Filosófica Politeia, 2021.
• CARREIRA, D. Igualdade e diferenças nas políticas educacionais: a agenda das diversidades nos governos Lula e Dilma. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) – Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2015. https://doi.org/10.11606/T.48.2016.tde-20042016-101028
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/T.48.2016.tde-20042016-101028
• CARREIRA, D. A execução orçamentária das políticas de diversidade nos governos Lula e Dilma: obstáculos e desafios. Revista Brasileira de Educação, v. 24, e240010, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-4782019240010
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-4782019240010
• CARREIRA, D. Tempos terríveis: memória e produção de resistências em educação no governo Bolsonaro. In: CARREIRA, Denise; LOPES, Barbara (org.). Gênero e educação: ofensivas reacionárias, resistências democráticas e anúncios pelo direito à educação. São Paulo: Ação Educativa, 2022. p. 14-36.
• CONECTAS DIREITOS HUMANOS. Entrevista: a ofensiva antigênero como política de Estado. Conectas Direitos Humanos, São Paulo, 7 mar. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.conectas.org/noticias/ofensiva-antigenero-politica-estado/ Acesso em: 7 jul. 2024.
  » https://www.conectas.org/noticias/ofensiva-antigenero-politica-estado/
• CÓSSIO, M.F. A nova gestão pública: alguns impactos nas políticas educacionais e na formação de professores. Educação, v. 41, n. 1, p. 66-73, 2018. https://doi.org/10.15448/1981-2582.2018.1.29528
  » https://doi.org/10.15448/1981-2582.2018.1.29528
• COSSON, R. Letramento político: trilhas abertas em campo minado. E-Legis, Brasília, v. 4, n. 7, p. 49-58, 2011. https://doi.org/10.51206/e-legis.v7i7.90
  » https://doi.org/10.51206/e-legis.v7i7.90
• DAVIES, W. The limits of neoliberalism: authority, sovereignty and the logic of competition. Los Angeles; Londres: Sage, 2017.
• FIGUEIRÓ, M.N.D. Educação sexual: retomando uma proposta, um desafio. Londrina: Eduel, 2010.
• FREIRE, P. A importância do ato de ler: em três artigos que se completam. São Paulo: Cortez, 1992.
• FURLANI, J. Educação sexual na sala de aula: relações de gênero, orientação sexual e igualdade étnico-racial numa proposta de respeito às diferenças. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2011.
• GOMES, N.L. O movimento negro educador: saberes construídos nas lutas por emancipação. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2017.
• INTERNATIONAL IDEA. Relatório do Estado Global da Democracia de 2023: Estabelecer contratos sociais numa época de descontentamento. Estocolmo: Instituto Internacional para a Democracia e a Assistência Eleitoral, 2023.
• JUNQUEIRA, R. A invenção da ideologia de gênero: um projeto reacionário de poder. Campo Grande: Letras Livres, 2022.
• LAVAL, C. A escola não é uma empresa: o neoliberalismo em ataque ao ensino público. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2019.
• LOURO, G. Gênero e sexualidade: pedagogias contemporâneas. Pro-Posições, v. 19, n. 2, p. 17-23, maio 2008. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/pp/a/fZwcZDzPFNctPLxjzSgYvVC/?format=pdf⟨=pt
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/pp/a/fZwcZDzPFNctPLxjzSgYvVC/?format=pdf⟨=pt
• MARQUES, L. O decênio decisivo: propostas para uma política de sobrevivência. São Paulo: Elefante, 2023.
• MBEMBE, A. Necropolítica. São Paulo: N-1, 2018.
• MENESES, D. Con Mis Hijos No Te Metas: un estudio de discurso y poder en un grupo de Facebook peruano opuesto a la “ideología de género”. Anthropologica, v. 37, n. 42, p. 129-154, 2019. https://doi.org/10.18800/anthropologica.201901.006
  » https://doi.org/10.18800/anthropologica.201901.006
• OBSERVATÓRIO DE SEXUALIDADE E POLÍTICA. Políticas antigênero na América Latina: resumos dos estudos de casos nacionais. Edição: Sonia Corrêa. Rio de Janeiro: Associação Brasileira Interdisciplinar de Aids, 2021.
• ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NAÇÕES UNIDAS PARA A EDUCAÇÃO, A CIÊNCIA E A CULTURA (UNESCO). Orientações técnicas internacionais de educação em sexualidade: uma abordagem baseada em evidências. 2. ed. Paris: Unesco, 2019.
• PEREIRA, G. Las voces de la igualdad: Bases para una teoría crítica de la justicia. Montevidéu: Proteus, 2010.
• QUEQUEJANA MELO, L.S. Contra la “ideología de género”: Transnacionalización de Con mis hijos no te metas en el activismo anti-género latinoamericano entre el 2016 y 2020. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, 2021.
• SENSATA UX RESEARCH. Estudio de audiências en el Peru: la educación entre dos visiones del mundo. Sensata Ux Research, 2022a.
• SENSATA UX RESEARCH. La educación sexual y política en el colégio: actitudes, apoyo y resistência en el publico colombiano. Sensata Ux Research, 2022b.
• SENSATA UX RESEARCH. Actitudes hacia la educacion sexual em Centroamérica Sensata Ux Research, 2023.
• SENTIIDO. Fabricar el pánico moral: usar la niñez como arma para atacar la justicia de género y los derechos humanos. Colômbia: Sentiido, 2021.
• SENTIIDO; MARTINEZ, J.; GARDNER, A.; GÓMEZ, V. “Sí” a la educación sexual y a los derechos de las personas LGBT: encuesta sobre las actitudes de padres y madres de familia en Colombia sobre la Educación Sexual Integral (ESI) y la diversidad sexual y de género. Colômbia: Sentiido, 2024.
• TORRES, L. Conferência de Abertura. In: CONGRESSO IBERO-AMERICANO DE POLÍTICA E ADMINISTRAÇÃO DA EDUCAÇÃO, 7, 2023. Lisboa, fev. 2023.

Editor de Seção: Ivany Pino https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6227-972X

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  23 Sept 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  08 Aug 2024
• Accepted
  13 Aug 2024