School, Family, and Psychology: Different Senses of Violence in Elementary Education

Abstract

This article aims to know what teachers of public elementary school and student families understand about violence. As sources of information had used: questionnaire with teachers and interviews with families. These instruments made it possible to understand the meanings and meanings given to violence through the questions: 1) "What is violence?” 2) "Have you ever lived and what did you feel in a situation of violence?"; 3) "What actions of referrals in this situation of violence?". Constructive-Interpretative Methodology analyzed the results and the process of awareness had sought through three dimensions: thinking, feeling and acting. The families presented the violence pointing out the types of manifestation, passing through their own life history, presenting an ideologically naturalized (re) production. The school perceived violence as directed action to the other, as an instrument and typified. Given this, from the perspective of Critical Psychology we perceive a disarticulation of the meanings attributed to violence, between school and family, disfavouring the process of integral development of children and adolescents and awareness.

Keywords:
Psychology; family; violence

Resumo

Este artigo visa conhecer o que professores de escola pública de ensino fundamental e as famílias dos estudantes entendem sobre violência. Como fontes de informações utilizaram-se: questionário com os professores e entrevistas com as famílias. Esses instrumentos possibilitaram compreender os sentidos e significados dado a violência, por meio das perguntas: 1) “O que é violência? ”; 2) “Você já viveu e o que sentiu em uma situação de violência? ”; 3) “Quais ações de encaminhamentos nesta situação de violência? ”. Os resultados foram analisados pela Metodologia Construtiva-Interpretativa buscando-se entender o processo de tomada de consciência por três dimensões: pensar, sentir e agir. As famílias apresentaram a violência apontando os tipos de manifestação, perpassando a própria história de vida, apresentando uma (re)produção ideologicamente naturalizada. A escola percebeu a violência como ação direcionada ao outro, instrumentalizada e tipificada. Diante disso, pela perspectiva da Psicologia Crítica percebemos uma desarticulação dos sentidos atribuídos à violência, entre a escola e a família, desfavorecendo o processo de desenvolvimento integral da criança e adolescente e a tomada de consciência.

Palavras-Chave:
Psicologia; família; violência

Resumen

Este artigo tiene por objetivo conocer lo que profesores de escuela pública de enseñanza primaria y las familias de los estudiantes entienden sobre violencia. Como fuentes de informaciones se utilizó: cuestionario con los profesores y entrevistas con las familias. Esos instrumentos posibilitaron comprender los sentidos y significados dado a la violencia, por intermedio de las preguntas: 1) “¿Lo que es violencia?”; 2) “¿Usted ya vivió y lo que sintió en una situación de violencia?”; 3)“¿Cuáles acciones de encaminamientos en esta situación de violencia?”. Se analizó los resultados por la Metodología Constructiva-Interpretativa y se buscó entender el proceso de toma de consciencia por tres dimensiones: pensar, sentir y actuar. Las familias presentaron la violencia apuntando los tipos de manifestación, creando la propia historia de vida, presentando una (re)producción ideológicamente naturalizada. La escuela percibió la violencia como acción direccionada al otro, instrumentalizada y tipificada. Delante de esto, por la perspectiva de la Psicología Crítica percibimos una desarticulación a los sentidos atribuidos a la violencia, entre escuela y familia, desfavoreciendo el proceso de desarrollo integral del niño y adolescente y la toma de consciencia.

Palabras clave:
Psicología; familia; violencia

Introduction

This article is part of a broader dissertation study, inserted in the Project Space of Coexistence, Action and Reflection - Ecoar -, a proposal of action of the psychology in the public schools, in the confrontation to the violence, directed towards the full development of children and young people in their life circumstances (Guzzo, Ribeiro, Meireles, Feldmann, Silva, Santos, & Dias, 2019).

Violence: Lifetime Settings

In order to think about the violence manifested in society it is necessary, first, to make it evident from the point of view of this analysis. The perspective that sustains us is through the critical reading that we live in a capitalist society, with foundations of reality from the class structures that involve the way of production and exploitation (Tonet, 2005). Economic appropriation is one of the factors of belonging to a class, it hierarchized by the place that a person occupies in the mode of production, its relations and conditions to maintain an economic system that generates social inequalities.

In this perspective, violence is involved in the construction of history and in the way of life of the people, as they organize themselves in the face of economic, social and political relations. Thus, it has used as an instrument for the exploitation of man-by-man himself, in the development of labor and life relations. It has perceived that it acts as an oppressive force and leads the working class in situations that contradict human dignity itself, to maintain a structure of society that violently excludes and alienates it (Saviani, 2013, Guzzo, 2016).

Many sense and meanings pervade violence, so the polysemy character of the word demonstrates that each area of knowledge treats it in a way. This question has understood by the representation of violence as a purpose, which can generate a disorder between meaning (action) and significant (who has / suffered the action). In this sense, it has seen that the violence associated with some type of action that qualifies the being that carried it brings about a representative function generated by the symbolic function (Pino, 1995, 2007).

There are many directions in conceptualizing violence. The World Health Organization (WHO, 2002, p.5) understands violence as "Intentional use of force or power in a form of threat or effectively against itself, another person or group or community, which causes or has great likely to cause injury, death, psychic damage, developmental changes or deprivation.” According to Saviani (2013), the way human being, as humanity, organizes itself and acts on material nature to satisfy its needs, allows the transformation of the object according to its interest, violating the law that governs it, to another legality. Meireles (2015, p.4) addresses as "an entity in itself, independent of processes of production and social significance."

Moreira (2012), in his work on characterizing violence in language dictionaries, emphasizes that violence, demarcated by history, is established by imaginary creations that may or may not use force, but also by the motivation of sustained interests in and by the history of social relations, in its conditions, to keep existing.

We adopted here the perspective of violence presented by the psychologist Ignácio Martín-Baró (1985). Faced with the history of the country where he lived (El Salvador), he realized that psychology was not at the service of most of the popular and that it needed to review its social function. He presented in his theory a social, epistemological and moral critique, in which he pointed out (a) lack of contextualization and distance from the psychology of the social context, (b) generalist concepts without situating the psychosocial knowledge, but taking other areas to explain the subject, disregarding its cultural and historical context. In addition, (c) supposed moral neutrality, a reference to scientific-positivist interests (Ibáñez, 2011).

The violence, according to Martin-Baró (1968, 1985, 1988), is a multiple phenomenon in expressions, with particularities that must be considered in studies on this subject. However, the first is that regardless of whether violence is an act of repression or coercion, it needs analyzed from a historical process, derived from social and ideological interests that assume objective and / or subjective forms.

Under this view, it is possible to understand violence from psychosocial aspects, that is, it requires a contextualized understanding in its psychological and social processes, of the subjects involved, of the existing situations in which the contradictions and potentialities of concrete and real reality have considered (Guzzo, Mezzalira, & Moreira, 2014).

School, Family and Violence

The process of development of children and young people occurs in a historical and social context, mediated by relationships, considering their physical, emotional, intellectual and symbolic dimensions in everyday life (Guzzo & Tizzei, 2007).

In this sense, family and school are the first contexts of living in society, in which the child relates to adults. Therefore, the partnership between them is fundamental, and it is up to the school to provide more participative spaces. In the context of the development of the child, it is not possible to treat the family and the school in a dissociated way, since the process of developing takes place through the various mediations present in the daily life. Thus, school and family form important spaces of social relations in the lives of children and young people, and investigating how these relationships take place is vital in understanding human development (Guzzo, 1990; Poland & Dessen, 2005).

It is important to highlight that understanding the process of development of children and young people, as subjects of rights, is a recent construction when considering the social history of childhood. According to Ariès (1978), the adults inserted the children in their dynamic of life and work, when they presented themselves with a certain physical independence. Thus, the family was not alone responsible for the socialization of the child and education had guaranteed by the learning of tasks performed with the adults.

The types of social relationships in which schools and families are involved make it possible to understand the unfolding, paths, perspectives and expectations in this relationship that still maintains a direction based on disciplining and moralizing families and children (Freitas, 2016). In order to understand the daily life of the school and the families, as they relate, it is necessary to invest time and dialogue, allowing the possibility of a strengthened partnership for the integral development of children and young people.

In this sense, school and families constitute themselves as complex social systems that articulate children's lives. A relationship without co-participation exposes weaknesses manifested through difficulties in the learning process, behavior or social coexistence making them difficult and troubled. Therefore, actions that comprise development involve the interdependence of psychological and social processes, making it possible to analyze the situations experienced by the subjects and their development indicators (Guzzo & Tizzei, 2007).

The education scenario has many challenges in the schooling process. One of them is in the relation between school and family, which Patto (1992) treats as an unequal confrontation, since the school catalogue attributions to the low academic performance of the students, directing the responsibility to families and students, mainly.

The search for the ideal family, present in the imaginary of the professionals of the school, causes that their actions are based on the stereotypes or departures because they do not correspond to the necessities of the school. This expected relationship does not consider families in their particular histories, nor in their conditions of life (Patto, 1992). The school as a space for integral development must be attentive to this aspect, through learning, interaction, processes of changes, mediations. However, the quest to promote development becomes difficult without knowing and accompanying students and their families.

Frequent notes, such as students' inability and / or disinterest, and family disorganization or disorder, are considerations made by the school. In view of this, the proposed solutions are limited, on a number of occasions, to calls from families, mostly represented by mothers or grandmothers. As well as, the referrals to health services or in search of psychological reports to justify or "de-responsibility" by not promoting the expected curricular learning process. The school thus ends up disregarding the impacts of vulnerabilities experienced and the concrete reality of each child in its context, and how much the situations of violence to which they have subjected interfere in their well-being and development.

Some children and young people experience a daily violence and, therefore, it is essential to seek to understand, through the analysis of social life, its development, including school. In this sense, the school needs to move towards the understanding attributed to violence, both for itself and for families, as well as in the school-family relationship, which needs addressed.

Understanding violence based on circumstantial and isolated events, without relating it to psychosocial aspects and their historical processes, makes it impossible to understand the relationships and configurations that occur in school, as well as outside it. It must therefore considered that learning, which is a social right, goes beyond the process of reading and writing, so must understand including these same psychosocial and historical aspects. Psychology in school, thus, to understand the process of development and learning of children, must break with the hegemonic perspective of psychological evaluation to develop a psychosocial and historical process of evaluation and intervention. This hegemonic model, which disregards the totality of social daily life and legitimizes school difficulties caused by individual characteristics and, sometimes familiar, takes on a relevance in the maintenance of unequal relations (Guzzo, Moreira, & Mezzalira, 2011).

In this perspective, violence is understood in its causal essence, which has as its guiding thread the unequal system of social classes in the logic of the capitalist mode of production that exploits, dominates and violent. Thus, violence begins to be analyzed putting it in the context its structural, social and economic roots as pillars of maintenance of this system, in which the people who make up this scenario are related and tend to (re) produce the social relations imposed by the interest of capital (Martín-Baró, 1988). One of the great challenges, especially for professionals of Psychologists, is to understand how these conditions have articulated in everyday life.

According to Oliveira and Marinho-Araújo (2010), the relationship between school and family manifests itself with postures characterized sometimes by defensive discourses, sometimes accusing, in the search to justify and find reasons for the behavior and coexistence of their children in school. For these relationships has modified, it takes a process of awareness raising involving all actors responsible for the development of children. When these individuals understand the reality in which they live, how they are living conditions can act to change individually or collectively.

For Vygotsky, consciousness has related to the higher psychological functions bringing elements of the affectivity, the experience and the thought that has its origin in the social context of development. The process of awareness would relate to language (Toassa, 2006). Thus, one can think that the process of conscience seeks to establish a dialogue between subject and reality, through the ability to think, feel and act reflected in the commitment to understand their condition of life. People, through a critical analysis of the conditions in which they live, begin to understand their place in society, therefore how they can act to change that reality (Freire, 1980, 2003).

The Psychology at school, through a critical perspective, seeks to identify and analyze the social and psychological context for the construction and interpretation of violent events, considering the scenario and the actors involved. This makes it possible to know the subjective meanings attributed to the situations experienced, as concrete conditions (Guzzo, 2015).

In addition, Psychology in the public school, in contact with the community and its social dynamics, can perceive social rights denied or violated, which makes it possible to confront development contexts that are distinct among social groups, as well as their impacts on the form to live and learn. However, however complex this reality may be, the school and family need to devote themselves to the development and implementation of actions to promote spaces of participation with democrat conditions (Guzzo, Mezzalira, Weber, Sant'Ana, & Silva, 2018).

Objectives

This article aims to understand the different meanings of violence presented by school professionals and the families of students in a public elementary school.

Method

It is an Participatiõn - Action - Research (PAR), founded on praxis, on ethical, political and social commitment. This kind of research that has the researcher involved as part of the process, reflecting and transforming with the others. In PAR, subjects transform reality through participation. This type of research assumes a process of social change whose goal is to overcome oppression (McTaggart, 1997; Diéguez, 1987).

The researched scenario was a municipal public school, in a city in the interior of the State of São Paulo. Participating subjects were teachers and students' families. The criteria for participation of the families were: a) having a child attending elementary school; b) accept the invitation made by the researcher at the Family and Educator Meetings (FEM); and c) fill out a form that included information such as: full name, relationship, telephone number and name of the child, date and time interview scheduling. This information had given at the time they became available to participate in the survey, 14 mothers or grandparents attended, totalizing the representation of participating families.

For teachers, the criterion of participation was to teach in elementary school and to make up the professional staff of the school unit. The invitation had made in daily school and in Collective Teaching Work meetings (CTW). The teachers arranged to participate, being scheduled the day and the time for the information search, which happened in the own school and was carried out in person, 12 teachers participated in the research.

Two instruments had used to search for information: for the teachers, the professionals present answered a questionnaire at the school; for the families whose contact was individual, a semi-structured interview script had applied. These instruments were sources of information, before a practice in qualitative research. This strategy sought a better approximation and understanding of the object of study, before the questions of the social reality in which it is inserted (Minayo, 2001).

After explaining the voluntary nature of participation and signing a free and informed consent form, the requirements of the Research Ethics Committee¹ had met. The questionnaire had nine questions, divided into two parts. The first one had a socio-demographic survey, with participants' characteristics regarding age, race / ethnicity, sex, teaching time, school time and level of schooling. In the second part, there were three open questions about the objectives of this study, considering three dimensions - thinking, feeling and acting - in situations of violence.

For the families, a semi-structured interview script had used with three questions, the same ones made for teachers in the second part of the questionnaire. According to Minayo (2001), the interview makes it possible to understand the perspective of the subject, his way of life, valuing the language, but also all other expressions in this encounter.

The information obtained in the interviews occurred individually, with each family member. They had recorded after authorization and deleted after the transcripts. Each interview had an average duration of 40 minutes. Psychological listening and observation as tools in practice during the interviews had highlighted.

The steps to analyze the data from the two sources of information: questionnaires and interviews are described in: 1st stage: transcription of the data, followed by the readings, which enabled the familiarization and appropriation of the material to be worked; step 2: analysis, with the objective of organizing the answers that composed each question. The information obtained in each group had analyzed separately and later integrated into common categories; step 3: From the previous elaboration, the categorized responses had interpreted for the final synthesis. At this stage, we sought to identify and know the singularities and similarities in the contents expressed by the two groups of participants.

As pointed out by González-Rey (1997), the analysis of the data in the qualitative epistemology is a theoretical-methodological perspective that is destined to the research of psychological processes. This perspective, based on historical-dialectical materialism, reveals the limits of theories that aim to describe phenomena not articulated to the context of the research subjects. It is a dynamic process, because in the interpretation, the researcher must seek to understand the context and the contradictions expressed by the participants.

Results and Analysis

The analysis had established in three dimensions for the two groups (Teachers and Families) participating in the research: "Think", "Feel" and "Act" on violence. In view of this, we outline the results and reflection by categories, by unit of meanings, for an understanding of the distinctions or similarities in the views presented by teachers and families.

Teachers' perspective

As they answered the first question, "What is violence to you?”- Thinking dimension - teachers presented in their answers three categories: a) action directed at the other (58.3%), b) typical actions (33.3%) and c) relational action (8.3%). In view of this, we perceive an instrumental value of violence, in which the action is destined to the other with intentionality. Thus, we consider there is a relationship of power that has instrumented by violence, showing the unequal way of treating the other. By typifying the phenomenon of violence, based on the nature of the acts, they responded by qualifying as: verbal, psychological, emotional and physical.

In this direction, accessing what they think is important to know how the process of consciousness has constituted. Thinking can be materialized by language and, as Vygotsky (1934/2001) says, "Thought is not expressed in the word but is realized in it, so it would be possible to speak of the formation of thought in the word" (p.409).

The second question, "Have you ever lived and what did you feel in a situation of violence?" - Feeling dimension - allowed knowing the senses attributed by teachers, analyzed by a psychological perspective, understanding and identifying how they have affected by violence. In these responses, all of them affirmed that they had experienced a situation of violence and teachers presented the categories of feelings: a) impotence (21%), b) rape (5.2%), c) fear (10.5%), d) revolt D) anger (10.5%), e) sadness (15.7%), f) uncomfortable (10.5%), g) humiliation (15.7%); h) revenge (5.2%). One notices how much and how teachers feel affected by violence, failing to associate violence with others and bringing it to themselves in their professional work space, portraying violent school space that generates humiliating and impotent experiences.

To know the actions - Act dimension - in front of the situation of violence has used the question "Which actions of referrals in this situation of violence?". The answers obtained had interpreted considering the referral and organized into four categories: a) dialogue (35.71%) as the most frequent action presented by the teachers, which precedes the referral to the school management. The action of dialogue as a referral in situations of violence has a preventive character, generating processes of awareness; however, the way it had presented, shows that this dialogue has directed at the student so that he makes the mistake and changes the behavior, in many cases having as consequences a punishment with warning or suspension. Another category was elaborated through what the teachers named as: b) "legal means"² (28.57%) in which they associated the police making police report in the police station for events that happened outside the school and inside they requested aid of the management team (director, deputy director and pedagogical advisor) in conflict resolutions. Other actions such as c) conformism (21.42%) realized by the action of silencing, ignoring or not being able to do anything in the face of violence, and d) confrontation (14.28%) in order to attract attention, discipline and ask students to assume the practiced action had carried out by teachers in their professional practice when they experienced situations of violence.

The teachers who indicated actions for dialogue or referrals to management as a form of accountability of students for the acts committed, observed that the behaviors persisted. Even when strongly corrective strategies had the character of repairing a situation and ended up taking a punitive tone, such as not participation of practical physical education classes, or reduced recreation time, or suspensions. This allows us to reflect on the need to seek the cause of actions, through the existing context and perspective of each subject in action. For Martin-Baró (1988), violence must be reflected by its causal roots in the constitution of the subject, since it must be considered through the relations of the mode of production and consequent social relations. The effects produced by violence have to consider in the face of the complexity of those who experience it daily in oppressive sociocultural confrontations, which generate psychological problems, which are different from those that have not lived directly situations of vulnerability and violence.

For Martin-Baró (1988), violence had reflected by its causal roots in the constitution of the subject, since it has to consider through the relations of the mode of production and consequent social relations. The effects produced by violence must considered in the face of the complexity of those who experience it daily in oppressive sociocultural confrontations, which generate psychological problems, which are different from those that have not lived directly situations of vulnerability and violence.

Thinking about violence, from its context, makes it possible to act in the causal focus and thus to collaborate with the process of awareness of the people involved in violent action. It is necessary for the professionals of the school to advance through this process, because the school space, which is development, enables links and strengthening of social relations generating support, partnership and thus transformations in everyday life. This task is not immediate. It requires the collaboration of Psychology professionals, specialized in human development, who, in partnership with the educational actors, enable the school to deal with situations of conflict and violence.

Family Perspective

When asking families "what is violence for you?" - Thinking dimension - the responses had organized into two categories a) typified as violence and b) domain relationship. In the category of typified as violence (64.28%), physical, verbal, emotional and psychological violence were cited, citing corresponding words such as: assaulting, beating, spanking, maltreating, cursing and discussing, in which all had associated with the community context , neighborhood).

Some mothers, when thinking about the phenomenon of violence, cried and this indicates how affected and vulnerable they are, suffering from situations that are part of their daily lives. In one of the reports, during the first minutes of the interview, when asked about violence, a mother (F01-2017) reported the difficulties she faced in keeping her teenage daughter in a professional team because of the treatment for eating disorders, because of bullying suffered at school. She reported the entire psychosocial trauma she experienced, the distance from her home hospital, her unfavorable financial situation, which led her to ask for food and help her neighbors to get on with her daughter's treatment outside of school. Even with so many apparent indicators, it was not possible for this mother to identify that her daughter had lived other stories of situations of violence still in childhood. In relation to her overweight, responding to the understanding of violence, only as physical aggression ("I do not know ... beating "/ F01-2017), a socially naturalized construction that qualifies action whether violent or not), seeking to understand the motives and not only the acts.

Another category of this dimension was the domain relationship (35.72%) - revealed by situations such as threats, punishment and naturalization of violence. These manifestations have imbricated in the interviewees' discourses, involving a historical process through the relations of power, class struggle, structure and social relation, configured by an ideological impregnation resulting from the interests of one particular group over the other.

The violence, as an instrument of domination within an unequal relationship of power, assumes a value of the class struggle. Thus, conformism and fatalism meet as a human response to a cycle of unperceived suffering. The fatalism reveals a sense of conformism and negative or indifferent passivity, in the sense of not taking responsibility for the dynamics of socially experienced violence (Martin-Baró, 1987).

In the second question "Have you lived and what did you feel in a situation of violence?" - Dimension feel - feelings about violence had involved with daily living. 86% of the mothers and grandparents interviewed reported having experienced a situation of violence. The following categories of feelings related to violence had found: a) fear (44.44%), b) sadness (27.7%), c) loneliness (16.6%), d) disappointment (5.8%) and e) revolt. The propagation of violence, as an instrument of control, constitutes a representation characterized by these feelings. This is because feelings had embedded in social relationships. The fear category was the most evident in the answers presented. The experiences had related to the family context of conflictive relationships, school fights when they were of school age, as well as assaults and attempted rape.

According to Martín-Baró (1985), from a social order of violence, everyone has oppressed by the fear that produces the action. The culture of violence that produces subjective and social insecurity begins produced to achieve a purpose in social control. Thus, to maintain the social structure, psychological repression has used to paralyze and oppress, inhibiting coping actions. In view of this, the meanings attributed to social relations reflect behaviors that may be of conformity and passivity in life itself. Therefore, feeling sad, lonely, disappointed or angry implies a suffering condition.

For Minayo (2005), violence, in its familiar or institutional expressions, has represented in four ways: physical, psychological, sexual and abandonment. It has understood as physics, one that uses force in the production of damage to the other. Psychological violence has in its context the intentionality of hurting or dominating emotionally, damaging the development and well-being of the other. Sexual violence imposes sexual practices through force, through grooming or threats. Abandonment refers to the absence or refusal of necessary care in a social relationship necessary for full human development. Therefore, the feelings generated by the violence involve social impacts present in the relations of the school.

In the third, question "What actions of referrals in this situation of violence?" - Action dimension - The categories "legal means" (35.29%), silence (29.41%), dialogue (18.3%) and did not know how to respond (17%) had raised. Families who sought the police in situations of robberies, as a possibility of action for the violent event, did not find a figure of protection or welcome which can lead to a situation of naturalization of violence. In relation to the school, as a legal means to act in the face of violence, we perceive the action after the conflict installed and not in a preventive way, because of a process of awareness of the conflict. With regard to domestic and / or family violence, mothers and grandmothers reported that they often use the strategy of silence or isolation, but when conflict involves their children, they seek to guide them. The silence was one of the main factors in the maintenance of violence in the family context, therefore, it is fundamental to understand this state of those who are silent or refrain from speaking. The action in not communicating is a reaction to the current model of society, in which one fears the relation with the other or even by erroneous understandings of the religiosity, used as instrument of alienation and dominion. When they brought questions about the school, the families pointed out to seek dialogue with management, especially in situations of conflicts involving their children. Freire (1980) understands that dialogue provides human relations, in contact with the other and their reality enables the action of listening, speaking and reflection in the process of awareness.

The families make sense of the school as a trusted space for education, teaching, mentoring, and caring for their children. Thus, dialogue, combined with the planning of shared actions, can contribute to the mediation of conflicts and, in a preventive and collective way, to change the relationships manifested by acts of violence.

The representativeness of those who did not know how to respond had related to the doubt about what to do or even the situations of violence presented by the media communications that use this phenomenon as perverse entertainment, allowing events of damage to the other as something common.

Final considerations

We consider as objective to know how the school and the family understand violence and as a synthesis, we conclude that violence is represented by the stories and daily life of families bringing a personal and subjective character to the phenomenon. For the school, represented by some of its professionals, violence had reported as an action of violation directed at the other in their rights, which shows a distance from their concrete reality experienced daily in society.

Feelings such as fear, sadness and revolts pointed to experienced suffering, both by school professionals and by families. On the other hand, the actions taken in situations of violence considered the search for "legal means", such as the police station, when it was about violence outside the school, and the management, to resolve conflicts related to the school context.

The forms of action against violence had approached through dialogue as the first attitude by teachers and a better option, but for families, legal means and silence were the first actions carried out, and the dialogue third action carried out in situations of violence. We understood that the meanings presented diverged because, while the school sought dialogue, in order to the students assume the "mistake" or generate a punishable path, families sought the school for collaborative guidance on how to educate their children in situations of existing conflicts.

When the school and the family refuse the dialogue to each other, placing the responsibility on the other in situations of violence, they end up allowing the naturalized violence. Given this, we understand that the relationship between the school and the families, as it has configured, does not favor the development and learning of children and young people.

The school knows the families through formal procedures, fulfilled by schedules of family meetings and educators whose purpose is the delivery of bulletins or complaints of student behavior. There are also calls for these reasons. However, we understand that this relationship configuration does little to reflect or discuss the concrete needs of the school and the families in the development of children and young people. This type of relationship does not bring closer and, in face of daily violence, can trigger the (re) production of it.

Thinking about the school and family relationship, strengthening actions are necessary, in partnership and collaboration with possible participative practices, since violence in the school is an issue that needs faced with the complexity demanded by this phenomenon and still better understood.

The Psychology committed to its ethical-political character, inserted in the school, can collaborate in preventive plans for coping with violence. It could be through actions such as: a) raising the presence of risk indicators for the development of children and young people, with families; b) to plan actions with the teachers to know the families, characterizing the social and psychological aspects; c) know children and young people and their living conditions, to understand their development processes. In addition, d) instigating discussion spaces between school and families; e) participate in school activities to develop a bond and understand the dynamics of the school.

We know that the possible path of change to the foundations of this unequal society can overcome by education. We understand that Psychology, contributing to the process of development and learning, provides a link between school and family relationships. As a result, we emphasize the defense of Psychology as part of the technical team of the school, contributing in the spaces of discussion about human development and assisting in the investigation of the concrete reality of the school context and its surroundings. Thus, pedagogical activity, in its causes and subjective effects, would have tools belonging to Psychology in the understanding of human development and relationships involving school and families, to manage the situations of violence that occur with their students.

Referências

• Ariès, P. (1978). História social da infância e da família (D. Flaksman, Trad.). Rio de Janeiro: LCT.
• Diéguez, A. J. (1987). La investigación-acción: Una metodologíadidáctica, para laparticipación y acción social. In Diéguez, A. J; Fidanza, E. L.; Rofman, A. R. (Org.), Elementos teóricos para la formulación de una metodología de investigación participativa y capacitación, de mujeres de sectores populares, conorientación económica (pp. 8-14.) OEA/CIM-Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Córdoba (Argentina). (Trabalho original publicado em 1983).
• Freire, P. (1980). Conscientização: teoria e prática da libertação - uma introdução ao pensamento de Paulo Freire (3ª ed.). São Paulo: Cortez & Moraes.
• Freire, P. (2003). Educação e Mudança Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.
• Freitas, F. L. (2016). A relação escola e família; analise de uma política em construção Tese de doutorado, Unicamp, SP. Disponível: http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/305331
  » http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/305331
• Guzzo, R. S. L. (1990). A família e a educação: uma perspectiva da integração família-escola. Estudos de Psicologia, 7(1), 134-139.
• Guzzo, R., Ribeiro, F.; Meireles, J.; Feldmann, M.; Silva, S.; Santos, L.; Dias, C. (2019). Práticas Promotoras de Mudanças no Cotidiano da Escola Pública: Projeto ECOAR.Revista de Psicologia da IMED, 11(1), 153-167. doi:https://doi.org/10.18256/2175-5027.2019.v11i1.2967
  » https://doi.org/10.18256/2175-5027.2019.v11i1.2967
• Guzzo, R. S. L. (2015). Risco a proteção: Análise Crítica de indicadores para uma intervenção preventiva na escola. In Viana, M. N.; Francischini, R. (Orgs.), Psicologia Escolar: que fazer é esse? (pp. 9-36). Brasília-DF: CFP.
• Guzzo, R . S. L.(2016). A (des)igualdade social e a Psicologia: uma perspectiva para o debate sobre a pobreza. In Ximenes, V. M.; Nepomuceno, B. B.; Cidade, E. C.; Moura Junior, J. F. (Org.),Implicações Psicossociais da Pobreza Diversidades e Resistências (pp. 149-162). Fortaleza: Expressão Gráfica e Editora.
• Guzzo, R. S.; Mezzalira, A. S.; Moreira, A. G. (2014). Desafios, Ameaças e Compromissos para os Psicólogos: as políticas públicas no campo educativo. In Oliveira, I. F.; Yamamoto, O. H., (Orgs), Psicologia e Políticas Sociais: temas em debate (pp. 215-238). Belém: Editora da Universidade Federal do Pará.
• Guzzo, R . S. L., Mezzalira, A. S . C; Weber, M. A. L. Sant’Ana, I. M., Silva, S . S. G. T. (2018). Psicologia Escolar e Família: Importância da Proximidade e do Diálogo. In Souza, V. L. S. T.; Aquino, F. S. B.; Guzzo, R . S. L.; Marinho-Araújo, C. M. (Orgs), Psicologia Escolar Crítica: atuação emancipatória nas escolas públicas (pp.143-162). Campinas, SP: Ed. Alínea.
• Guzzo, R . S.; Moreira, A. P.; Mezzalira, A. S. (2011). Avaliação Psicossocial: desafios para a prática. Avaliação Psicológica, 10(2), 163-171. Disponível: http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S167704712011000200007&lng=pt&nrm=i
  » http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S167704712011000200007&lng=pt&nrm=i
• Guzzo, R. S. L.; Tizzei, R. P. (2007). Olhar sobre a criança: Perspectiva de pais sobre o desenvolvimento. In Guzzo, R . S. L. (Org.), Desenvolvimento infantil: Família, proteção e risco (pp. 35-57). Campinas, SP.
• González Rey, F. L. (1997). Epistemología cualitativa y subjetividad São Paulo: EDUC.
• Ibáñez, L. L. C. (2011). A Psicologia social de Martín-Baró ou o imperativo da crítica. In Guzzo, R. S. L.; Lacerda Jr. F, (Orgs.), Psicologia Social para América Latina: o resgate da psicologia da libertação (2ª ed., pp.121-151). Campinas, SP: Editora Alínea.
• McTaggart, R. (1997). Guiding principles for participatory action. In McTaggart, R. (Org.), Participatory Action Research: International Context and Consequences(pp.25-43). Albany: Suny Press.
• Martín-Baró, I. (1968). Los cristianos y la violencia. Teoria Critica de la Psicología, 6, 415-456. Disponível: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/5895373.pdf
  » https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/5895373.pdf
• Martín-Baró, I. (1987). O Latino indolente: caráter ideológico do fatalismo latino-americano. In Montero, M. (Coord.),Psicologia Política Latino-Americana (pp.135-162). Caracas: Panapo.
• Martín-Baró, I. (1988). La violencia em Centroamérica: una visión psicosocial. Revista Costarricense de psicología, 12(13), 21-34.
• Martín-Baró, I. (2012). Acción y ideologia: Psicología Social desde Centroamérica (2ª ed.). San Salvador: UCA Editores. (Trabalho original publicado em 1985).
• Meireles, J . (2015). Ecos da Violência: a perspectiva de estudantes de uma escola pública Dissertação de Mestrado, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas, Campinas- São Paulo. Disponível: http://tede.bibliotecadigital.puc-campinas.edu.br:8080/jspui/handle/tede/354
  » http://tede.bibliotecadigital.puc-campinas.edu.br:8080/jspui/handle/tede/354
• Minayo, M. C. S. (2001). Pesquisa Social. Teoria, método e criatividade (18ª ed.). Petrópolis: Vozes. Disponível:http://www.faed.udesc.br/arquivos/idsubmenu/1428/minayo2001.pdf
  » http://www.faed.udesc.br/arquivos/idsubmenu/1428/minayo2001.pdf
• Minayo, M. C. S. (2005). Violência: um velho-novo desafio para a atenção à saúde. Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica, 29(1), 55-63. Disponível: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/psoc/v29/1807-0310-psoc-29-e141683.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/psoc/v29/1807-0310-psoc-29-e141683.pdf
• Moreira, R. R. (2012) A designação de violência em dicionários de língua. Revista Fragmentum, 33, 40-48. Disponível: https://periodicos.ufsm.br/fragmentum/article/view/6752
  » https://periodicos.ufsm.br/fragmentum/article/view/6752
• Oliveira, C. B. E.; Marinho-Araújo, C. M. (2010). A relação família-escola: intersecções e desafios. Estudos de Psicologia, 27(1), 99-108.Disponível:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103166X2010000100012&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt
  » http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103166X2010000100012&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt
• Organização Mundial da Saúde[OMS] (2002). Informe mundial sobre laviolencia y salud Genebra: OMS. Disponível: https://www.cevs.rs.gov.br/upload/arquivos/201706/14142032-relatorio-mundial-sobre-violencia-e-saude.pdf
  » https://www.cevs.rs.gov.br/upload/arquivos/201706/14142032-relatorio-mundial-sobre-violencia-e-saude.pdf
• Patto, M. H. S. (1992). A família Pobre e a Escola Pública: Anotações sobre um Desencontro. Psicologia USP, 3(1/2), 107-121. Disponível: http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678- 51771992000100011
  » http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678- 51771992000100011
• Pino, A. (1995). Semiótica e cognição na perspectiva histórico-cultural. Temas em Psicologia, 3(2),31-40. Disponível: http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413389X1995000200005&lng=pt&tlng=pt
  » http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413389X1995000200005&lng=pt&tlng=pt
• Pino, A. (2007). Violência, Educação e Sociedade: um olhar sobre o Brasil. contemporâneo. Revista educação e sociedade, Campinas, 28(100),763-785. Disponível: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/es/v28n100/a0728100.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/es/v28n100/a0728100.pdf
• Saviani, D. (2013). Pedagogia Histórico-Crítica e luta de classes na educação escolar Campinas: Autores Associados.
• Toassa, G. (2006). Conceito de Consciência em Vigotski. Psicologia USP, 17(2), 59-83. Disponível: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/pusp/v17n2/v17n2a04.pdf
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/pusp/v17n2/v17n2a04.pdf
• Tonet, I. (2005). Educação, Cidadania e emancipação humana Rio Grande do Sul: Unijuí.
• Vigotski, L. S. (2001). Pensamento e palavra. In Vigotski, L. S.A construção do Pensamento e da Linguagem São Paulo: Martins Fontes. (Trabalho original publicado em 1934). Disponível: https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/2477794/mod_resource/content/1/A%20construcao%20do%20pensamento%20e%20da%20linguagem.pdf
  » https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/2477794/mod_resource/content/1/A%20construcao%20do%20pensamento%20e%20da%20linguagem.pdf

• 1
  Process 2.033.253/2017 - Research Ethics Committee.
• 2
  This category has enclosed in quotation marks, since it was the term used by school professionals and families.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  04 Nov 2019
• Date of issue
  2019

History

• Received
  23 Jan 2018
• Accepted
  01 May 2018