Educar para quê? Uma análise gramsciana da prática do educador social com crianças e adolescentes

Abstract

This thesis has as initial point the following problem: why does the practice of the social educator educates children and adolescents who live inhumane situations due to the precariousness of material, cultural and social factors legally defined as social risk and vulnerability? Connected to the question, it was defined as a general objective to analyze the purpose of the practice of the social educator with children and teenagers in order to contribute to their theoretical and practical consolidation through a case study of the Wall Ferraz Center of Conviviality, located in the region of Santa Maria da Codipi in Teresina-PI. It was also identified the conception of social education and social educator, as well as contents, limitations and possibilities that emerged from the practice of the investigate subjects. The object of study is the practice of the educator analyzed on basis of Gramsci thought and in authors who are close to this theoretical-political connected. Qualitative research was used through the strategy of the case study and procedures such as semi-structured interview for data construction, documentary analysis, participant observation and content analysis technique. A total of fourteen subjects were organized by segment, namely one general coordinator, one social worker, nine social educators and three students who shared their thoughts about social education, practice and social educator. The research shows that the social education based on the legal contexts of basic social protection of the national policy of social assistance is linked to a large extent to the neoliberal political project that values for collaboration to the detriment of the contestatory discourse of the capitalist order, as an epidermal process that seeks to encourage citizen coexistence and the behavior change of the students, but without radically problematizing the current context. In this relation, the educator's practice is restricted to promote prevention-intervention in situations of risks and vulnerabilities and to enable students to live in class society. In this direction, the educator's practice is restricted to promoting prevention-intervention in situations of risks and vulnerabilities and to allow students to live in class society. Thus the educator manifests itself as mediator of coexistence, conflict solver and modifier of students' attitudes. On the opposite way, what defends itself is the education, the practice and the social educator involved to the construction of the hegemony of the subalterns.