Permanent Teacher Qualification in Pedagogical Project (Re)Construction: Possibilities

1

PERMANENT TEACHER QUALIFICATION IN PEDAGOGICAL PROJECT (RE)CONSTRUCTION: POSSIBILITIES AND CHALLENGES

Maria de Fátima Barbosa ABDALLA

Santos Catholic University

Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Ghent, 19-21 September 2007

The proposal here is to discuss results and issues emergingfrom an investigation carried out with teachers/coordinators from municipal schools in the Baixada Santista metro region, in the State of São Paulo, based on the Pedagogic Coordination and Work Organization at School Course (SME/UniSantos partnership). The goal was to understand the meaning of (re)constructing the pedagogical project for permanent teacher qualification.

From this perspective, this paper follows the idea set forth in the survey, beginning with the pedagogic project notion, seeking to list a few definitions, and then emphasizing the need for the search for qualityand for the meaningof the work carried out in the schools.

We will then analyze the meaning of this project in qualifying the actors inside the school, highlighting, on one side, the principles required to organize pedagogic work and, on the other, the basic elements that allow us to revitalize the mode of action and intervention in the school praxis.

And, at a third moment, we will concentrate our comments on the possibility this project is contributing to overcoming a few of the challenges one must face in daily school life and to build the teachers’ permanent professional identity.

It must also be kept in mind that a few questions come up immediately when one intends to trail this path. Among them, we will highlight those that seemed to be the most troublesome to us: how can weform opinions about the pedagogic project considering such different realities? Furthermore, how can this project actually transform the School and its actors and, by doing so, become a strategy to understand changes are hard, but possible(Freire, 1997: 88)? These and several other issues must be analyzed and discussed on an ongoing basis with the entire educational community, as it is this community that will give meaning to this process of conceiving, performing and evaluating, which translates in building the School’s pedagogic project.

It must also be kept in mind that the comments we will make also have to do with ideas set forth by the other interlocutors that have written on this theme (Carvalho, 1993; Barbier, 1996; Gandin e Gandin; 1999; Libâneo, 2001; Veiga, 1995; 2004; among others). From this perspective, we hope to contribute to assisting teachers in an ongoing updating process of their individual and collective plans.

1. In search of the meaningand for the requiredqualityof the pedagogical project

The most immediate images the pedagogical project notion remits us to regard activities that may be carried out (and how intentionally), to the agents/actors who are able to materialize them (and how they will do so), and the directionone expects to give to the commitment designed in the thoughts and actions of those who share the school context. This commitment encompasses, as Veiga (2004: 20) says, the search for qualityandmeaningin the pedagogic project, the biggest requirement of which is to reflect on who we want to educate.

Firstly, it must be stated that the pedagogic project concept is rather elastic, as it can mean a permanent process of organizing the school’s pedagogic work globally(id: 15). But what does that actually mean?

In search of answers, together with teachers/coordinators, we listed a few definitions which, to Barbier (1996: 57-58), arerepresentations that allow one to understand the project as a combination of means that allow the objective that was established to be reached; a process that puts the action one intends to develop into practice; a sequence of activities; an action program/plan. In sum, a sense of anaction project, the purpose of which is to understand the work carried out in the school to transform it.

In this regard, it was possible to bring the following issues up: if the pedagogic project is an action project, that seeks to organize the school’s work in order to achieve changes, how can one search for quality? And, furthermore, what would that mean in the school context dynamics and for ongoing teacher qualification?

Facing these questions, and based on the qualification episodes (a qualification strategy that allowed for the exchange of experiences and for case analyses), we started analyzing the meaning of the different projects to qualify these teachers /coordinators.

2. The pedagogic project as a space of possibilities: understanding therules of thegame

To learn the meaning of the pedagogic project with this space of possibilities, as Bourdieu (1996) says, first and foremost it is necessary to understand the rules of the game, which guide the specific work the teacher has to carry out to become the subject of his/her existence, of his/her own projects, and how to materialize them.

But what are these rules? How can they be defined as a position to take-on positionsin order to give new meaning to the pedagogic project as a space of possibilities, as indicated by Bourdieu (id.: 265)?

Seeking for answers, we analyzed the meaning of the pedagogic project for teacher qualification. To do so, we highlight, on one side, principlesthat lead to understanding how pedagogic work is organized and, on the other, basic elementsthat can (re)build a more democratic, solidary project.

2.1. Principles to organize the teacher’s work and redefine the pedagogic project

It is very important that we go deeper into what we are considering as organizing principles to redefine a pedagogic project that highlights a coherent set of options, ideals, knowledge and proposals. Among the principles, we also emphasize those that can contribute with a view of the whole, giving meaning (and direction) to the teaching and educative work done in school and in classrooms, guiding, therefore, the (re)construction of the desired pedagogic project. These are the principles.

The1stprincipleis based on on understanding thefactors and determinantsthat hinder the teacher’s action/reflection and end up interfering with the pedagogic project’s actual implementation, negotiated collectively. Among these factors and determinants, together with teachers/coordinators, we thought it necessary to: 1stAcknowledge the impact new communication & information technologies have; 2ndReview, on an ongoing basis, the logic behind productivity and the market; 3rdRedefine sociocultural and educational policy values; 4thReflect on: a) the function of learning legitimate knowledge/values and the meaning of the act of learning; b) the school, as the monopoly of information and as the center for human qualification; c) the family, as a partner (or not) of the teacher/student work.

From this perspective, we can consider a 2nd principle, which involves defining professional identity. It was significant for the group to name a few of this identity’s dimensions by: 1stAnalyzing the conditions that delimitthe practices; 2ndUnderstanding the theory/practice relationship; and 3rdBecoming aware of the communication processes and of how to undertake the task of teaching (classroom management & control).

The3rd principle is related to thewillingness to change, in other words,to a new“habitus”–the generating and unifying principle (Bourdieu,1997: 21-22), with distinct and distinctive practices. To the teachers/coordinators, in order to think about the possibilities of change it is necessary to acknowledge: 1stThe school, as a teacher action/qualification context; 2ndTeaching as the teacher’s task, allowing room for cultural diversity and human emancipation; and 3rdThe curriculum as a place where teachers can intervene, incorporating teaching and research on the actual constructionof the pedagogic practice.

However, to organize these principles, which is in fact what set out to do, we highlight a few basic elements for pedagogic project construction which, all things considered, are the aspects these principles “stitch” or principles that are “stitched” by these aspects.

2. 2. On the basic elements to build the pedagogic project

We call thembasic elementsbecause they are the ones that help us face the more essential issues when seeking to build a pedagogic project: who are we? What do we want for our school? What do we do, as teachers/coordinators? And how do we do what we propose to do?

We developed two basic elements toaccount for some of the outputs: 1st Redefinition of the problematic situation surrounding organizing the pedagogic work; and, 2ndThe different stages involved in building a pedagogic project that allows one to give quality and meaningto the school context and to the permanent qualification of the teachers who work there.

On redefining pedagogic work organization

Insofar as analyzing this aspect is concerned, it is important to analyze the first two questions: who are we? And what do we want for our school?

It is while seeking answers for these questions, and based on the teachers’ needs regarding their identity and the problematic situation they face in daily school life, that we can understand the project as a historically conditioned process, belonging to a society, but notonly to reproduce, but, also, to influence this same society, as Sacristán states (2000: 148).

In this renewing intervention space, the pedagogic team and, especially, the teachers, are responsible forpinpointingtheir positions in the rules of the game as imposed by the current society and by the school context. To do so, it is necessary to think about how to organize the best pedagogic work which brings theabsent quality in it and which isalways rated asutopia, asRios says (2001: 138).

This involves, above all, collective work that implements democratic debates in order for decision making to be more aware and critical. In this perspective, we highlight the importance of: 1st.Knowing the needs/expectations of the group teachers, students, and the school community have; 2nd.Gain deeper knowledge about the viewpoints that recover the institutional and social interest; 3rd.Give new meaning to collective work as a valuable moment for social and educative practice.

However, by redefining who we are and what we want as a pedagogic team, we must also keep two other issues in mind: what do we do as teachers/coordinators? And how are we doing what we propose to do?

One of the ways (not the only one, though) to map our intentions and actions, as the school’s collectiveness, is to register a work plan and/or action plan. To do so, it is fundamental to reflect on the different stages involved in (re)constructing the pedagogic project the group intends to achieve: we call this the 2nd basic element, as follows.

On the different stages involved in building a pedagogic project

As Neves (1995: 110-111), we believe there are certain stages involved in building a pedagogic project.These stages contribute to an understanding on how the project’s agenda is materialized, something that translates into the analysis of the problematic situation, in the objectives put up for discussion, and, mainly, in understanding the rules of the game, such as: strategy selection, implementation, follow-up and evaluation of the entire pedagogic process. They include:

1st Stage: diagnosing the situation

It is in this phase that we survey the indicators to evaluate our conditions (material, financial, human) and needs/expectations for quality, meaningfulwork. Based on this analysis, we can actually organize the school and potentialize its operation, never taking for granted, however, that it is part of a specific culture, the social and economic profile of which has already been instituted, but which must undergo changes that are instituted.

This situation diagnosis must draw the actors/agents closer together to redefine the problematic situation. It must also be kept mind that this approximation takes-on several dimensions: 1stContextualized approximation – in which the ideas and practices are explored; 2ndParticipative approximation– when there is an exchange of experiences, a critical work of participation in which conceptions, methods, activities, and results the team discussed are listed; 3rdFormative approximation– when the group is guided towards the more critical decision-making process, allowing better envisioning of the proposed project’s implementation and follow-up.

To us, this diagnosis will only be successful if the actors/agents are the most engaged as possible, next to each other and dedicated to a collective, committed work. It is the sense of belonging, in which we come increasingly closer to each other and outline a social space, afield of forces, as Bourdieu would say (1997: 50), capable of conserving or transforming teachers’ fields of performance.

2nd Stage: The guidelines (fundamentals and conceptions)

So far as the second stage is concerned, it must thus be investigated which guidelines (foundations and conceptions) are subsidizing the educational policies and how the school and the classroom are being managed, guiding curricular development, the teacher’s work, and their respective qualifications. But how can these issues be discussed in order to enhance teacher limits and possibilities when confronted with daily life challenges?

We believe one way to get about doing this is by clarifying the guidelines, conceptions, and the fundamentals, as well as our purposes relative to these aspects. This means the pedagogic team must be suspicious of any imposition that is made on educational policies or by a more authoritarian management. In this regard, one must take-on a critical resistance, as Giroux (1997: 186) states: that isn’trandomandisolated, and that allows theintellectuals to undertake theircrucial role in mobilizing such resistance in a praxis that has political impact. To us, this praxismust undergo moments that help us reflect on the need: 1stto reformulate the teacher’s political and mediating role within and outside of the school; 2ndto develop a curriculum, i.e., forms of action and of awareness; 3rdto motivate the exchange of experiences, allowing deeper reflections on what is at play.

An important point that must also be considered has to do with the critical understanding of how the pedagogic team can lead these issues. We believe that what matters the most is to develop a line of thought about building and defining actions, one that discusses and debates these “legal impositions,” in order for the experience one has in school to be more critical, aware, one that is made legitimate by all parties involved. There must be an action plan to reach this objective. That will be our next stage.

3rdStage: the action plan

The pressing question now ishow to elaborate an action planthat can diagnose the entire problem situation that seeks to implement, follow-up on and evaluate actions to overcome it. What would this plan be built on?

An action plan would have to situate the entire diagnosis, indicating the goals to achieve, listing priorities, describing the support teams and their tasks, organizing activities, a study timeline, meetings, etc. The action plan should also contain the evaluation, follow-up and support actions, identifying the physical and human resource forecasts and provisions.

To guide an action plan, it is necessary to organize the several activities to be performed. Libâneo (2001: 174-176) reminds us these activities can be grouped in four action areas, organizing: a) school life (the school as a whole); b) the teaching and learning areas (teacher and student work); c) technical and administrative support activities; d) the activities that bind the school to the community.

In this regard, the action plan should contextualize the school as a whole, to reflect on the collective senses and interpretative schemes of the subjects in it.

4th Stage: implementation

The fourth(and last) stage deals with implementing the actions that were planned. This means, as Bourdieu (1996: 15) would say, simplylooking at things head-on and seeing them as they are. In this process, it is importantto highlight at least three aspects: 1st evaluation, which must be permanent, thus, performed in all process stages; 2nd follow-up and the respective support for the actions that were set into motion; and, 3rd resource forecast and provision. It is then necessary to kick-off an evaluation process (qualitativeand regarding qualifications) thatencompasses an acknowledgement of the modes of action and intervention in the school praxis, whether by analyzing what can be done and the speeches and representations of what the pedagogic team dreamed of achieving.

3. The pedagogic project as astrategy/wager: from challenges to possibilities

While unveiling the pedagogic project as a strategy/water to face the challenges imposed by daily life, together with the teachers/coordinators, a few issues came up: after all, what are the possibilities the pedagogic project allows for in the school context and, particularly, for ongoing teacher qualification? How can the project be a strategy and, meanwhile, a wager to highlight the uncertainty of action, facing risks, dialogues with the new, a possibility of finding solutions for new situations (Morin, 1999: 79)?

We will reconsider the school concept to show in what regard the project can mean a wager in the sense of contributing to its quality and becoming the possible expression of the strategy of updating the strategies and uses of its actors’ margins of autonomy, as Lima (1996: 31) says. In this regard, the pedagogic project, over and beyond the risk and wager aspects it contains, is an idealized way to mobilize teachers to materialize their work to deal with the educational policies, the existing conditions, interpersonal relations, local problems, and other challenges.

And what does the pedagogic project mean for permanent teacher qualification? How does it contribute to all teachers facing the uncertainties of their actions?

Based on the above-mentioned principles, it was also possible to outline a few significant axis of the importance of building the pedagogic project for a more critical and aware collective work and, thus, for qualityand meaningful qualification. These axes may be understood, according to Morin (1999: 79), as “cognitive strategies,”as they allow “information to be extracted from the ocean of noise; for the proper representation of a situation; to evaluate mishaps and elaborate scenarios for action.”We highlighted the following axes orcognitive strategiesand/oraction strategieswith the teachers/coordinators:

Contextual analysis of the school as a social practice

When considering the contextual analysis of the school as a social practiceas one of the axes or strategies to contribute to teacher qualification we are, in principle, strengthening the idea that it is at school, understood as a “social phenomenon,” as Sierra (1996: 119) says, that “relations and interactions” are mediated.