Vozes que constituem o discurso da igualdade educacional na base nacional comum curricular brasileira

Abstract

This research aims to understand the discourse of educational equality present in the National Curricular Common Base (BNCC). Therefore, I approach the discourse of educational equality as an object of research, with the BNCC as the main document for the search for this discourse. Therefore, the guiding question of the research was to know: how is the discourse of educational equality in BNCC built and sustained? Based on this question, I have built three specific objectives, which are as follows: a) To discuss the hegemonic voices present in the discourse of equality in the BNCC; b) Understand the relationships between educational equality and social equality in BNCC; c) To listen in the statements of BNCC materiality possibilities of libertarian gaps as counterwords to the discourse of educational equality. In this way, the text is organized into three chapters, which comprise the effort to achieve the three proposed objectives, one in each chapter, respectively. This research is based on the theoretical perspective of Philosophy of Language, by the Bakhtinian thought. The theoretical references used as a basis for understanding and developing the research methodology are the writings of Bakhtin and his Circle, as well as contemporary scholars of Bakhtin's theory, such as Geraldi, Miotello, Ponzio, among others. Therefore, the collation was used as a means of putting the constituent voices of BNCC in relation. Thus, I start from the statements of the BNCC so as to compare with voices that are characterized as counter-words that arse during the BNCC‘s construction process, so I bring the dialogue with the BNCC, as a counterpart to Letter 01/2015 from Anped and, Repudiation Notes from Anped and Anfope. Thus, made the search for the voices that constitute the statement from BNCC statement, through the study of the discourse, it was possible to understand that the statement of the BNCC is constituted by hegemonic and non-hegemonic voices and that the hegemonic voices appear actively as an attempt to smother the other words, the BNCC being a gateway to commodified education and, for the hegemonic discourse, since it is predominantly constituted by hegemonic voices, characterized by agents of the financial sector who are present in its construction. However, considering the Bakhtinian assertion that a discourse is always dialogical, in which there are at least two voices, I understand that in the materiality of the BNCC there are libertarian chinks, which are non-hegemonic voices constituting discourse as a responsive act, being understood as such as counterwords to the hegemonic thinking that constitutes the discourse of educational equality in the BNCC. There is, in the materiality of the document, a strong dispute, with voices in tension that sometimes struggle to maintain a certain order of things and, at other times, struggle to put in words other possibilities.