Realidades em contato : construindo uma interface entre a educação especial e a educação do campo

• Ano de defesa: 2016
• Autor(a) principal: Anjos, Christiano Félix dos
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BR; Mestrado em Educação; Centro de Educação; UFES; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação
• Palavras-chave em Português: Special education; Education in the country; Narrative; Interface; Educação do Campo; Narrativa; Análise de interação em educação; Educação especial; Educação rural; Pesquisa educacional – Narrativas pessoais; Educação; 37
• Link de acesso: http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/8592

Caiado and Meletti (2011), Jesus, Anjos and Bergami (2011) and Marcoccia (2010) highlight the paucity of studies on the interface of Special Education with Education in the Countryside. The study aims at unveiling and questioning this interface based on the subjects who produced knowledge about these two modalities of education in the Postgraduate Program in Education at the Federal University of Espírito Santo, Brazil. The methodology we employed made use of Santos’ (2011) cartography and we understand the productions as symbolic maps that show the drawings of given reality from the studies. Once we understand theses and dissertations as narratives, we analyzed these texts and went after the authors so as to obtain clues about Special Education and/or Education in the Country such as they have reported in their studies. Going further, we sought to understand the interface in its life story, in its stages before the respective academic production, in which authors, from a new perspective, can narrate their own studies. We also used census data to outline a scenario of enrollment of special education students in schools in the countryside. In our theoretical framework, we made use of Santos’ (2006) Sociology of Absences and Sociology of Emergences, as well as the work of translation. In the results, we identify three categories: clues of invisibilization machanisms of special education students in countryside schools; visibilization movements of these students departing from counter-hegemonic resistance actions; and the proximity between special education and education in the country. We highlight the importance of further studies on the interface of special education/education in the country because our studies show traces of total invisibilization, even for those created in the interface. We need to avoid other periods of silencing.