Training of YAE teachers working in socio-education with deprivation of liberty



SOUZA, Eliane Silva [1], SANTOS, Maria Margarete Cerqueira dos [2]

SOUZA, Eliane Silva. SANTOS, Maria Margarete Cerqueira dos. Training of YAE teachers who work in socio-education with deprivation of liberty. Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento. Year 05, Ed. 08, Vol. 08, pp. 103-124. August 2020. ISSN: 2448-0959, Access link:


This article analyzes the theme of the training of teachers of Youth and Adult Education (YAE) who work in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty. In order to discuss the training of teachers of the YAE of the said educational context, the study, with a qualitative approach, involved bibliographic research, questionnaire and participant observation in the production of information. The study was developed in an YAE school, linked to the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty, of the Municipal Education Network of Salvador, Bahia, and the result of the investigation shows that there are fruitful initiatives with formations that emerge from the needs of the educational field. In addition to continuing education, teachers weave the construction of training networks, seeking solutions through peer discussion, where experiences are divided, knowledge is re-meaning and possibilities are constructed, generating a process of co-formation, collaborating with the rupture in relation to the weakening of the YAE promoted by precariousization in initial education.

Keywords: Teacher Training, Youth and Adult Education, socio-education, education as a law.


In this article we analyze the theme of the education of teachers of Youth and Adult Education (YAE) who work in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty, where we implement a discussion about elementary concepts to the understanding of teacher education from the perspective of training to the consolidation of an education as a right. The discussion dilates the theme of teacher education, enabling reflections about the consolidation of an education that breaks with the perspective where the immutability of the logic that governs the structured world in the capitalist production model is conventional.

To address the theme from the perspective presented, we put the following problem: to what extent does the training of YAE teachers, who work in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty, contribute to the consolidation of an education as a right? This is an issue that needs to be studied in the direction of problematization, discussion, reflection and the possibility of institution of new understandings about teacher education.

The implementation of the study of this problem promotes the formulation of the following general objective: to discuss the training of YAE teachers who work in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty. From this objective, we tried to bring to the field of discussion the subjects of the YAE, the precariousin the formation of teachers and the urgency of a training in the perspective of institution of changes in the field of The YAE considering its specificity.

The deepening of the discussion to which this study is dedicated requires the definition of the following specific objectives: to reflect on the conception of the YAE, the subjects and the training of teachers who work in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty and to discuss the training of teachers of the YAE in the perspective of the consolidation of education as a right. This is a significant discussion, because it provides reflections on the education of teachers who work in an educational context with subjects who have their trajectory marked by the processes of exclusion of rights, including the right to education, where the training of the Teacher of JaS can be a potentiating element of the process of rupture of this exclusion.

Thus, this article is structured by this introduction, where we highlight the theme, problematic, general and specific objectives. Next, we present the methodological procedures involving the research approach and the devices used in the production of information; the theoretical assumptions and the discussion of elements related to the theme; the considerations resulting from the discussion and reflection provided by the study; and, finally, the references used.


The tessitura of the article results from a qualitative study developed from questions ” […] related to socially conditioned interests and circumstances resulting from a certain insertion in the real, finding its reasons and objectives […]” (MINAYO, 2002, p. 18). Considering Chizzotti (2003), we see in qualitative research the possibility of

investigation of human phenomena, always saturated with reason, freedom and will, are possessed of specific characteristics: they create and attribute meanings to things and people in social interactions and these can be described and analyzed, without statistical quantifications. (CHIZZOTTI, 2003, p. 222).

The implementation of the study involved bibliographic research, questionnaire application and participant observation. Through bibliographic research, we raise theoretical references analyzed and published, allowing access to already structured knowledge about the theme studied (SILVEIRA; CÓRDOBA, 2009). The bibliographic survey provided the discussion involving the information produced about the teachers through the questionnaire, a device that favors access to knowledge of a broad group of subjects (GIL, 2019), through participant observation, an efficient way of accessing meanings linked to the subjects’ actions (HAGUETTE, 2013), and information regarding students of the YAE of the context surveyed, linked to socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty.

As for the context where we produce the information related to the subjects of the YAE, teachers and students, this is a school of the Municipal School Network of Salvador, Bahia, which exclusively serves adolescents and young people linked to socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty, due to what is provided for in the Statute of the Child and Adolescent (SCA) in article 124 (BRASIL, 1990), with Law No. 12,594/2012 of January 18, 2012, establishing the National System of Socio-Educational Care (NSSEC), defined in Article 15, as defined in article 15, the requirement that, for the registration of deprivation of liberty programs, it is necessary to ensure the existence of an educational establishment with adequate facilities and in accordance with the reference standards (BRASIL, 2012).


We can start by considering the YAE as a modality constituted to the reparation of a loophole left by the conception of the right to education as privileges of some. This definition includes the modality as a space for overcoming the gap constituted by the denial of the right of access and permanence in school, space for political debate, for human formation, for social emancipation and for thinking about other possibilities of organization of our society from education to ‘other possible worlds’ (GADOTTI, 2011).

The idea of educating for ‘other possible worlds’ consists, as presented by Gadotti (2011), in educating for life, for human quality, overcoming the logic of capitalism, in order to develop an education based on criticality instead of forming labor to move the gears of the market. This is an education perspective that aims to problematize the way of production and, consequently, the way of producing human existence. It assumes that changes in the world cannot dispense with changing people and changing their mentality. Thus, “to educate for other possible worlds is to educate to overcome the dehumanizing logic of capital that has in individualism and profit its foundations, is to educate to radically transform the current economic and political model” (GADOTTI, 2011, p. 98).

Thus, the YAE is understood as a space of struggle and confrontation in relation to the discrepancies produced by a world that operates based on the logic of production and consumption, where the production of the collectivity is expropriated from those who produce for the enjoyment of a small group. In relation to this group, it is not interesting to uncover the fact that all sorts of adversities resulting from the exclusion of basic rights stem stems from the perverse logic of this production model for consumption, driven by the incessant production of synthetic needs.

This process of struggle and confrontation is equivalent to the questioning of the capitalist production model as the only viable, equivalent to the questioning of a production logic that has no commitment to the production of what is truly necessary, not respecting life and the limits of the planet’s resources. From this logic “neoliberalism conceives education as a commodity, reducing our identities to those of mere consumers, disregarding the public space and the humanist dimension of education” (GADOTTI, 2009, p. 18).

In the terms we are discussing, the YAE is a space of problematization focused on criticality and the unsealing of artificial elements naturally naturalized according to the fatalist guidelines of the market. Considering the ideas of Beltrán and Montané (2011), we have in this field of education a possibility of political literacy, based on a broad project of emancipatory character, a perspective of mentality change, overcoming human cosification and the way of relating to the world and with people. It is, therefore, the constitution of a space committed to the development of a new consciousness, aiming at overcoming our mental boundaries to the constitution of networks for ‘social linkage’.

From the dialogue with Marques (2018), as well as the reading of Jardilino and Araujo (2015), we realize that through international events, where adult education is discussed, it is possible to reconstruct the design of the conception that this field has had over time. The International Conferences on Adult Education (Confinteas), throughout its six editions, is an opportunity for this reconstitution with the discussions initiated in the post-war context, when it sought to undertake a global organization focused on progress and the restoration of peace between nations.

The development of the first conference was attended by twenty-seven countries and twenty-one international organizations, held in Denmark in 1949, where Brazil did not participate. The results of the studies indicated that Adult Education should be developed to appropriate the specificities and functionalities of the care to the subjects, as well as the methods and techniques.  It pointed to the need to discuss the problems related to the living conditions of populations aiming at the production of a culture of tolerance and peace and recommended the continuity of the activity due to the evidence that adult education was an emerging and global theme.

In 1960, eleven years after the first conference, The Confintea II took place in Montreal, Canada, where forty-seven countries, forty-six non-governmental organizations and two countries as observers participated. This edition reinforced the importance of the role of Adult Education that should be understood as the task of all developing nations with the support of developed countries. Adult Education had two distinct approaches at this conference: the first, conceiving it as a continuation of formal education, comprising it as a continuing education and the second, comprising it as basic education or community education.

The III Confintea took place in 1972 in Tokyo, Japan, with the participation of eighty-two countries, with three in the observer category, thirty-seven international organizations and three organizations linked to the United Nations. The theme of this conference was Adult Education in the context of lifelong education. In the discussions, the perspective of Adult Education was evidenced as a subject of formal education from the idea of reintroducing subjects, especially the illiterate, into the formal education system.

The creation of the International Council for Adult Education and the Faure Report contributed to the discussions at that time and influenced the guidelines for this edition of the conference. In the same decade, the Unesco General Conference, held in Kenya in 1976, defined that each country should recognize Adult Education as a basic element and permanent action in the construction of public policies, expanding educational actions aimed at guaranteeing the fundamental right to education.

In 1985, in Paris, France, iv Confintea took place. This conference was the theme ‘learning is the key of the world’ and was attended by one hundred and twelve countries, as well as united nations agencies and non-governmental organizations. At the time, Adult Education was discussed as a right and in a perspective of continuing education or lifelong learning. From Gadotti’s perspective (2009) this was a conference marked by the plurality of concepts since “[…] many themes were presented, among them: adult literacy, post-literacy, rural education, family education, women’s education, health and nutrition education, cooperative education, vocational education, technical education.” (GADOTTI, 2009, p. 9).

In the 1990s there were many events, such as the World Conference on Education for All in Jomtien, Thailand, where the concept of Adult Education continued to count on a diversity of interpretations. This conference argued that adult literacy would correspond to the first stage of basic education, establishing the understanding that literacy cannot be detached from post-literacy. The countries participating in this conference made the commitment proposed in the World Declaration on Education for All.

In 1993, the New Delhi Conference was reaffirmed, reaffirming the commitment made in Jomtien and making commitments and setting goals to meet the basic learning needs of children, young people and adults. From the definitions of these conferences several countries have made educational reforms. In Brazil, this movement has had an impact on public educational policies with the elaboration of a new Law on Guidelines and Bases of National Education (LGBNE), Law No. 9,394/96, where Youth and Adult Education won a special chapter (COSTA; MACHADO, 2017).

V Confintea was held in 1997 in Hamburg, Germany. This edition was understood as a milestone in the understanding of what adult education is. The theme of the conference involved the discussion about adult learning as a tool, law, pleasure and responsibility. The conference was a space in which we sought to expand the role of popular education in the political guidelines of the participating governments. This edition included one hundred and seventy countries, five hundred non-governmental organizations and about one thousand and three hundred participants. This conference was very significant for Brazil due to the occurrences that culminated in the constitution of the YAE Forums (COSTA; MACHADO, 2017).

According to Costa e Machado (2017) the Ministry of Education (MEC) promoted several meetings in Brazil in 1996 involving state and municipal departments of education, non-governmental organizations, unions, universities, representatives of companies and popular movements, in sum, several segments that worked with the YAE, with the aim of building a diagnosis of the reality of the YAE in Brazil. All segments were involved in the MEC’s proposition and prepared a report that would be presented at the Latin American and Caribbean Regional Meeting, a preparatory meeting for V Confintea.

The document “demonstrated the low education of the young and adult population in the country and the inefficiency of several discontinuous actions of governments, which hindered the consolidation of the YAE as a public policy” (COSTA; MACHADO, 2017, p. 106). In January 1997, the delegates who had been elected at the Brazilian meetings were surprised, at the Latin American and Caribbean Regional Meeting, with a document delivered by MEC representatives that did not correspond to that resulting from the collective elaboration process that had taken place throughout the country.

Although these facts show that the relationship between state and civil society was marked by tensions

[…] the political strategy of mobilizing the segments ended up representing an important moment in the consolidation of a network of institutions, entities and people who, when they perceive each other together, saw the condition of a more organic intervention in the attempt to build the YAE policy, which resulted in the emergence of the YAE forums of Brazil […]. (COSTA; MACHADO, 2017, p. 107).

This occurrence resulted in the reconfiguration of the relationship between the State and civil society, creating the necessary conditions for Brazil to be able to apply and host the VI Confintea, which took place in Belém in 2009. It had the participation of one hundred and forty-four countries, as well as representations from civil society organizations, social partners, united nations agency, intergovernmental and private sector organizations. Brazil prepared itself through the mobilization of the State forums for Youth and Adult Education, regional and national meetings, with meetings aimed at bringing people together to describe the state of the art regarding the education of young and adult people in Brazil. The document produced at these meetings was incorporated into the base document of the conference and delivered to UNESCO.

The theme of the conference was ‘Living and learning for a viable future: the power of adult learning and education’. In this edition, the right to education was reaffirmed as an essential element that needs to be extended to all young people and adults. The education of women, vulnerable populations such as indigenous people, people deprived of liberty and rural populations was established as a priority. It was emphasized, in the documents elaborated, the priority that should be given to literacy in the context of continuing education and professional training of all who seek continuity of their studies.

Marques (2018) points out that in this last edition appears the idea of building a viable future, present in the discussion of Paulo Freire, as well as the idea of education as a right, underpoured the conception of adult education in a way that until then had not been consolidated in the other editions of the conference. Marques (2018) points out that in the path taken until the establishment of this understanding, the concept of Youth and Adult Education was linked to the conceptions of an education developed to meet the demands of the capitalist economic model, reflecting in the discussions and referrals of conferences.


The subjects of the YAE, referring to the subjects who demand the development and supply of the modality, are subjects who have been denied basic rights, including the right of access and permanence in school at the age idealized as “adequate”. Although they went through this denial of the right to education, YAE students experienced, experienced, produced, established exchanges, etc., were socially, politically and economically productive and productive, within the exclusionary limits imposed by the organization of our society. These subjects arrive in the classrooms with an immense range of knowledge that can yield shares and constitute as starting points and problematizations, the basis for the constitution of actions and practices that will be developed by teachers.

By dialoguing with Arroyo (2005) we realized the need to configuration youth and adult education as a specific field of public responsibility of the State, understanding/identifying the need for JaS policies to return to the guarantee of specific rights of subjects, respecting the specificities of their life, youth and adultlife, instead of addressing weaknesses in schooling experiences.

It is necessary to understand who these subjects are and recognize their protagonism, because they are young people and adults who follow a human trajectory marked by the struggle in the face of the perversity of social exclusion and the denial of basic rights. In addition, it is necessary to relate this trajectory of denial experienced in their human paths with school trajectories, understanding the perverse dimension of this relationship. This situation demonstrates vulnerability in life trajectories and the right to education. According to Gadotti (2009), the subjects of the YAE “[…] had a negative experience of the school and re-including them in it requires the adoption of educational and cultural methodologies and practices that do not reproduce the mistakes made before, in the school they attended and from which they were expelled” (GADOTTI, 2009, p. 16).

The subjects of the YAE are protagonists in social movements, culture, struggle for another social organization and struggle for their rights. This aspect deserves the attention of those who formulate educational policies, being understood in its real dimension of movements of young people and popular adults around their rights, the need for policies respecting the time of life and their needs, especially the right to education, avoiding the conception of a threatening and violent protagonism, which triggers in configurations of preventive educational policies (ARROYO , 2005).

The configuration of the YAE as a public policy and state duty must occur from the recognition of popular youth and adults as subjects of rights, lacking to look at these subjects from a positive perspective. “The right to education cannot be disassociated from social rights. Human rights are all interdependent. We cannot defend the right to education without associating it with other rights” (GADOTTI, 2009, p. 16). This awareness of rights also needs to be developed by the subjects themselves and this can be observed from the participation of young people and adults in social movements and in the struggle for their education.

In relation to the young and adults of the YAE, it is fundamental to perceive that throughout history they are always poor subjects, who experience unemployment and act in the informal economy, experiencing the limits of survival. These are popular young people and adults linked to a certain social, racial, ethnic and cultural collective that is historically maintained (ARROYO, 2005). This perception avoids the dilution of these collectives in a generic definition of the subject of the YAE, interrupting the perpetuation of the denial of rights. It must also be shown that,

When we establish the most vulnerable social groups as a priority for the right to education, we must include illiterate people there and also those deprived of liberty. […] The education of persons deprived of liberty must be integrated into the global campaign for the right to education. (GADOTTI, 2009, p. 19).

The constancy noted in the profile of the subjects of the YAE throughout history deserves attention, because it denounces the fact that education has not been developed as rights of all and, coincidentally, has been excluding the same collectives. Arroyo (2005) signals six aspects of the history of the YAE linked to the Popular Education Movement with which we can learn: the need to start from a real view of the subject considering their trajectories and conceptions; any YAE proposal needs to consider popular knowledge and dialogue with them; there are specificities in the trajectories of the subjects of the YAE, which are not linear, a fact that needs to be considered in any proposal; focus on popular education as a process of humanization; existence of tension between school knowledge and the subjects of the YAE; and the need for political interpretation of the trajectories of the subjects of the YAE.

With regard to the YAE and the school systems, it is necessary to understand that in the plastering of the second never fell into the trajectories and knowledge of the subjects of the first. The unpredictability present in the life trajectories of the subjects requires a reconfiguration of the specificity of the YAE in so that the right to education of the popular sectors can be guaranteed. Thus, an YAE configuration as the right field of subjects of the popular sectors is fit.

The analysis of information[3] related to the profile of the students of the YAE of the studied context evidences that from the universe of sixty-one students enrolled, 2% is from the Metropolitan Region of Salvador, 36% from Salvador and 62% from twenty-five different cities in the interior of Bahia. It is a collective of subjects who, for the most part, cannot count on the collaboration and systematic support of their families and, because they originate from various points of the state, compose an extremely diverse universe in the classroom, in addition to the diversity normally found in schools.

This is a context of YAE where the black subject predominates, coming from peripheral communities, which is circumscribed in the collectives of the YAE that Arroyo (2005) evidences, with histories of life marked by the deprivation of the right to education, as well as other basic rights. Considering the information of the current enrollment of the school where the survey was conducted, it is evident that the subjects have an age group of thirteen to twenty years. In this collective, 1% are thirteen years old, 49% are between fifteen and seventeen years old and 49% are between eighteen and twenty years old. In this group of students 8% attend Classes of Learning Time (LT) I, which has equivalence to the 1st year, 36% attend classes of LT-II, equivalent to the 2nd and 3rd years and 56% attend LT-III, equivalent to the 4th and 5th years of elementary school.

Based on the information we present, we observed that in the Education of Youth and Adults for adolescents and young people deprived of liberty, in the context investigated, there is an important challenge to be faced, which is part of a field of struggle and resistance and a search for rupture with utilitarian understandings of the YAE that limits it to a space of mass formation for the gear of the capitalist production system.

The subjects of the YAE linked to socio-education with deprivation of liberty are responsible for the disruption with the definitions contained in the legal provisions that regulate life in society. However, it is necessary to consider all the elements, social, economic and political, conditioning the trajectories of these subjects so that we do not insedate in a minimalist reading of the facts that led them to deprivation of liberty. This expanded perspective puts us before the incessant production of exclusions of rights promoted by the capitalist production model from which it is possible to evidence that these subjects constitute the denunciation of the fierce dehumanization of this production model.


The Municipal Education Network of Salvador, Bahia, has two schools that serve exclusively adolescents and young people in compliance with socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty. Analyzing information related to the lócus school of the research, we have a group consisting of eleven teachers who act as first or second pedagogue in classes of LT-I, LT-II and LT-III, which are equivalent to the first phase of elementary school. We obtained information from this group, 73% of the teachers of the school, composing the group whose information we present below to help the discussion.

Of the group of teachers, 62% have temporary ties to the school, while 38% are effective public employees. In this group, 63% of the teachers work exclusively at the school, while 37% also work in other institutions. Considering the time of work in the YAE in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty, we found that 50% have one to two years, 25% have less than one year of work, while 25% work at school between five and ten years. In relation to the time of performance in the teaching profession, 38% has between six and ten years, 26% has between sixteen and twenty years, 12% has up to five years of experience, 12% has between eleven and fifteen years and 12% has twenty-one years or more of performance in the teaching.

When considering initial training, all have a degree in Pedagogy, and 75% have a specialization course, while 25% of the group has only a degree. In relation to the areas in which the teachers of this group have specialization, we identified the following: specialization in psychomotricity; media production for online education; Pedagogy for the Initial Series; education, technological processes and innovative practices; school management and coordination; literacy and literacy; socio-educational measure; and visual impairments in the Early Series. It is evident, therefore, that there is no specific training in JaS. Only one teacher has specialization that dialogues with the context of socio-education, but with a focus restricted to the context of the socio-educational measure without any clipping in the YAE. The teachers state that they did not have access to discussions about the YAE in their initial training.

The information we present regarding the teachers who work in the YAE in the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty leads us to Faria (2012), author who develops a contemporary debate about the initial and continued education of teachers who work with young and adult people. His ideas enable us to understand anchored in the challenges arising from an educational process developed in a capitalist context.

In this capitalist context there is the emptying of the State’s responsibility to provide a humanizing education, which considers all the potentialities of the subjects. Thus, the State is excluded from the guarantee of the right to education for all, acting in the production of the naturalization of the mistaken idea that the distancing from the school and the difficulty of staying in it is due to the action of the subjects themselves. Certainly the absence of specific training for the YAE corroborates with such mistaken ideas. In addition, most teachers have a short immersion time in the educational context, in addition to 62% of the group having temporary ties, elements that hinder the search for continued training focused on the specificity with which they work.

The high number of teachers with temporary ties will certainly impact on the consolidation of a group that can build and share knowledge about the experience developed in the educational context, a movement that could contribute to reduce the effects of the lack of training that discusses the specificities of the YAE. Considering this scenario, we perceive a double process of disregard: the first as there is no opportunity for discussion in the initial formation about the specificity of the JaS, the second when the group of teachers will not continue their experience in the educational context, which will end with the end of the temporary contract, preventing the problematization of experiences and the resignification of teaching knowledge specific to the educational field.

These elements can be understood as conditioning factors / producers of an exclusionary Brazilian education, as Faria (2012) states, even if they have legally constituted the right to education for all, including those who could not access it at an age idealized as “own”. In order to adequately size the responsibility for the denial of the right to the subjects of the YAE, it is also possible to consider that they

[…] they are almost always belonging to minority groups, such as black women, especially black women, subjects of popular localities, workers and workers informal and also unemployed. They are also individuals who carry with them two main brands, one, that they have never attended school and the other who have already had access to formal education, but who, because of their work and the struggle for their own survival, have not continued the schooling process. (FARIA, 2012, p. 7).

Thus, it is understood that the longing and demand for teacher training can be the starting point, because the training of these subjects should be understood as a “[…] field of struggle and reconfiguration” (FARIA, 2012, p. 2), which enhances the security of the educational rights of young people and adults. According to Faria (2012), there is a low number of investigations of the experiences and specialized knowledge of YAE professors, requiring the University to legitimise the YAE as a field of research and can assume the development of a teacher training potentiating the constitution of the YAE as a right, overcoming the wrong practices of education and softened to those who had interrupted educational processes , or who were unable to access the school.

The historical process of Education in Brazil, with the undervaluation of teacher education, lack of investments in specific training of YAE teachers and conceptions based on the “[…]  neoliberal discourse expressed in the policies of the YAE at the end of the 1990s” (FARIA, 2012, p. 8), which guided the teaching practice with proposals denying adequately qualified educational possibilities for the development of the subjects of the YAE considering their potentialities , resulted in the elaboration of misconceptions of these student subjects, which began to be identified as coming from “school failure”.

This undervaluation of the teacher training of the YAE teacher is evident in the invisibility that the modality has in the initial teacher training courses. Certainly this gap in the process of initial teacher education helps to strengthen the mistaken conceptions about the JaS and the subjects. This perception is shared by Dantas, Nunes and Laffin (2017) when they state that:

[…] the education of young people and adults is marginalized or placed in the background in most curricula of pedagogy courses and in teacher training degrees for the various areas of knowledge, causing an important gap in the initial training of teachers who can act (and sometimes already act) in the modality of the YAE. (DANTAS; NUNES; LAFFIN, 2017, p. 185).

Faria (2012) establishes a reflection about the initial and continued formation of the YAE teacher pointing out some needs: the need to overcome the mistaken conceptions about young people and adults and on the real reasons that kept them away from school or that led to the interruption of their educational process; the need to recognise respect for the guarantee of the right to education for all; the need to develop specific research on the training of YAE teachers; the need for a permanent dialogue around an innovative education, which seeks solutions and answers in favor of improving the quality of life of subjects; the need for structured education based on the social practices constitutive of the subjects; and the need for mobilization and commitment of teachers in favor of protagonism, liberation, emancipation and promotion of the struggle and resistance of the student subjects of the YAE in relation to the expropriation of their knowledge and actions in the capitalist context.

These elements pointed out by the author provoke us to reflect on the formation of teachers who work with the YAE in the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty, aimed at adolescents and young people who comply with socio-educational measures, as well as on these student subjects and on the repetition of stories of dropouts and difficulty in staying at school. These reflections highlight the urgency of discussing the specificity of the JaS in the initial training of teachers, the need for the development of continuing education for those who already work in the context and a policy of valorization that allows the composition of a group of teachers who can immerse themselves in the long-term educational context, instead of temporary contracts.

Still considering information from the group of teachers working in the YAE in socio-education with deprivation of liberty, we perceive latent the search for the consolidation of continuing education to the constitution of more in-depth understandings about the YAE in the educational context. This search has taken place from several fronts. The first involved the group’s engagement for studies and discussion of the YAE curriculum developed in the educational context.  The studies developed between 2015 and 2016 resulted in the design of a curricular matrix, according to Santos, Lago and Souza (2018), which led to the creation of Resolution CME 001/2018, which deals with the regulation of pedagogical guidelines aimed at school care for adolescents and young people in compliance with socio-educational measures enrolled in the Municipal Education Network of Salvador.

The second involved the reactivation, in 2017, of the working and discussion groups, previously constituted for the development of studies and discussion of the curriculum, to resume studies aimed at the development of a Pedagogical Political Project for the YAE linked to the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty in the Municipal Education Network of Salvador. This action is in progress, involves studies, discussion, written production, preparation of seminars and has walked, including, with the dissemination of experiences in scientific events as observed in Reis, Santos and Nascimento (2018).

These formative processes that emerge on the school floor are extremely significant. According to Dantas, Nunes and Laffin (2017) the school is an important locus of training and “[…] assuming the school in its daily life as a privileged place for training becomes more than a probable choice, it is a fundamental pedagogical requirement for the exchange of experiences, discoveries, learning […]” (DANTAS; NUNES; LAFFIN, 2017, p. 184). It is consistent with these ideas the fact that the two formative experiences, described above, provided learning, discoveries, resignifications of specific issues of the YAE developed in socio-education with deprivation of liberty with a sense that would hardly be achieved in a type of proposal far from the school and its questions.

A third front in the search for continuing education involves the entry of teachers into master’s programs with research linked to the YAE linked to socio-education with deprivation of liberty. In the Professional Master’s Program in Youth and Adult Education (MPYAE) and the Graduate Program in Education and Contemporaneity (GPEC), both from the University of the State of Bahia (USB), there are two ongoing studies developed by teachers of the school studied.

In one of the studies, the continuing training of teachers is focused, enabling, along the training path, the research and production of knowledge, which corroborates with a deeper understanding about the specificity of the YAE in the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty, as well as with the configuration of the YAE as a specific field aimed at guaranteeing the right to education to those who had this right denied due to an education marked by the characteristics of a social organization , excluding and perverse political and economic. The other research involves the investigation about a gamified methodology, aiming at the institution of significant pedagogical practices, providing a condition for the effectiveness of school educational action to the subjects of the YAE in the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty.

The discussions provided by these investigations and the approximation between the educational context studied and the university have provided other formative opportunities, reaching all teachers and school managers. In this way, a fourth front emerges in favor of teacher training that gained concreteity with the partnership between the school and the Training Research Group, Technologies, Distance Education and Curriculum (ForTEC/UNEB) through an improvement course entitled “Curriculum and socio-educational school spaces of the municipality of Salvador: socializing curricular practices as pedagogical innovation”, through which it is intended to develop a continuous training action based on collaborative principles to support, both in theoretical aspects, and in methodological aspects, the pedagogical work of teachers, seeking to validate curricular practices in an innovative, emancipatory and citizen perspective.


The formative experiences that have been experienced by teachers of Youth and Adult Education linked to socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty need to dialogue with the knowledge of the subjects, since, in search of a humanized proposal of education, based on an emancipatory project, one cannot dispense with dialogue with diversity and with specificities, as well as with the condition that the subject says “his word”.

We have in Freire (2018) the denunciation of an education that coisificats the subjects and the announcement of the possibility of a humanizing and liberating education. These extremes are visualized from the Pedagogy of the Oppressed. From a project for the few to the idea of education for all, the History of Education in Brazil highlights the process of operationalized dehumanization from devices such as curriculum, school organization and micropolicies that permeate relationships. This perception ensures the importance of freirean legacy to the potentiation of dreams, the effectiveness of the struggle and the consolidation of another education project.

If banking education, subtracting the voice of the students and the realization of the dialogical relationship in the educational process, surrounds the possibilities of people educating each other, in the YAE this model, which initially amputated access and permanence in school, can later produce, through its perverse nature, the idea that the fault of the mispaths in the school is the subjects themselves. Finally, the production of a mass on the margins of social organization, where even their workforce assures them of participation as productive people to guarantee their subsistence, denounces the rigor of the perversity of this educational model.

Women, men, poor, black, white, Indians, manual workers, informal market, peripheral, simple origin, plucked, adolescents and young people deprived of liberty, the same collective to which the YAE is dedicated throughout its history. In the search for the overcoming of compensatory education, based on an ideal of “right age”, teachers and teachers, together with other subjects linked to social movements that have popular education in their fight agenda, try to reorganize the field of the YAE, establishing it as the Right to Education, ensuring the recognition of specificity as a field of public responsibility towards the subjects for which it is instituted , respecting their knowledge, voice and trajectory.

It is not enough to read, write and calculate to the subject of the YAE. It is necessary to express, problematize and reflect on the relationships and contradictions present in our society. The YAE student linked to the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty has a life trajectory in society and in their relationships and experiences developed knowledge that needs to be considered. There is no way to achieve a change-driving education if we take scenarios for contextualizing the educational process taken from the subjects’ reality.

The thematic universe of people’s lives needs to be the starting point for the development of a sensed education. This recognition is an attitude of opposition to banking education. In the times and spaces in which their life history takes place, the subjects of the YAE are protagonists of struggles driven and strengthened by the dream of a better, fairer and more dignified life. Educational projects built with students are potentially fertile to the development of a critical awareness about the contradictions of our society, in which the idea of rights for all is replaced by the practice of rights as privileges for the few, impacting people’s lives.

As it establishes the critique of education that corroborates the reproduction of an unequal and perverse world Freire (2018) provokes and strengthens the restlessness, desire and hope to institute proposals in the field of the YAE to the constitution of a look that strengthens the understanding that, in the construction of a humanized and liberating education and in the idea of building a more just society project , we are all subjects of possibilities. Such understandings have been structuring for the concretety of formative experiences involving the subjects in the lócus of research.


The discussion we have established is quite significant for the training process of YAE teachers who work in the context of socio-education with deprivation of liberty. The formative path constructed through ongoing research that was identified in the investigated context and the co-formation processes that are woven have legitimized the importance of considering the YAE and its subjects respecting and valuing its specificities. These elements are opportunities for the understanding of this field of education in a critical way, analyzing it as a field conditioned by the logic of the capitalist production model, but which also carries the potential to provoke the unsealing of false naturalized conceptions as truths to maintain the oppression of the subjects.

The reflexive process that we have constructed, and that we try to reveal in some way in the tessitura of this article, implies the understanding that the changes necessary to the YAE undergo a formation built on the perceptive of the counterposition of the fatality that the capitalist production model, based on production and unbridled consumption, is the only viable. Accepting this fatality is to accept the naturalization of exclusion, deprivation of rights and dehumanization of the subject in a world that has widened the gulf between rich and poor.

Teacher training needs to be developed in a critical perspective in order to unease the deceptive truths, strengthening the struggle and confrontation to consolidate the YAE as a field of public responsibility of the State to the subjects, needs to be potentiating dreams of change and aggregating knowledge to strengthen the practice in the field of action in the YAE school , consolidating the space of action as a place of resignification of knowledge.

This conception of teacher education is fruitful, has life and is made thinking about lives that need to be considered, respected, that need to be strengthened to be lived in the best possible way. The YAE school is a place full of life, diversity, dreams and much struggle of those who insist on not succumbing to vicissitudes. Thus, the teacher needs a good training, which enhances the possibilities of the lives with which he will live and learn each other.

This is a perspective of training that has rigor, but that is not mechanistic. Rigor lies in what is essential to the exercise of teaching with conscience and responsibility. A teaching involved with questioning and searches, inherent to the investigative spirit, by a knowledge that is not static, but dynamic and alive, because it can always be re-meant. In this perspective, our belief is that teacher training is an opportunity to resignify our view of the YAE and to vicejar the possibility of effecting it as a right, resignifying our understanding of the meaning of educating for substantial changes in society.

Considering the information we brought to the discussion in the sections of this article, it is evidenced the distancing from the initial training of teachers of the YAE, which acts in the context of socio-educational measures with deprivation of liberty, as a basis for the consolidation of the YAE as a right, since the teachers went through a training process that neglected the discussions regarding the specificities of the YAE. Another element that does not collaborate with this perspective of education is the devaluation of the teacher and the impediment of long-term ties in the educational field due to temporary contracts.

However, fruitful initiatives are evidenced with the formations that emerge from the needs of the educational field identified by the teachers. These experiences provide the construction of networks involving subjects who are restless and seek solutions through peer discussion, where experiences are divided, knowledge is re-meaning and possibilities are constructed, also generating a process of co-formation. These initiatives can be understood as a movement of rupture with the weakening of the YAE promoted by precarious training.


ARROYO, Miguel. Educação de jovens e adultos: um campo de direitos e de responsabilidade pública. In: SOARES, Leôncio; GIOVANETTI, Maria Amélia; GOMES, Nilma Lino (org.). Diálogos na educação de jovens e adultos. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2005. p. 19-50.

BELTRÁN, José; MONTANÉ, Alejandra. Educación de personas adultas para la vinculación social. In: TEODORO, António; JESINE, Edineide (org.). Movimentos educacionais e educação de adultos na Ibero-América: lutas e desafios. Brasília-DF: Liber Livro Editora. 2011. p. 215-240.

BRASIL. Lei nº 8.069, de 13 de julho de 1990. Dispõe sobre o Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente e dá outras providências. Brasília: Presidência da República, 1990.

BRASIL.  Lei nº 12.594, de 18 de janeiro de 2012. Institui o Sistema Nacional de Atendimento Socioeducativo (SINASE). Brasília, 2012.

CHIZZOTTI, Antonio. A pesquisa qualitativa em ciências humanas e sociais: evolução e desafios. Revista portuguesa de educação. vol. 16 n. 002. Universidade do Minho: Braga, Portugal. 2003, p. 221-236.

COSTA, Cláudia Borges; MACHADO, Maria Margarida. Políticas Públicas e Educação de Jovens e Adultos no Brasil. São Paulo: Cortez Editora, 2017.

DANTAS, T. R.; NUNES, E. J. F.; LAFFIN, M. H. L. F.. Formação de professores e práticas educativas na EJA. In: AMORIM, A.; DANTAS, T. M.; AQUINO, M. S. (org.). Educação de Jovens e Adultos: políticas públicas, formação de professores, gestão e diversidade multicultural. Salvador: Edufba, 2017. p. 183-204.

FARIA, Edite da Silva. A precarização e a (des)profissionalização docente na Educação de Jovens e Adultos trabalhadores. In: Anais do VIII Seminário do Trabalho: Trabalho e Políticas Sociais no Século XXI: 25 a 28 de junho de 2012/ coordenação geral: Giovanni Alves… [et al.] – Marília – SP: UNESP, 2012.

FREIRE, Paulo. Pedagogia do oprimido. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 2018.

GADOTTI, Moacir. Educação de Adultos como direito humano. São Paulo: Editora e Livraria Instituto Paulo Freire, 2009.

GADOTTI, Moacir. Boniteza de um sonho: ensinar-e-aprender com sentido. 2. ed. São Paulo: Editora e Livraria Instituto Paulo Freire, 2011.

GIL, Antonio Carlos. Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. 7ª ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2019.

HAGUETTE, T. M. F. Metodologias qualitativas na sociologia. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2013.

JARDILINO, J. R. L.; ARAÚJO, R. M. B. Educação de Jovens e Adultos: sujeitos saberes e práticas. São Paulo: Cortez Editora, 2015.

MARQUES, M. O. Educação de Adultos, Educação ao Longo da Vida: revendo conceitos. Roda de conversa realizada em 01 de outubro de 2018. Universidade do Estado da Bahia: Programa de Mestrado Profissional em Educação de Jovens e Adultos – MPEJA, Salvador-BA: UNEB, 2018.

MINAYO, M. C. de S. Ciência, técnica e arte: o desafio da pesquisa social. In: MINAYO, M. C. de S. (org.) Pesquisa social: teoria, método e criatividade. Petrópolis, RG: Vozes, 2002. p. 9-30.

REIS, A. C. da S.; SANTOS, M. M. C. dos; NASCIMENTO, C. C.. Projeto Político Pedagógico para a EJA na socioeducação com privação de liberdade: a busca da garantia do direito à educação dos sujeitos. In: Anais do V ALFAeEJA encontro de pré-abertura de Salvador. Salvador: UNEB, 2018. v. 2. p. 101-107.

SALVADOR. Resolução CME 001/2018. Dispõe sobre a regulamentação de diretrizes pedagógicas para atendimento escolar de adolescentes e jovens em cumprimento de Medidas socioeducativas na Rede Municipal de Ensino de Salvador. Diário Oficial do Município, Salvador, BA, nº 7.054, 23 fev. 2018. p 13.

SANTOS, R. R.; LAGO, C.; SOUZA, E.S. . Percurso Educativo: uma inovação curricular na EJA no contexto socioeducativo. In: Anais do V ALFAeEJA encontro de pré-abertura de Salvador. Salvador: UNEB, 2018. v. 1. p. 97-104.

SILVEIRA, Denise Tolfo e CÓRDOVA, Fernanda Peixoto. A pesquisa científica. In: GERHARDT, Tatiana Engel e SILVEIRA, Denise Tolfo. (org.). Métodos de pesquisa. Coordenado pela Universidade Aberta do Brasil – UAB/UFRGS e pelo Curso de Graduação Tecnológica – Planejamento e Gestão para o Desenvolvimento Rural da SEAD/UFRGS. Porto Alegre: Editora da UF RGS, 2009. p. 31-42.


3. Information regarding students enrolled on November 23, 2018.

[1] Master of the Youth and Adult Education Program (MPEJA) of the State University of Bahia (UNEB); Specialist in Teaching Methodology, Research and Extension in Education (UNEB); Specialist in Education, Technological Processes and Innovative Practices (UNEB); Graduated in Pedagogy from the University of the State of Bahia (UNEB); Member of the Interface Research Group: Interdisciplinary Research on Educator Training; Teacher and deputy director at the Municipal School Network of Salvador/BA.

[2] Master’s student of the Graduate Program in Education and Contemporaneity (PPGEduc) of the State University of Bahia (UNEB); Specialist in Education, Technological Processes and Innovative Practices (UNEB); Graduated in Pedagogy from the Federal University of Bahia (UFBA); Member of the Research Group Training, Technologies, Distance Education and Curriculum. Teacher at the Municipal School Network of Salvador/ BA.

Sent: April, 2020.

Approved: August, 2020.

Master student of the Youth and Adult Education Program (MPEJA) at the State University of Bahia (UNEB); Specialist in Teaching Methodology, Research and Extension in Education (UNEB); Specialist in Education, Technological Processes and Innovative Practices (UNEB); Graduated in Pedagogy from the State University of Bahia (UNEB); Member of the Interface Research Group: Interdisciplinary Research on Educator Training; Professor and deputy director at the Municipal Education Network of Salvador / BA.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here