In the course of the High School curricular reforms placed in action in Brazil between 1990 and 2010, an idea that has gained strengh and that has remained as a signifier around which has been articulating a varied number of demands and motivated intense disputes and negotiations of meanings and the idea of integration. The theme of curricular integration has assumed a remarkable centrality in the contemporary curricular debates due to the very importance given to the issue of curricular organization as a condition to operate changes and innovations required for this level of education at the present time. Due to the centrality that the theme presents in the context of the Brazilian curricular policy, this research focuses the discursive formations that seek to signify the integration in the official curricular texts produced in the period from 1998 to 2012. The questions that gave rise to the study aims to answer the following questions: How and when does the signifier integration emerge in the Brazilian curricular policy for high? What meanings of integration have been played out in the official curricular texts? which operations of equivalence and differences some meanings have achieved hegemony? What are the antagonisms and demands that form the articulatory chain of integration discourses? Based on these questions, the main objective of the research is to understand the process of production of the discourses of integration in the curriculum policy for high school as a hegemonic struggle for the signification of curriculum. Methodologically, the research is based on a qualitative approach and is characterized as a bibliographic and documentary study that brings together various works and official documents related to the history and curriculum policy of the Brazilian high school. Ernesto Laclau's Theory of Speech, Stephen Ball's Continuing Cycle of Policies and the incorporation of these theoretical-analytical perspectives into the curriculum field by Alice Casimiro Lopes, Elizabeth Macedo and Lourdes Rangel Tura are the strategic contributions that subsidize research. The results obtained allow me to confirm the hypothesis that hegemonized integration discourses do not carry unique and stable meanings, but they link changing and sliding senses, even because they were constructed through a dispute between old and new demands that claim space in the official political text. I therefore argue that around this signifier have articulated different demands placed by groups and individuals with power to influence the production of politics in the focused context, which compete for hegemony within the scope of official curriculum policy. By the impossibility of establishing a literal and transparent sense capable of encompassing or canceling all the differences that cross the political struggle, the negotiation around integration makes it emerge as an empty signifier, under which ambiguous, contradictory and fluid senses slide as a condition of their own possibility of existence.
|
