PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | preprint |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | SciELO Preprints |
Texto Completo: | https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/4607 |
Resumo: | This article aims to analyze the game of disputes and negotiations for the public fund between public-private partnerships in the financing of special education. The discussions derive from the bibliographic and documental review of writings aligned with the elected objective, and are supported by the theoretical assumptions of the historical-dialectical materialism (MARX, 1985). In the analysis of the sources consulted, it was verified that in the context of the State's exoneration in relation to social policies, the public-private partnerships win the dispute in the benemerence market in detriment to the target public of special education, and seek the resources of the public fund and the participation in the direction of educational policies. It was also evident that the partnership between the State and the private sector contributed to the precariousness of public education, to fuel tensions between the conquered rights and the effective rights, and to the non-compliance with the goals of the PNE 2014-2024 and the pacts firmed between Brazil and international organizations, such as the Declaration of Salamanca (1994). On the other hand, the findings revealed some exits to combat social and educational apartheid, which has been disseminated by the business class in the saga of the dispute for the public fund: develop the capacity of organization, access to information, and internal communication to ensure public investments; overcome centralized management in school spaces; and strengthen social control through social and popular participation. |
id |
SCI-1_14c98bc0f9f4389e5bc7ff99ab4f3ebf |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/4607 |
network_acronym_str |
SCI-1 |
network_name_str |
SciELO Preprints |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE?FINANCIACIÓN PÚBLICO-PRIVADA DE LA EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL: ¿QUIÉN GANA Y QUIÉN PIERDE EN EL MERCADO DE LA BENEMERENCIA?PÚBLICO-PRIVADO NO FINANCIAMENTO DA EDUCAÇÃO ESPECIAL: QUEM GANHA E QUEM PERDE NO MERCADO DA BENEMERÊNCIA?público-privadofinanciamento educacionaleducação especialmercadopublic-privateeducational financingspecial educationmarketpúblico-privadofinanciación de la educacióneducación especialmercadoThis article aims to analyze the game of disputes and negotiations for the public fund between public-private partnerships in the financing of special education. The discussions derive from the bibliographic and documental review of writings aligned with the elected objective, and are supported by the theoretical assumptions of the historical-dialectical materialism (MARX, 1985). In the analysis of the sources consulted, it was verified that in the context of the State's exoneration in relation to social policies, the public-private partnerships win the dispute in the benemerence market in detriment to the target public of special education, and seek the resources of the public fund and the participation in the direction of educational policies. It was also evident that the partnership between the State and the private sector contributed to the precariousness of public education, to fuel tensions between the conquered rights and the effective rights, and to the non-compliance with the goals of the PNE 2014-2024 and the pacts firmed between Brazil and international organizations, such as the Declaration of Salamanca (1994). On the other hand, the findings revealed some exits to combat social and educational apartheid, which has been disseminated by the business class in the saga of the dispute for the public fund: develop the capacity of organization, access to information, and internal communication to ensure public investments; overcome centralized management in school spaces; and strengthen social control through social and popular participation.Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar el juego de disputas y negociaciones por el fondo público entre las asociaciones público-privadas en la financiación de la educación especial. Las discusiones se derivan de la revisión bibliográfica y documental de escritos alineados con el objetivo elegido, y se basan en los supuestos teóricos del materialismo histórico-dialéctico (MARX, 1985). En el análisis de las fuentes consultadas, se verificó que en el contexto de la exoneración del Estado en relación a las políticas sociales, las asociaciones público-privadas ganan la disputa en el mercado de la benemerencia en detrimento del público objetivo de la educación especial, y buscan los recursos del fondo público y la participación en las direcciones de las políticas educativas. También se evidenció que la asociación entre el Estado y el sector privado contribuyó para precarizar la educación pública, alimentar las tensiones entre los derechos conquistados y los derechos efectivos, y para el incumplimiento de las metas del PNE 2014-2024 y de los pactos firmados entre Brasil y los organismos internacionales, como la Declaración de Salamanca (1994). Por otro lado, los resultados revelaron algunas salidas de combatir el apartheid social y educativo, que ha sido diseminado por la clase empresarial en la saga de la disputa por el fondo público: desarrollar la capacidad de organización, el acceso a la información y la comunicación interna para asegurar las inversiones públicas; superar la gestión centralizada en los espacios escolares; y fortalecer el control social a través de la participación social y popular.Este artigo objetiva analisar o jogo de disputas e negociações pelo fundo público entre as parcerias público-privadas no financiamento da educação especial. As discussões derivam da revisão bibliográfica e documental de escritos alinhados ao objetivo eleito, e estão sustentadas nos pressupostos teóricos do materialismo histórico-dialético (MARX, 1985). Na análise das fontes consultadas, verificou-se que no contexto de desoneração do Estado em relação às políticas sociais, as parcerias público-privadas ganham a disputa no mercado da benemerência em detrimento ao público-alvo da educação especial, e buscam os recursos do fundo público e a participação nos direcionamentos das políticas educacionais. Evidenciou-se ainda, que a parceria entre o Estado e o setor privado contribuiu para precarizar o ensino público, alimentar tensões entre os direitos conquistados e os direitos efetivados, e para descumprir as metas do PNE 2014-2024 e dos pactos firmados entre o Brasil e os organismos internacionais, como a Declaração de Salamanca (1994). Por outro lado, os achados revelaram algumas saídas para combater o apartheid social e educacional, que tem sido disseminado pela classe empresária na saga da disputa pelo fundo público: desenvolver a capacidade de organização, de acesso à informação e de comunicação interna para garantir os investimentos públicos; superar a gestão centralizada nos espaços escolares; e fortalecer o controle social por meio da participação social e popular. SciELO PreprintsSciELO PreprintsSciELO Preprints2022-08-19info:eu-repo/semantics/preprintinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/460710.1590/SciELOPreprints.4607porhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/4607/8842Copyright (c) 2022 Lorrana Oliveira Nunes, Ana Cláudia da Silva Rodrigueshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNunes, Lorrana OliveiraRodrigues, Ana Cláudia da Silvareponame:SciELO Preprintsinstname:SciELOinstacron:SCI2022-08-16T13:39:42Zoai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/4607Servidor de preprintshttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scieloONGhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/oaiscielo.submission@scielo.orgopendoar:2022-08-16T13:39:42SciELO Preprints - SciELOfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? FINANCIACIÓN PÚBLICO-PRIVADA DE LA EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL: ¿QUIÉN GANA Y QUIÉN PIERDE EN EL MERCADO DE LA BENEMERENCIA? PÚBLICO-PRIVADO NO FINANCIAMENTO DA EDUCAÇÃO ESPECIAL: QUEM GANHA E QUEM PERDE NO MERCADO DA BENEMERÊNCIA? |
title |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
spellingShingle |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? Nunes, Lorrana Oliveira público-privado financiamento educacional educação especial mercado public-private educational financing special education market público-privado financiación de la educación educación especial mercado |
title_short |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
title_full |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
title_fullStr |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
title_full_unstemmed |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
title_sort |
PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION: WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES IN THE MARKET BENEMERENCE? |
author |
Nunes, Lorrana Oliveira |
author_facet |
Nunes, Lorrana Oliveira Rodrigues, Ana Cláudia da Silva |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Rodrigues, Ana Cláudia da Silva |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Nunes, Lorrana Oliveira Rodrigues, Ana Cláudia da Silva |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
público-privado financiamento educacional educação especial mercado public-private educational financing special education market público-privado financiación de la educación educación especial mercado |
topic |
público-privado financiamento educacional educação especial mercado public-private educational financing special education market público-privado financiación de la educación educación especial mercado |
description |
This article aims to analyze the game of disputes and negotiations for the public fund between public-private partnerships in the financing of special education. The discussions derive from the bibliographic and documental review of writings aligned with the elected objective, and are supported by the theoretical assumptions of the historical-dialectical materialism (MARX, 1985). In the analysis of the sources consulted, it was verified that in the context of the State's exoneration in relation to social policies, the public-private partnerships win the dispute in the benemerence market in detriment to the target public of special education, and seek the resources of the public fund and the participation in the direction of educational policies. It was also evident that the partnership between the State and the private sector contributed to the precariousness of public education, to fuel tensions between the conquered rights and the effective rights, and to the non-compliance with the goals of the PNE 2014-2024 and the pacts firmed between Brazil and international organizations, such as the Declaration of Salamanca (1994). On the other hand, the findings revealed some exits to combat social and educational apartheid, which has been disseminated by the business class in the saga of the dispute for the public fund: develop the capacity of organization, access to information, and internal communication to ensure public investments; overcome centralized management in school spaces; and strengthen social control through social and popular participation. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-08-19 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
preprint |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/4607 10.1590/SciELOPreprints.4607 |
url |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/4607 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/SciELOPreprints.4607 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/4607/8842 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Lorrana Oliveira Nunes, Ana Cláudia da Silva Rodrigues https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Lorrana Oliveira Nunes, Ana Cláudia da Silva Rodrigues https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:SciELO Preprints instname:SciELO instacron:SCI |
instname_str |
SciELO |
instacron_str |
SCI |
institution |
SCI |
reponame_str |
SciELO Preprints |
collection |
SciELO Preprints |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints - SciELO |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
scielo.submission@scielo.org |
_version_ |
1797047829764505600 |