O ensino fundamental de nove anos e o direito à educação

• Autor(a) principal: Arelaro, Lisete Regina Gomes
• Data de Publicação: 2011
• Outros Autores: Jacomini, Márcia Aparecida [UNIFESP], Klein, Sylvie Bonifácio
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
• Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-97022011000100003; http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/6388
• topic: Educational policy; Nine-year fundamental education; Right to education; Democratic management; Quality of education; Política educacional; Ensino fundamental de nove anos; Direito à educação; Gestão democrática; Qualidade de ensino

This article investigates the consequences of the Federal Laws No. 11114/05, which instituted the start of the period of mandatory education at the age of six, and No. 11274/06, which increased the duration of fundamental education to nine years, keeping its start at the age of six. The analyses presented here are based on documents and empirical data of the study Avaliando políticas educacionais: um estudo sobre a implantação do ensino fundamental de nove anos no Estado de São Paulo [Evaluating educational policies: a study of the implementation of nine-year fundamental education in the State of São Paulo]. Under a qualitative approach, that study was conducted in municipal and state public school systems, and involved different segments: education workers, parents, and six-year-olds enrolled at the first year of fundamental education. The interviews and questionnaires helped to gather their opinions on various aspects of the implementation of nine-year fundamental education, and allowed the comparison with the intentions declared in the official documents in the light of three educational principles: the right to education, democratic management, and quality of education. It was observed that practices remain which disregard both the legal precepts and the importance of the participation of those involved in the education process in order to achieve quality education. Likewise, the first year curriculum reflects only a simplistic adaptation of the former first year curriculum, with minor methodological adjustments that do not incorporate the ludic as something specific to childhood. It became evident that material and financial resources are insufficient, that teachers are not being oriented, and that the future of pre-school under the new organization is not being discussed.