Evidence of the classical management approach in the guidelines of the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC) and its implications for brazilian education

Concilium Pub Date : 2024-04-03 DOI:10.53660/clm-3198-24f46
Ana Lucia Dourado, Marina Garcia Lara, Ana Karoline Machado, Juliana Almeida Matos, Kerlyn Tatiana Schulz Niesvald, Franciele Maria David, Mariane Betania Elias Batista
{"title":"Evidence of the classical management approach in the guidelines of the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC) and its implications for brazilian education","authors":"Ana Lucia Dourado, Marina Garcia Lara, Ana Karoline Machado, Juliana Almeida Matos, Kerlyn Tatiana Schulz Niesvald, Franciele Maria David, Mariane Betania Elias Batista","doi":"10.53660/clm-3198-24f46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present work aims to present evidence of the classical approach to administration, discovered in the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC), seeking to identify some of its implications for Brazilian education. To achieve this, this qualitative research makes use of the BNCC itself, specifically its introductory part and its pedagogical foundations. The BNCC is a document that specifies the skills, abilities and knowledge that every Brazilian student must acquire throughout their basic education. Analysis of the document demonstrates that the BNCC incorporates some of the principles found in the classical management approach, including the focus on worker efficiency and work standardization. Some objections to the document focus on the excessive standardization of teaching, which restricts teachers' autonomy and limits the diversity of pedagogical approaches. Furthermore, the emphasis on efficiency and measurable results can lead to a reductionist and utilitarian view of education, disregarding subjective aspects and the integral development of students.","PeriodicalId":505714,"journal":{"name":"Concilium","volume":"22 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Concilium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53660/clm-3198-24f46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present work aims to present evidence of the classical approach to administration, discovered in the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC), seeking to identify some of its implications for Brazilian education. To achieve this, this qualitative research makes use of the BNCC itself, specifically its introductory part and its pedagogical foundations. The BNCC is a document that specifies the skills, abilities and knowledge that every Brazilian student must acquire throughout their basic education. Analysis of the document demonstrates that the BNCC incorporates some of the principles found in the classical management approach, including the focus on worker efficiency and work standardization. Some objections to the document focus on the excessive standardization of teaching, which restricts teachers' autonomy and limits the diversity of pedagogical approaches. Furthermore, the emphasis on efficiency and measurable results can lead to a reductionist and utilitarian view of education, disregarding subjective aspects and the integral development of students.
国家共同课程基地(BNCC)指导方针中经典管理方法的证据及其对巴西教育的影响
本著作旨在介绍《国家共同课程基础》(BNCC)中发现的经典行政管理方法的证据,并试图确定其对巴西教育的一些影响。为此,这项定性研究利用了《国家共同课程基础》本身,特别是其导言部分及其教学基础。BNCC 是一份规定了巴西学生在整个基础教育阶段必须掌握的技能、能力和知识的文件。对该文件的分析表明,BNCC 吸收了经典管理方法中的一些原则,包括注重工人效率和工作标准化。对该文件的一些反对意见主要集中在过度的教学标准化上,这限制了教师的自主性,也限制了教学方法的多样性。此外,强调效率和可衡量的结果会导致对教育的简化主义和功利主义观点,忽视学生的主观方面和全面发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信