O ensino religioso, embora esteja previsto na Constituição Federal como disciplina obrigatória de ser oferecida nas escolas públicas, é a única da grade escolar em que não há um currículo pré-definido em lei federal. A falta de parâmetros claros em âmbito nacional para uma disciplina que possui a palavra “religião” em seu nome repercute em os professores serem chamados a elaborar um conteúdo que se pronuncie a respeito dessa dimensão da vida social. Esta dissertação teve por objetivo compreender como isso é feito, por meio da realização de um estudo etnográfico em aulas de ensino religioso de três escolas públicas de Porto Alegre. A chave de leitura utilizada para dar sentido à maneira como a disciplina foi significada e conduzida está relacionada com a compreensão do religioso enquanto “igual” (uma esfera social como qualquer outra) ou “diferente” (uma esfera diferenciada, apartada das demais, merecedora de tratamento específico). Enfatizando as respostas às entrevistas com três coordenadoras pedagógicas e quatro professores de ensino religioso, e dialogando com dados de outros pesquisadores que realizaram trabalho de campo em ensino religioso, esta dissertação procura demonstrar um processo no qual há uma recorrência de professores entendendo que a disciplina, a despeito do nome, não deve tratar de religião. Ao final, sugerem-se outros contextos nos quais a chave de interpretação do religioso como “igual” ou “diferente” poderia se configurar em uma ferramenta analítica útil. / Religious education, despite being on Brazilian Federal Constitution as a mandatory discipline to be offered in public schools, is the only one at the school frame in which there isn’t a pre-defined curriculum in federal law. The lack of clear national parameters to a discipline which possesses the word “religion” in its name reverberates in teachers being called to elaborate content which refers to that dimension of social life. This investigation aims to understand how that is done, conducting an ethnographic study in religious education classes of three public schools in Porto Alegre. The key of interpretation used to give meaning to the ways that discipline was signified and conducted is related to the comprehension of the religious as “the same” (a social sphere as any other) or “different” (a differentiated sphere, apart from the others, which deserves a specific treatment). Focusing on the answers given in interviews with three pedagogical coordinators and four religious education teachers, and in dialogue with data from other researchers which realized fieldwork in religious education, this research aims to demonstrate a process in which there is a recurrence of teachers understanding that the discipline, despite its name, should not be about religion. In the end, it’s suggested other contexts in which the key of interpretation to the religious as “the same” or “different” could configure a valid analytical tool.

O ensino religioso, embora esteja previsto na Constituição Federal como disciplina obrigatória de ser oferecida nas escolas públicas, é a única da grade escolar em que não há um currículo pré-definido em lei federal. A falta de parâmetros claros em âmbito nacional para uma disciplina que possui a palavra “religião” em seu nome repercute em os professores serem chamados a elaborar um conteúdo que se pronuncie a respeito dessa dimensão da vida social. Esta dissertação teve por objetivo compreender como isso é feito, por meio da realização de um estudo etnográfico em aulas de ensino religioso de três escolas públicas de Porto Alegre. A chave de leitura utilizada para dar sentido à maneira como a disciplina foi significada e conduzida está relacionada com a compreensão do religioso enquanto “igual” (uma esfera social como qualquer outra) ou “diferente” (uma esfera diferenciada, apartada das demais, merecedora de tratamento específico). Enfatizando as respostas às entrevistas com três coordenadoras pedagógicas e quatro professores de ensino religioso, e dialogando com dados de outros pesquisadores que realizaram trabalho de campo em ensino religioso, esta dissertação procura demonstrar um processo no qual há uma recorrência de professores entendendo que a disciplina, a despeito do nome, não deve tratar de religião. Ao final, sugerem-se outros contextos nos quais a chave de interpretação do religioso como “igual” ou “diferente” poderia se configurar em uma ferramenta analítica útil. / Religious education, despite being on Brazilian Federal Constitution as a mandatory discipline to be offered in public schools, is the only one at the school frame in which there isn’t a pre-defined curriculum in federal law. The lack of clear national parameters to a discipline which possesses the word “religion” in its name reverberates in teachers being called to elaborate content which refers to that dimension of social life. This investigation aims to understand how that is done, conducting an ethnographic study in religious education classes of three public schools in Porto Alegre. The key of interpretation used to give meaning to the ways that discipline was signified and conducted is related to the comprehension of the religious as “the same” (a social sphere as any other) or “different” (a differentiated sphere, apart from the others, which deserves a specific treatment). Focusing on the answers given in interviews with three pedagogical coordinators and four religious education teachers, and in dialogue with data from other researchers which realized fieldwork in religious education, this research aims to demonstrate a process in which there is a recurrence of teachers understanding that the discipline, despite its name, should not be about religion. In the end, it’s suggested other contexts in which the key of interpretation to the religious as “the same” or “different” could configure a valid analytical tool.

O ensino religioso, embora esteja previsto na Constituição Federal como disciplina obrigatória de ser oferecida nas escolas públicas, é a única da grade escolar em que não há um currículo pré-definido em lei federal. A falta de parâmetros claros em âmbito nacional para uma disciplina que possui a palavra “religião” em seu nome repercute em os professores serem chamados a elaborar um conteúdo que se pronuncie a respeito dessa dimensão da vida social. Esta dissertação teve por objetivo compreender como isso é feito, por meio da realização de um estudo etnográfico em aulas de ensino religioso de três escolas públicas de Porto Alegre. A chave de leitura utilizada para dar sentido à maneira como a disciplina foi significada e conduzida está relacionada com a compreensão do religioso enquanto “igual” (uma esfera social como qualquer outra) ou “diferente” (uma esfera diferenciada, apartada das demais, merecedora de tratamento específico). Enfatizando as respostas às entrevistas com três coordenadoras pedagógicas e quatro professores de ensino religioso, e dialogando com dados de outros pesquisadores que realizaram trabalho de campo em ensino religioso, esta dissertação procura demonstrar um processo no qual há uma recorrência de professores entendendo que a disciplina, a despeito do nome, não deve tratar de religião. Ao final, sugerem-se outros contextos nos quais a chave de interpretação do religioso como “igual” ou “diferente” poderia se configurar em uma ferramenta analítica útil. / Religious education, despite being on Brazilian Federal Constitution as a mandatory discipline to be offered in public schools, is the only one at the school frame in which there isn’t a pre-defined curriculum in federal law. The lack of clear national parameters to a discipline which possesses the word “religion” in its name reverberates in teachers being called to elaborate content which refers to that dimension of social life. This investigation aims to understand how that is done, conducting an ethnographic study in religious education classes of three public schools in Porto Alegre. The key of interpretation used to give meaning to the ways that discipline was signified and conducted is related to the comprehension of the religious as “the same” (a social sphere as any other) or “different” (a differentiated sphere, apart from the others, which deserves a specific treatment). Focusing on the answers given in interviews with three pedagogical coordinators and four religious education teachers, and in dialogue with data from other researchers which realized fieldwork in religious education, this research aims to demonstrate a process in which there is a recurrence of teachers understanding that the discipline, despite its name, should not be about religion. In the end, it’s suggested other contexts in which the key of interpretation to the religious as “the same” or “different” could configure a valid analytical tool.

Informed by institutional ethnography, and taking the problematic from disjunctures in teacher/participants’ experience between actual practice and official policy, this study is an intertextual analysis of print/electronic documents pertaining to students ‘at risk.’ It unpacks the Student Success Strategy in Ontario secondary schools as organized around discourses on risk and safety. Discriminatory classing and racializing processes construct students ‘at risk’ in ways that reproduce socio-economic inequities through premature streaming into pathways geared to post-secondary destinations: university, college, apprenticeship and work. This study questions the accounting logic that reduces education to skills training in workplace literacy/numeracy, and contradicts the official ‘success’ story that promotes Ontario as a model of large-scale educational change. The follow-up intertextual analyses reveal ideological circles that promote ‘evidence-based research’ and ‘evidence-informed practice,’ while actually gearing education to improving ‘results’ on large-scale standardized tests and manufacturing consent for government policies. Questions arise about the lack of transparency and selective use of educational research. A web of behind-the-scenes activities are made visible at public policy think-tanks (e.g. Canadian Council on Learning; Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network), and two little-researched bodies in educational governance — the Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC) and OECD. Although invisible to teachers, the infrastructure for the Student Success Strategy is the Ontario School Information System (OnSIS); this web-enabled data-management technology has built-in capacity to profile students ‘at risk’ and to instigate accountability and surveillance over teachers’ work, with implications for re-regulating teaching practice towards test scores and aggregate statistics. With the intention of transforming education towards genuine equity, and linking the re-organization of social relations in large-scale reform locally, nationally and globally, this study contributes to critical scholarship on the effects of reform policies on people’s lives and extends knowledge of how translocal text-mediated ruling relations operate in education.

Informed by institutional ethnography, and taking the problematic from disjunctures in teacher/participants’ experience between actual practice and official policy, this study is an intertextual analysis of print/electronic documents pertaining to students ‘at risk.’ It unpacks the Student Success Strategy in Ontario secondary schools as organized around discourses on risk and safety. Discriminatory classing and racializing processes construct students ‘at risk’ in ways that reproduce socio-economic inequities through premature streaming into pathways geared to post-secondary destinations: university, college, apprenticeship and work. This study questions the accounting logic that reduces education to skills training in workplace literacy/numeracy, and contradicts the official ‘success’ story that promotes Ontario as a model of large-scale educational change. The follow-up intertextual analyses reveal ideological circles that promote ‘evidence-based research’ and ‘evidence-informed practice,’ while actually gearing education to improving ‘results’ on large-scale standardized tests and manufacturing consent for government policies. Questions arise about the lack of transparency and selective use of educational research. A web of behind-the-scenes activities are made visible at public policy think-tanks (e.g. Canadian Council on Learning; Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network), and two little-researched bodies in educational governance — the Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC) and OECD. Although invisible to teachers, the infrastructure for the Student Success Strategy is the Ontario School Information System (OnSIS); this web-enabled data-management technology has built-in capacity to profile students ‘at risk’ and to instigate accountability and surveillance over teachers’ work, with implications for re-regulating teaching practice towards test scores and aggregate statistics. With the intention of transforming education towards genuine equity, and linking the re-organization of social relations in large-scale reform locally, nationally and globally, this study contributes to critical scholarship on the effects of reform policies on people’s lives and extends knowledge of how translocal text-mediated ruling relations operate in education.