Adventure Body Practices in Undergraduate Physical Education Programs: a comparative study between UFSC and UFG

ABSTRACT

The insertion of the Adventure Body Practices in the undergraduate Physical Education programs of the Federal University of Santa Catarina and Federal University of Goiás carried out during the curricular reformulation process in the last years was analyzed. The methodology used was Comparative Education. The Federal University of Goiás created an introductory course, while the Federal University of Santa Catarina created three – an introductory course, a licentiate-specific course, and an optional course. Both cases present similarities and differences in the understanding of the new guidelines and how this was reflected in their Curricular Pedagogical Projects, with a strong influence of the territories where the institutions are located. The article concludes with the identification of the advances in each higher education institution on this content from the perspective of Comparative Education.

Keywords
Physical Education Training; Adventure Body Practices; Curricular Reformulation; Comparative Education

RESUMO

Analisou-se a inserção das Práticas Corporais de Aventura na graduação em Educação Física da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina e da Universidade Federal de Goiás, realizada durante o processo de reformulação curricular ocorrido nos últimos anos. A metodologia utilizada foi a de Educação Comparada. A Universidade Federal de Goiás criou uma disciplina introdutória, enquanto a Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina criou três – uma introdutória, uma específica para a licenciatura e outra optativa. Ambos os casos apresentam similaridades e distanciamentos na compreensão das novas diretrizes e na forma como isso se refletiu em seus Projetos Pedagógicos Curriculares, havendo forte influência dos territórios onde as instituições estão situadas. O artigo é concluído com a identificação dos avanços em cada instituição de ensino superior sobre esse conteúdo, desde a perspectiva da Educação Comparada.

Palavras-chave
Formação em Educação Física; Práticas Corporais de Aventura; Reformulação Curricular; Educação Comparada

Introduction

Brazilian Physical Education (PE) has presented numerous faces along its trajectory according to the historical contexts of its development (technical, sportive, related to gymnastics or leisure, militarized, critical, and emancipatory, etc.) and with conformations based on theoretical paradigms that are also dynamic (Castellani Filho, 1988; Soares, 2017).

Faces that have sometimes been so different but have had points in common: the need for higher-level academic and professional training. Hence, from time to time, new guidelines for initial training are presented, requiring educational institutions to reformulate their program pedagogical projects (PPPs), rethinking and reformulating, among other formal aspects constituting these documents, the organization/division of training profiles, workloads, list of courses and their distribution in the curriculum, contents, syllabuses, and mandatory and complementary references. When one observes the scientific production on the topic, one may perceive both the political-academic concern with these curricular reformulations – as in Metzner and Drigo (2021) and Furtado and Rios (2021) – and the positions of various societal segments on the subject – as in Maia and Sacardo (2020).

The latest version of the curriculum guidelines for PE training is Resolution No. 6 of December 18, 2018, of the National Council of Education/Chamber of Higher Education (Brazil, 2018). In addition, Resolution No. 2 of December 20, 2019, establishes the guidelines for the training of Basic Education teachers of the National Council of Education/Full Council (Brazil, 2019), expanding the task of reviewing the PPPs since the PE offers two forms of training: the licentiate program, for working in the mandatory curricular component of Basic Education, and the bachelor's program, for working in other fields of intervention, such as sports, leisure, health, physical activities, etc. Concomitantly and internally to this process, we have observed propositions around the insertion of new content in the PE context: adventure body practices (ABPs).

Inácio (2014) pointed out that ABPs are the practices commonly called adventure sports or extreme sports. However, by focusing on them with leisure and/or school as the context of their development, they gain other contours that distinguish them from when carried out in a sportive/competitive way:

[...] they commonly aim at adventure and risk and are carried out in environments far from urban centers, notably spaces with little human interference, whether land, water, and/or air. They are also characterized by having high educational value and a search for the (re)establishment of a more intrinsic relationship between human beings and everything that surrounds them, which may culminate in some progress to overcome the marketing logic of/in leisure and with the establishment and/or rescue of human values such as cooperation and solidarity

(Inácio, 2014, p. 532)¹.

From the 1990s (Coletivo de Autores, 1992) to the present day (Morais, 2021), criticisms have been made of the traditional and predominant content in/of school PE, which is court sports – especially futsal, volleyball, basketball, and handball – and gymnastics, wrestling, and athletics. However, the search for new/other content has moved the teaching practice, leveraged by the emergence and offer of “physical activities” in leisure/tourism and fitness. It is in this process that the ABPs are raised as an alternative for the activity of teachers or bachelors in PE.

ABPs have been presented by several authors as new and motivating content for students already discouraged by traditional PE classes, which have been repeated for decades. Elements such as risk, uncertainty, flexibility, and the need to adapt to the environment during the activity, among others, are different from those present in the most common sports in school PE. They are pointed out as motivating because they present new challenges in motor, cognitive, and emotional terms. In a large part of ABPs, there is no explicit competition, reducing prejudice relative to those who are less strong, less tall, or less efficient (Cauper, 2018; Inácio et al., 2016; Franco; Cavasini; Darido, 2014; Tahara; Carnicelli Filho, 2013).

The environment in which they may be performed also differs from that of traditional PE – in which the court is the almost hegemonic space, transferring to the trees, open courtyards, squares, and green areas near the schools and, when possible, hills and mountains, rivers, seas, caves, etc. This context generated, among other effects, the inclusion of ABPs in the Base Nacional Comum Curricular (BNCC, National Common Curricular Base) in 2018, appearing among the content indicated from the sixth to the ninth years of Elementary School and the first to the third years of High School. As a consequence, higher-level PE programs, especially the licentiate program but with dissemination in the bachelor's program, also began to include courses related to ABPs in their curricula.

In this text, we present an analysis of the insertion of ABPs in two initial training programs in PE of two federal higher education institutions, carried out during the curricular reformulation process derived from the abovementioned resolutions.

Reflections on Curriculum and Higher Education

We chose here to support our view from some aspects of Training and Curriculum. Although it is from 2001, the following statement by Carvalho (2001, p. 76, our translation) remains current, given that teacher training is a permanent challenge:

The centrality of debates and studies on teacher training is on the agenda both in academic production and in the context of public policies, and [...] there is a need for government commitment to develop a global training policy, with there already being, in Brazil, an expressive theoretical production that allows this formulation.

In turn, considering mathematics training, Bianchini, Lima, and Gomes (2019) claimed that “[...] a first aspect to consider is the profile of the professional one seeks to train” and, in this sense, a point to be observed is that the initial training of teachers (of mathematics, in this case) must necessarily be different from that of a program that aims to train investigators or bachelors. We affirm that this assertion is valid for all fields that train both teachers and bachelors, so PPPs must take this into account in their organization.

The authors mentioned above, supported by Viana (2009), also highlighted some objectives to be considered in teacher training, including providing content mastery, psycho-pedagogical and/or didactic training, development of creativity and/or good humor, the understanding of the relationship between theory and practice, and the opportunity to develop autonomy (Bianchini; Lima; Gomes, 2019).

In turn, bachelor's training, which, in the case of PE, has historically been subsumed by market interests, cannot be exempt from critical training. Still in the context of Brazilian PE, this training process is disputed and outlined by sectors such as professional councils, which dispute, with other institutions – including government ones –, the opportunities and spaces to define professional training. After all, the territory of the curriculum/training “[...] does not deviate from the rule; its statements are linked to the dynamics of power and knowledge of its time” (Neira; Borges, 2018, our translation).

It is not uncommon to observe criticism of bachelor in PE training supported by principles of productivity, rationality, competencies, and performance. Ball (2010) argued that a curriculum policy based on such principles measures initial training by efficiency and productivity, which is in line with hegemonic economic interests in our society.

Based on the reflections by Barretto, Tamanini, and Silva (2004) and referring to higher education in Brazil in the 1970s (in the case in question, connected to the tourism program), thus still in times of civic-military dictatorship and censorship, Hallal et al. (2010, p. 7) highlighted that university education gradually became more like a technical program yet taught at another level. Thus, a qualification was forged in which people believed they were receiving university training but which was nothing more than technical qualification.

Writing about the training of the bachelor's program in tourism, Hallal et al. (2010) highlighted that, during the period of the civil-military dictatorship, it was very pragmatic, met market demand, and used economic and technical terminology, neglecting social and political aspects that are required today of any professional training. They also pointed out that “[...] this emphasis on technical aspects generally occurred in all programs, according to the developmentalist view of the period” (Hallal et al., 2010, p. 11, our translation, emphasis added). We argue that this dynamic is still present in contemporary higher training in Brazil.

Within the context of PE, the constitution and implementation of bachelor's undergraduate programs were the subject of historical disputes that lasted more than 30 years. Quelhas and Nozaki (2006² apud Ribeiro, 2012, p. 37) said that such training seeks (sought) a professional profile of an entrepreneur, liberal, flexible, but which is (was), in fact, a casualized worker, typical of the new world of work made evident since the 1990s.

According to Metzner and Drigo (2021, p. 2, our translation), “[...] the consolidation of the field of physical education work occurred when the 1937 Constitution made physical education mandatory within the school context”, requiring training for professional activity based on minimum curricular assumptions. On that occasion, the National School of Physical Education and Sports was created in 1939 by Decree-Law No. 1212 of 1939, establishing professional training guidelines. This proposal was revised in 1945 with Decree-Law No. 8270 (Metzner & Drigo, 2021). There were many changes arising from this decree and after it, for years, amending the conformations of PE programs.

In addition to a field of professional training, PE also began its steps in search of scientific legitimization. In that context, at the end of the 1980s, a preliminary draft was prepared and sent to the Federal Council of Education (CFE) with a proposal to overcome the conception of the minimum curriculum in favor of flexibility and autonomy (Metzner; Drigo, 2021). This culminated in the Federal Council of Education Opinion No. 215/1987, resulting in the curricular legislation of 1987, CFE Resolution No. 03, which established the minimum content and duration for undergraduate programs in physical education, bachelor's program and/or full licentiate program, determining that the programs would start having a “[...] minimum duration of four years and a maximum of seven years, comprising a workload of 2,880 class hours” (Brasil, 1987, our translation). To this day, it is recognized that there was a significant advance with this change, allowing more general and humanistic training that was less focused on technical aspects.

Still, Furtado and Rios (2021) understood that the curricula developed in the light of such guidelines did not provide the necessary changes to PE training, maintaining directive procedures in which decisions are made by the teaching staff, with the opinions and interventions of students regarding the directions and conceptions of initial training in the field mattering little.

However, like the broader social context in which it is inserted, the field of PE did not stop changing and presenting new requirements – academic and market-wise – to expand. In the early 2000s, Resolution No. 01 of February 18, 2002, established the National Curricular Guidelines for Basic Education Teacher Training, clearly demarcating the distinction between training to “be a teacher” and training to work outside schools – the bachelor's program. The enactment of these guidelines also resulted in what was defined as the “undergraduate program in Physical Education” (the bachelor's program) while retaining the “licentiate” for teacher training.

Since then, other changes have been implemented in both the training for working in Basic Education and the bachelor's training, but what is of interest in this text are the amendments generated with Resolution No. 06 of December 18, 2018, as well as the determinations/indications of the BNCC, also published in 2018, for PE training.

This resolution defines that the undergraduate program in PE will have a workload of 3,200 hours with articulation between initial and continuous training; it will have a single admission (Basic Admission Area (ABI)) and will unfold in two stages – the common and the specific. Integrating the specific areas (bachelor's and licentiate) is possible but without the suppression of topics or content related to each indicated area (Metzner; Drigo, 2021).

Furtado and Rios (2021, p. 5) denounced that the training recommended in these guidelines is substantiated by a practical conception (historically present in our history in higher training in general, as previously highlighted, and in PE in particular), with clearly evidenced market interests:

[...] there is a regression in the articulation of theory and practice and a strong practical inspiration that puts practice and its tacit, every day, and subjectivist 'knowledge' as the founding reference of the training process. This aspect relegates to the background the set of fundamental scientific knowledge for training in a given area of knowledge or professional academic field and also for expanded human training.

They also argued that the current guidelines practically ignored the debate, evaluations, and propositions developed over the 15 years that separated this guideline from the previous one, incorporating practice – in a critical way – as the guide of the training process (Furtado; Rios, 2021).

In turn, Maia and Sacardo (2020, p. 2) warned of the fact that, historically, the changes and enactments of new curricular guidelines in Brazil accompany “[...] the development of productive forces, characterized as the hegemonic support of capital”, culminating in 'new' national curricular guidelines that change little and even regress regarding epistemological, scientific, and pedagogical advances in the field of PE. Still criticizing the assumptions and propositions present in the previous and current national curricular guidelines, Furtado and Rios (2021, p. 6) highlighted that

[...] the national curricular guidelines for Physical Education present a set of other aspects that make it even more difficult for institutions committed to quality training. We highlight two of such aspects: 1. The first is the formalization and evidencing of the division of training into Licentiate and Bachelor's in the Curricular Guideline itself, an aspect does not present in the previous resolution [...]. 2. The second is the stage-wise characteristic, which adds a new division (fragmentation) to the training. We refer to the division between common stage and specific stages.

That being said, and from the perspectives indicated in the texts mentioned above, it is now up to us to dedicate ourselves to the purpose of this study, focusing on how two proposals for curricular reformulation underway in federal institutions of higher education address the ABP content in their PPPs.

Methodology

For the study reported here, we proposed to analyze comparatively the proposals for including the ABP content in the PPPs of the Federal University of Goiás (Goiânia) and the Federal University of Santa Catarina (Florianópolis), both with their implementation indicated for the beginning of the 2022 school year³ and developed in light of the new guidelines.

Access to the two documents took place after a request to members of the curricular restructuring committees of each institution, as they were not yet available on the institutional websites. Since these are public documents, there was no conflict, restriction, or illegality in this action. We were also informed that, at that time, both documents corresponded to their final versions.

Developing the comparative analysis, the PPPs were read in their entirety and then broken down in the light of the theoretical framework presented above and under the assumptions of Comparative Studies (CSs).

Research in the history of education (and considering that the study reported here is circumscribed in the context of a history of the present)⁴, “[...] is determined by the perspective of writing a curricular history, based on a very particular version, which transitions between the analyses of official curricular documents” (Silva, 2016, p. 209, our translation). The author aimed to write a particular curricular history under the light of the CS methodology, which is precisely what we are also doing here.

However, CSs cannot be viewed only as “tools” for data analysis, given that the operation of educational systems must be based on common and universal principles (Carvalho, 2013, p. 418). With the same position, Meyer and Ramirez (2002⁵ apud Carvalho, 2013, p. 422) understood that “[...] there is a process of worldwide homogenization of education produced by globalization”.

According to Malet (2004) and Carvalho (2013), in the proposal for the analysis of CSs, despite different theoretical and methodological perspectives assumed at different times in their development, some common aspects were maintained in their procedures: 1) nation-states as the reference for the analysis of educational systems; 2) the ideology of progress; 3) the belief in science and objective knowledge for understanding phenomena; 4) these studies are developed as a reaction against a) the objective and closed conditions of educational and cultural phenomena, b) the perspectives of social evolutionism that tend­ to neglect processes of social change, and c) consensualism, which ends up restricting the scientific endeavor of questioning its ends.

Carvalho (2011) added to the above observations the fact that educational reforms were undertaken following a managerial and productivist inspiration and submitted to market logic. Thus, there is agreement with the criticisms present in the productions about the reforms in PE already presented. The same author, when discussing the transnational determinations glimpsed in educational projects, warned of the need to

[...] not lose the local specificity of the phenomenon and address it within the complex social relations that constitute it as preparation for the work in a culturally and economically globalized world. This means understanding it as a strategic response to the problems posed by economic globalization, productive restructuring, quality and competitiveness objectives, transformations in the world of work, and structural unemployment

(Carvalho, 2011, p. 429, our translation).

Thus, CSs should not be limited to recognizing textual similarities and differences in documents, but seek an explanation of why they occur or why the behavior of a part is diverse from that of the whole. The analysis must have the purpose of discovering what is universal in singular processes, but without failing to take into account that the particular does not exist without the universal – and vice versa.

In the condition of objects, the PPPs may be taken as sources since they select and legitimize knowledge, mobilizing discourses in the schooling process­. “This understanding­ allows the analysis of its materiality, i.e., the material support for the construction of practices in educational spaces” (Silva, 2016, p. 214, our translation).

Data and Analyses

The study reported here focused on the new PPPs of the Federal University of Goiás and the Federal University of Santa Catarina, focusing on the ABP content. Developed from the latest PE and teacher training guidelines, both aim to meet a national training project present in such guidelines. It is understood that these PPPs end up reproducing the logic present in the guidelines, which is criticized for presenting few advances toward more progressist training and even regressions (Furtado & Rios, 2021; Maia & Sacardo, 2020).

Abib and Knuth (2021) also criticized the guidelines for their limits and inaccuracies, especially in the case reflected by them in the relationship of the propositions in it with Public Health and the UHS. To them, the main difference between the current guidelines and the previous ones ends up “[...] being the division of the undergraduate program into two training stages, the first being called 'common' and the second 'specific', in which, after completing the first stage, students choose to attend a licentiate or bachelor's program” (Abib & Knuth, 2021, p. 8, our translation).

In the UFG PPP, one may observe that the determination of this single admission generated conflicts and challenges, not only bureaucratic and/or organizational of the courses, but also structural, leading the institution to have to restructure its historical training project. In contrast, the text highlights the accumulations of the trajectory, choices, and theoretical-methodological profiles developed and defended by that school over more than three decades of contribution to training, following the debates and developments in the field and the defense of quality public education, were added to the new legal system. The document indicates that it also considered the institutional policies of UFG based on the guidelines of its Forum of Licentiate Programs (UFG/FEFD, 2021).

A clear and common aspect in both documents is the concern with quality training for both options, without distinction or privileges for the licentiate or bachelor's programs. At UFSC, the PPP says that

[...] before the presentation of the licentiate and bachelor's programs and their specific and, therefore, differentiated curricula, it is indicated that the teachers/professionals trained in either program need to be able to critically analyze the knowledge relevant to the various fields of intervention in which they may come to work, seeking to understand the conditions and processes in which such knowledge was produced, with a view to supporting their professional practice

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 12, our translation).

In turn, while also emphasizing the search for equivalent training in the two options, UFG reveals that it understands that “[...] the guiding principles of teacher training contribute to the program as a whole, including for the bachelor's training”, recognizing that “[...] the dimensions of the axes of sport, health, and leisure are fundamental for licentiate training for teaching work in basic education” (UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 7, our translation), so the UFG document declares to seek articulation strategies between these contents in both types of training. Nevertheless, the institution stresses that there are inconsistencies between the guidelines specific to PE and those of teacher training, “[...] which makes the construction of the project even more difficult” (UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 5, our translation).

In the years leading up to the publication of the current guideline, numerous debates were held in which the interference of the CONFEF/CREF System, a defender of two-stage training, was sharply criticized, giving the guidelines a marketing and corporatist nature. Logically, the system itself also promoted its debates, seeking to reinforce its arguments and capture allies.

Another important aspect of the guidelines is the proposition of training based on the acquisition/development of “competencies”. On this, when assuming the obligation to meet this issue, the PPPs thus pronounce themselves:

It is warned that the assumption of professional competence, according to Contreras (2002), transcends the strictly technical and rational meaning of the didactic resources made available for teaching, not referring only to the available knowledge capital. Thus, a direct relationship is established with the intellectual resources they have to make possible the expansion and development of professional knowledge. Pizani (2011) added that one cannot reduce the understanding of professional competence disconnected from experiences, from real teaching situations, because teachers do not become competent if they do not have the possibility of making decisions regarding their intervention

(UFSC/CDS, 2021).

From the point of view of the prevailing theoretical orientation, these Resolutions intensify the process of training by and for competencies. This aspect may unfold in the deterioration of training processes guided by mastery and theoretical-scientific rigor in consistent articulation with the social practice of professional training. One of the main challenges is not to assume social reality only as a time and space for empirical experimentation that unfolds in the production of tacit knowledge. On the contrary, the path we propose preserves concepts and categories as theoretical mediations indispensable for understanding the structures and forms of production of the social reality where work in Physical Education develops

(UFG/FEFD, 2021).

We infer that the PPPs seek a broader understanding of “competency”, distancing themselves from the technical conception present in the resolution.

Finally, it seems clear to us that, within the context of the nation-state, the two particularities were shaped by official determinations but without failing to imprint particular characteristics on their PPPs.

Regarding particularities, one of the aspects addressed in the CS was the UFG PE program, created in September 1989, one of the first in the state of Goiás. Offered by UFG at the Samambaia campus, in the northern region of Goiânia, which at the time was a rural area, it was part of the expansion and enlargement project of the institution. David (2012⁶ apud UFG / FEFD, 2021, p. 1) stressed that

[...] building a curriculum based on an epistemic conception of knowledge, open in its training dynamics, reflective and critical in the treatment of academic knowledge, mediated by the production of knowledge, and articulated with the demands of society, was, notably, innovative in the field of Brazilian Physical Education.

That was a period of profound reformulations in Brazilian PE training (Metzner; Drigo, 2021). The UFG program, located at the then-created Faculdade de Educação Física (FEF, School of Physical Education)⁷, was marked by CFE Resolution No. 03, which established that the training could be licentiate or bachelor's. UFG only offered the licentiate program, given the proposal of the “[...] training of teachers aimed at professional activity in schools and other spaces of the social practice of Physical Education” (UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 1, our translation).

The facilities and equipment of the already defunct Sports Coordination, responsible for the sports practice of the university's students during half of their curricular terms, were designated for the new program. We also stress that the Samambaia campus is maintained as a green environment, with a rich presence of fauna and flora of the Cerrado biome. Despite this privilege – and because of it – it suffers from the remoteness of more developed infrastructure in the neighborhood and surroundings. It is known, within the context of the Brazilian critical PE, that, since its implementation, the UFG program has moved toward a progressist education that is resistant to the dictates of the market and of liberal education propositions (David, 2012).

With a small number of faculty members and considerable difficulties – in particular, those of financial resources and the distance to the large knowledge-producing centers in Brazil (South and Southeast regions) – the success in creating the graduate program, master's level, was only achieved in 2019, with it still being the only master's program in PE in the state of Goiás. This occurred after the expansion of programs and vacancies and thanks to the hiring and/or training of doctor-level professors, originated from the Reuni Plan to expand federal universities.

In turn, at UFSC, in Florianópolis, the program was created much earlier, in 1974, with the beginning of the first class in 1975. Just as at UFG, its facilities were inherited/shared with the Coordination of Sports Practice at the Trindade campus, nowadays called the Rector João David Ferreira Lima Campus. It is located in a non-central region, but one that developed and grew much and quickly. Currently, the neighborhood of Trindade is one of the most populous in the city, with excellent infrastructure in terms of services, commerce, transport, health, and leisure.

Its graduate program began in 1996 with the master's degree, and the doctorate started in 2006. Unlike UFG, where a licentiate program in PE based on the critical field was hegemonic, at UFSC, different conceptions disputed spaces and positions, which had repercussions on initial training and graduate studies.

Still on the particularities, UFG is located in a rural environment, in the countryside of Brazil, with fewer contributions either by the federal government and its institutions such as Capes and CNPq or by state and municipal institutions. UFSC is located in a coastal city, one of the most requested by tourism and known nationally and internationally; it has been the stage in recent years of important sporting events, such as the Brazilian leg of Iron Man, the most important triathlon in the world, or stages of the World Surf League (WSL).

This information, related to the location and some more specific characteristics, is significant for the examination of the PPPs of two institutions so different from each other: one program is located in a city with a more beachy, sporty, and stripped lifestyle, and the other is in a city driven by agribusiness and with strong rural features. Will there be particularities in the PPPs arising from these characteristics?

As already mentioned, another aspect of the CS methodology is the specificity of the object to be analyzed, without failing to articulate such aspects with other more comprehensive ones. In this direction, we focused our gaze on the insertion of the ABP content in the two PPPs.

Numerous studies have shown that such content has been gaining strength, visibility, and space in school PE (Inácio et al., 2016; Franco; Cavasini; Darido, 2014; Armbrust; Pereira, 2010; Franco, 2008). Moreover, the inclusion of ABPs in the BNCC is highly significant and confirms its social relevance. In the same direction, they point out the need for the content to be inserted in the initial training, providing minimal training for it to be developed in school.

It is known that, little by little, ABPs have been occupying space in PE programs, totaling, according to Correa and Delgado (2021), 351 programs that already present in their PPPs some course related to the topic, which represents about 21% of the total PE programs in Brazil. Thus, it is known that the curricular restructuring determined by the new guidelines created an “opportunity” for the expansion of this number with the insertion of courses in the curricular matrix, which is precisely the case of the two PPPs detailed here.

At UFG, other curricular components have already been created and offered previously, yet in the form of the Free Core, which are optional courses open to all university students, regardless of the program they attend. They were the following: Body Practices in Nature (2009 and 2010), Introductory Studies on the Teaching of Adventure Body Practices in School Physical Education (2020), and Adventure Body Practices (2021). Except for the class of 2009, which was taught by a collective of faculty members, all the others were taught by Professor Humberto L. D. Inácio, of the institution's permanent staff. In addition, the Teaching of Adventure Body Practices course (2019 and 2021) was offered to the FEFD graduate programs in PE by the same professor⁸.

In the current PPC, the curricular components were distributed in four curriculum areas: 1) Biodynamic Foundations of Human Movement; 2) Philosophical and Socio-Historical Foundations of Physical Education; 3) Identifying Knowledge of Physical Education; 4) Research and Professional Practice. In the first two, the courses (or curricular components) are mandatory and are allocated in the common stage, in the first four semesters of the specific stage, with mandatory and optional courses; finally, the fourth area makes up the final years, therefore in the specific stages.

In the list of curricular components, the Theoretical-Methodological Foundations of Adventure Body Practices course appears in the third semester, with 48 class hours, in the common stage – mandatory for all students. Thus, for the first time in its history, UFG/FEFD will offer in its curricular matrix a course with the topic of the ABPs, with the following syllabus:

Concepts, historical-cultural aspects, and social manifestations of Adventure Body Practices. Leisure, the environment, and Education. Didactic-pedagogical foundations of the teaching of Adventure Body Practices and their contributions to environmental education

(UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 69).

A book chapter⁹, an article published in a Brazilian journal¹⁰, and a book by a foreign author¹¹ are listed in the basic/mandatory bibliography. We infer that the first bibliography is conceptual, the second is related to school PE, and the third addresses ABPs more broadly. Thus, it is possible to say that there was a concern to meet, in the common stage, the interests of both the licentiate and bachelor's programs.

In turn, at UFSC, in the first half of the 2000s, an optional course was created whose content was fundamentally “Surfing”, taught by Professor Sidney Farias. He resided at Praia do Campeche and was a surfer, which suggests the offer from a more personal than institutional interest (information from a retired professor). The same source informed us that the mandatory Theory and Methodology of Adventure Sports course was created for the bachelor's and licentiate programs in a curricular reform carried out a few years later.

In the current proposal, the PPP was organized from curricular dimensions, namely the Biodynamic Dimension of Human Movement, Behavioral Dimension of Human Movement, Socio-Anthropological Dimension of Human Movement, Pedagogical Dimension of Human Movement, Scientific-Technological Dimension of Human Movement, Dimension of Manifestations of Human Movement Culture, and the Technical-Functional Dimension Applied to Human Movement (UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 16).

Three courses are listed, all within the context of the Dimension of Manifestations of Human Movement Culture: the first, Introduction to Adventure Activities, is in the common stage, second semester, with 54 class hours; the second, Teaching Practice in School and the Teaching of Adventure Body Practices, with 36 class hours, is in the seventh semester, therefore, in the specific stage. The third, Adventure Activities in Nature, is an optional course with 54 class hours.

From the titles of the courses and their distribution in the flow, we may infer that the first attempts to present to the entrant students introductory notions on the topic. Its syllabus says the following:

Historical and cultural contextualization of adventure activities. The social significance of adventure activities (including discussions of gender, persons with disability, and ethnic-racial relations). Characterization and classification of adventure activities in different environments (urban and in nature, land and water). Basic fundamentals of safe practice. Methodological aspects of the teaching-learning process of adventure activities. Didactic-pedagogical interaction with different spaces of professional activity in Physical Education

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 97).

In the references present in the basic bibliography, we observe a study on environmental education¹², although this topic is not on the syllabus; however, the articulation between BPs and environmental education has been common, which justifies its presence. The second (an article published in a journal) discusses gender relations¹³ in adventure sports – this topic is of growing interest in all dimensions of PE and is suitable for an introductory course. The third reference is a book chapter, in which one may find indications for teaching and conceptual and classification issues of ABPs¹⁴.

The second course is listed only in the curriculum of the licentiate program. Its basic bibliography is clearly related to school PE¹⁵. The syllabus, in which an adequate articulation with the basic and complementary bibliographies is observed, is thus described:

Systematization and critical re-elaboration of the knowledge of Adventure Body Practices from progressions of complexity over the school years. Elaboration of strategies for teaching and evaluating Adventure Body Practices in a perspective coherent with the purposes of school Physical Education. Dialogue of the Adventure Body Practices with the knowledge produced in the other areas and curricular components, including discussions of gender, people with disability, and ethnic-racial relations. Pedagogical practice under faculty guidance and supervision comprising directed observation activities or teaching experiences

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 150).

In turn, the third course, Adventure Activities in Nature, is optional for the licentiate and bachelor programs. Its syllabus is the following:

Interfaces between adventure activities, leisure, and environmental education. Risk management and safety in adventure activities. Adventure activities in nature (land and water): Characterization, structuring, and teaching-learning-training processes. Inclusion and accessibility in adventure activities. Pedagogical practice under faculty guidance and supervision comprising activities of reflection, directed observation, and/or teaching experiences

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 206).

In this syllabus, the indication of land and water ABPs and the absence of air ABPs drew our attention. This seems justified when we identify that the so-called “air” ABPs require resources (equipment, professional and financial support, etc.) that are generally not accessible to a significant portion of the population and probably not even to the student body as a whole. In the case of water ABPs, it is inferred that practices (surfing, canoeing, stand-up paddle, kayak) held at sea and in enclosed waters (Conceição and Peri lagoons) are on the horizon of experiences of the course, especially considering the mention of the contributions of Cisco Araña, an important surfer from São Paulo, on the teaching of surfing in the complementary references. In its basic references are three books, all organized in chapters, with different authors and topics, covering a wide range of aspects related to ABPs¹⁶.

It is also observed that the introductory and optional courses have the expression “adventure activities” in their titles. In turn, the course exclusive to the licentiate program has the expression “adventure body practices”. This may indicate an option for using the concept of “adventure body practices” in the course focused on its teaching in school PE, following the BNCC. The other two seem to highlight that, if and when the ABPs are developed outside the school context, then they are “activities”. The debate on the concepts of body practice and physical activity has been going on in the field of PE since the first half of the 2000s, spreading to its dimensions, the case of body practices considered adventure.

Finally, we observed the indication of “equivalence” of the Theory and Methodology of Adventure Sports course, offered to classes before this PPP, with the Introduction to Adventure Activities course. In this case, when migrating to the new curriculum, the students who attended it do not need to take the course in the new PPP.

Diagnosing now the approximations and distances related to the ABPs in the two PPPs, the quantitative issue soon stands out, with UFG presenting only one course while UFSC presents three. This may reverberate as a concern at UFSC that its egresses have significant contact with the topic, although, for those who only finish the bachelor's program, if they do not attend the optional course, they will only have some contact with the ABPs and in an introductory manner. In turn, the licentiate program will have mandatory courses in two moments: the introductory course and the following one. At UFG, upon offering only one course and in the common stage, there seems to be an objective that everyone has minimal contact with ABPs and is able to expand their knowledge when and if any of the Free Cores reported above are offered.

Significant data to understand these two distinct contexts is that there is already a permanent staff professor at UFG who works with this topic but also with the leisure theme, and who, due to the distribution of components in the curricular flow, will work, each year, with the Physical Education and Leisure course in one semester and with ABPs in the other. On the other hand, at UFSC, derived from this new PPP, a competition for permanent professors specific to this topic was held in 2022.

However, the UFG PPP presents an important flexibility in five mandatory courses: Teaching Internship in Body Practices (sixth term, licentiate and bachelor's programs), Internship in Leisure, Sports, and Health (8th term, bachelor's program), Internship in Teaching, Research, and Extension (no definition of term, licentiate and bachelor's programs), Thematic Body Practices I and Thematic Body Practices II (second and third terms, respectively). These curriculum components may be offered by any FEFD professor, individually or collectively, with different contents of Body Culture, including ABPs. From this perspective, the ABPs may be addressed numerous times in their various constitutive dimensions at the end of training cycles.

Another distance diagnosed was the non-indication, at UFG, of land, water, and/or air ABPs, with the choice of ABPs to be carried out by the class remaining open to the freedom of the professorship. In this direction, the scarce presence of water spaces in the region, such as lakes and lagoons, must significantly restrict access to water practices, except when performed/simulated in swimming pools; this is in addition to the limitations already pointed out for air ABPs.

An aspect that has been frequently debated in the field of ABPs is its articulation with the environment and/or with nature. Most of the time, the environment concerns everything that surrounds the human being, be it the urban, rural, artificial, or preserved environment. On the other hand, nature is more linked to poorly urbanized areas, many already constituted as permanent preservation areas (PPAs).

In this line, it was observed that the UFSC PPP is concerned with pointing out the need to take this into account. This aspect is reflected in the syllabuses and references of the courses analyzed above and in their introductory text:

The coast of Santa Catarina Island is 172 km long and full of beaches, shores, spits, mangroves, and dunes. The morphology of the island is discontinuous, formed by mountain ridges that reach 532 m of altitude in the Ribeirão da Ilha hill and sedimentary lands of recent formation composing the coastal plains. Therefore, there are many possibilities for exploring and incorporating Physical Education from the various manifestations of human movement existing/practiced in this city

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 06-07, emphasis added).

This concern was not made explicit in the UFG PPP, except for a mention of the environment in the syllabus of the Theoretical-Methodological Foundations of Adventure Body Practices course. Thus, the professor responsible for the topic presents related publications¹⁷, which indirectly suggests that the debate on the environment and ABPs will be present.

Regarding approximations, it seems that the proposals for inserting ABPs in the two PPPs are located in a more general context of understanding the social relevance and visibility that this content has been assuming/achieving in the Brazilian scenario since its articulations with culture, tourism, and leisure, with the economy, with the media, with the “sport” institution. And with Education and Physical Education as well, always in search of new content and new educational strategies and/or strategies for consolidating theoretical-methodological proposals already developed in the academic and school environment.

Final Considerations

We chose to end this text by commenting on considerations about other aspects listed in the Methodology: are the two PPPs based on common and universal principles? Is it possible to observe a homogenization process produced by globalization in them? What are the determinations stemming from the Brazilian nation-state in the new curricula? Is there an ideology of progress present in them? Is there a conception of science in the PPPs? And also, what is the objective intention of inserting this content into PE training?

What principles would be common and universal in offering courses on ABPs in undergraduate PE programs? It seems to us that this is a trend in countries in Europe and South America, two realities that we are relatively familiar with. In these contexts, there has been agreement to offer ABPs by differentiating when they are content for school PE and when they are in other contexts, notably leisure and sports. However, while there is an objective in wealthier countries of presenting ABPs in school PE to introduce them as content to be consumed at leisure and/or practiced as a sport, it is noticed that in countries in which societies lack even resources for a dignified survival, ABPs are placed in school PE as, perhaps, the only time in a student's life when it will be possible for them to experience such practices. The presence of ABPs in PE training may also increase their relevance and inclusion in school PE, pointing out alternative paths of professional activity. Here we have a typical situation of the conflict between capital and labor since its presence in higher education programs may mean an expansion of the consumer public with a consequent increase in the exploitation of the working class that will work with the ABPs; however, it may also, dialectically, contribute to the creation of a culture of experiences of these practices autonomously and creatively.

On the other hand, it may constitute a process of homogenization of ABPs, fundamentally if its appropriation is through the reproduction of its dominant practice – technical, rationalized, instrumental. In this sense, it is important to critically envisage ABPs in the initial training as manifestations of body culture that are susceptible to changes and resignifications and to be treated by other means.

And the Brazilian nation-state, how did it influence the two curricular reforms analyzed here? And how did such reforms subsume (or not) these influences? In the UFG PPP, there are explicit manifestations of maintaining the progressist training project present since its implementation:

[...] the guiding and constitutive principles of the formative projects of the Academic Unit are preserved, while we incorporate results of other evaluation processes carried out throughout the validity periods of these last PPPs. These are, therefore, the main markers of the decisions taken in this reformulation

(UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 2).

The document exposes the long, open, and participatory process in its construction, the importance of curricular evaluations developed on numerous occasions, and highlights that it considers the objective and subjective conditions that make up the national and local institutional reality in its structural, political, theoretical, and normative dimensions, but its objective is to remain supported by the principles that have guided training at FEFD since its creation. Thus, there is a clear resistance to “top-down” determinations, through which the FEFD meets the new guidelines bureaucratically but implements strategies for organizing its PPP to support critical training.

At UFSC, it was also observed that the evaluation processes carried out over some years before the reformulation influenced the current PPP. However, there are virtually no references to previous PPPs and/or a “background policy” that is program-identifying. Still, it warns of “[...] new contingents of training with a critical view of the 'fads' of the area” (UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 33, our translation).

The pedagogical proposal seems to accept the changes recommended in the guidelines as if they converge with the general idea of training in/of that academic teaching unit, an interpretation guided by the high scores received in ENADE editions, and still attributes to the new generation of professors of the CDS an important role in this dynamic:

In general, the analysis of each ENADE cycle shows superior general and specific scores compared to other programs in the same field in the Federative Unit, Greater Region, and Brazil. The presented scenario is not all negative; on the contrary, it signals progress in conducting and consolidating the program. [...] Many of the challenges presented have already been overcome, such as the significant updating of the faculty that occurred in recent years

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 34).

UFSC points to the need to overcome the simplistic curricular debate centered on the definition of new courses and workloads, and highlights the need to look at the “[...] real needs of the future professional [...] construction and execution of a realistic and consistent pedagogical project for the training of graduates in Physical Education at UFSC” (UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 34, our translation). There were no expressions or phrases that may be interpreted as a progressist training project; UFSC seems to receive the changes in the new guidelines with some affinity.

It is not possible for us to clearly evaluate the insertion of ABPs in UFG programs in line with what was discussed in the previous paragraphs, nor the expansion of their presence in UFSC programs. In both, this insertion seems to respond to/meet, at the same time, the ideals of updating the PPPs and adaptation to new fields of activity regarding the important opportunity to offer access to ABPs to the Brazilian population, either in school spaces or in other contexts of professional activity.

In scrutinizing the PPPs, we sought to define expressions that could contribute to analyzing some ideology of progress present in them. We began by searching for the very expression “progresso” (“progress”) and found it in neither. We then chose the word “atualização” (“updating”) as a possible expression of a notion of linear progress aligned with the market, even though we were aware that this choice could be wrong and lead us to errors in the analysis of the PPPs.

At UFSC, “atualização” appeared in some excerpts:

Updating of the didactic-pedagogical materials and teaching strategies, as well as improving the quality of relationships established in the teaching-learning process, thinking of the curriculum as a human construction

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 25, emphasis added).

It was also pointed out, especially in the bachelor's program, the need for curricular updating in the sense of articulating professional training to the most current needs of the field

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 33, emphasis added).

However, the dynamics in the field are observed that impose constant updating and reflection on the curriculum

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 34, emphasis added).

Thus, the profile of a critical, achieving, and aggregating professional is outlined, with the ability to transform knowledge, readiness to solve problems, ability to deal with people and work in a team, autonomous, responsible, ethical, qualified, and concerned with their continuous updating, who manages the present by creating the future and transforms difficulties into opportunities

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 166, emphasis added).

Our analysis understands that “updating” seems to be used as a synonym for responding to the most immediate, contemporary requirements – which would not always correspond to critical and progressist training. The last sentence quoted above – “[...] concerned with their continuous updating, who manages the present by creating the future and transforms difficulties into opportunities” – could be in advertisements for Sebrae and/or the S System programs.

In turn, in the UFG PPP, we did not find one or the other. There is, yes, the expression “qualificação” (“qualification”), repeated a few times to argue in favor of the continuous training of the servants of the academic unit. On the other hand, when referring to the ethical and professional commitment of future egresses, and seeming to be an attempt not to point out some idea of progress but to highlight the presence of contradiction in social processes, which require continuous reflection, the PPP underscores the search for:

Critical understanding of reality and social and political commitment to social transformation [...]. Understanding of the contradictory movements of advances and regressions in public policies related to the professional practice of Physical Education and the need for social participation in the organization process for the defense of social rights; continuing training, qualification training

(UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 13).

Our penultimate aspect of analysis addresses the presence, explicit or not, of some conception of science and, consequently, of knowledge production in the documents. For such, we narrowed our search to the terms “ciência” (“science”) and “conhecimento” (“knowledge”) and others derived from them.

At UFG, from the following quote, we may infer that there is indeed a conception of science designed for the curriculum, supported by the principles of praxis, which leads us to a production of knowledge of a materialist-historical nature: “The development of training is based on the articulation between theory and practice, with praxis as the foundation of the teaching-learning process, knowledge production, and professional activity” (UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 12, our translation). We observe the fact that other sciences are placed and may be present in the training; the PPP emphasizes: “There is the recognition of the contributions of different sciences and other forms of knowledge for the theoretical development of the academic and professional field of Physical Education and human training in general” (UFG/FEFD, 2021, p. 12, our translation). Thus, the PPP highlights that content related to scientific work and knowledge production is distributed in several courses, and this may be measured by looking at the references of the curricular components, in which 19 studies may be found that contain the expression “conhecimento” (“knowledge”) in their titles.

In turn, the UFSC PPP indicates that the study of movement should be interdisciplinary and, therefore, based on the different sciences that investigate it: “Professional intervention in Physical Education based on principles, concepts, and methods that are integral to the sciences involved in the interdisciplinary study of human movement” (UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 15, our translation). And, when referring to the expected profile for the egresses, reinforces this interdisciplinary and scientific idea in their training:

Thus, a professional who masters the following competencies and general skills is visualized: – Master conceptual, procedural, and attitudinal knowledge specific to Physical Education and those coming from the related sciences and fields, guided by social, moral, ethical, and esthetic values typical of a plural and democratic society

(UFSC/CDS, 2021, p. 171, emphasis in the original).

Thus, it seems clear to us that UFG proposes progressist and critical-based training, although it does not engender the PPP in this perspective, while UFSC projects more interdisciplinary training, without an explicit election for one or another scientific project.

It remains to be reinforced that this study sought to identify the characteristics, aspects, and determinations that led the two institutions studied to offer courses with the ABP content in their new PPPs implemented – both in the first academic semester of 2022. In this journey, we also ended up analyzing some more general aspects of the PPPs, without which it would not have been possible to achieve our general objective with the rigor we wanted.

We conclude by reaffirming our assessment that the offer of courses with this content, in both cases, seems to meet the requirements of the world of the market and labor and that, despite the highlighted differences, the two PPPs intend not to lose the local specificities, treating the phenomenon within the context of the

[...] complex social relations that constitute it as preparation for work, in a culturally and economically globalized world. This means understanding it as a strategic response to the problems posed by economic globalization, productive restructuring, quality and competitiveness objectives, transformations in the world of work, and structural unemployment

(Carvalho, 2013, p. 429, our translation).

However, dialectically, they present proposals that make it possible to expand access to ABPs in both the training and activity of their future egresses, whether teachers or bachelors.

Notes

• 1
  For more on the concept of Adventure Body Practices, see Ignatius et al. (2016).
• 2
  QUELHAS, Alvaro de Azeredo; NOZAKI, Hajime Takeuchi. Políticas neoliberais e as modificações na formação do professor de educação física: em defeesa da politecnia. In: SEMINÁRIO DA REDESTRADO: REGULAÇÃO EDUCACIONAL E TRABALHO DOCENTE, 6., 2006, Rio de Janeiro. Anais […].Rio de Janeiro: Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, 2006.
• 3
  Due to issues related to internal administrative procedures for curricular reformulation at UFSC, it is known that the Physical Education PPP of this institution will only begin in the first semester of 2025.
• 4
  On the topic of the history of the present, see, among others, Dosse (2012).
• 5
  MEYER, John; RAMÍREZ, Francisco. La insitucionalización mundial de la educación. In: SCHRIEWER, Jürgen (Org.). Formación del discurso en la educación comparada. Barcelona: Ediciones Pomares, 2002. P. 69-90.
• 6
  DAVID, Nivaldo. A Formação de Professores na Universidade: reflexões acerca da cultura, juventude e trabalho docente. 2012. 308 f. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) – Faculdade de Educação, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, 2012.
• 7
  Currently, after the creation of the Licentiate Program in Dance, it was renamed the Faculdade de Educação Física e Dança (FEFD, School of Physical Education and Dance).
• 8
  Information available in SIGAA (2022), the UFG academic management system.
• 9
  INÁCIO, Humberto. Práticas Corporais de Aventura na Natureza. In: GONZÁLEZ, Fernando; FENSTERSEIFER, Paulo (Org.). Dicionário Crítico de Educação Física. Ijuí: Unijuí, 2014. P. 531-535.
• 10
  INÁCIO, Humberto. Proposta de classificação das práticas corporais de aventura para o ensino na educação física escolar. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, Brasília, v. 43, 2021. Disponível em https://www.scielo.br/j/rbce/a/JBt8mVCrp38pdD6KxPWjPZM/
• 11
  LE BRETON, David. Condutas de risco: dos jogos de morte ao jogo de viver. Campinas: Autores Associados, 2009.
• 12
  BAETA, Anna Bianchini et al. Educação ambiental: repensando o espaço da cidadania. São Paulo: Cortez, 2005.
• 13
  CARDOSO, Fernando; MARINHO, Alcyane; PIMENTEL, Giuliano. Questões de gênero em universitários praticantes de esportes de aventura. Revista da Educação Física, Maringá, UEM, v. 24, n. 4, p. 597-608, 2013.
• 14
  GONZÁLEZ, Fernando; DARIDO, Suraya; OLIVEIRA, Amauri (Org.). Lutas, capoeira e práticas corporais de aventura. Maringá: EDUEM, 2017.
• 15
  CORRÊA, Liciane; BADARÓ, Luiz; SOUZA, Juliano; PIMENTEL, Giuliano. Práticas corporais de aventura e biografias de movimento na Educação Física Escolar. Humanidades e Inovação, Palmas, v. 7, n. 10, 2020; PEREIRA, Dimitri. Pedagogia da aventura na escola: proposições para a base nacional comum curricular. Várzea Paulista: Fontoura, 2019; PORTELA, Andrey. Os esportes de aventura na Educação Física Escolar: formação e atuação de professores. Curitiba: CRV, 2020.
• 16
  MARINHO, Alcyane; BRUHNS, Heloísa (Org.). Viagens, lazer e esporte: o espaço da natureza. São Paulo: Manole, 2006; DIAS, Cleber; ALVES JUNIOR, Edmur (Org.). Em busca de aventura: múltiplos olhares sobre esporte, lazer e natureza. Niterói: EdUFF, 2009; SCHWARTZ, Gisele (Org.). Aventuras na natureza: consolidando significados. Jundiaí: Fontoura, 2006.
• 17
  INACIO, Humberto; BAENA, Antonio; SOUSA, Marcel. ¿Es el deporte de aventura una práctica ecológica? Análisis en Brasil y España en el contexto de la educación física. Educacion Fisica y Deporte, Medellín, v. 35, p. 313-333, 2016; SANTOS, Oromar; INACIO, Humberto. Práticas Corporais de Lazer, Consciência e comportamento Ambiental no Rio Araguaia: A Praia do Goiano. Revista Brasileira de Estudos do Lazer, Licere, v. 01, p. 24-42, 2015; INACIO, Humberto; Moraes, Thaís; SILVEIRA, Amanda. Educação Física e educação ambiental: refletindo sobre a formação e atuação docente. Conexões, Campinas, Unicamp, v. 11, p. 1-23, 2013.

Availability of research data

The dataset supporting the results of this study is published in this article.

References

• ABIB, Leonardo; KNUTH, Alan. As diretrizes curriculares nacionais da educação física de 2018 e as imprecisões em torno da saúde coletiva e o SUS. Pensar a Prática, Goiânia, UFG, v. 24, e67182, 2021. Disponível em: https://revistas.ufg.br/fef/article/view/67182 Acesso em: 27 mar. 2022.
  » https://revistas.ufg.br/fef/article/view/67182
• ARMBRUST, Igor; PEREIRA, Dimitri. Pedagogia da aventura na escola Várzea Paulista: Fontoura, 2010.
• BALL, Stephen. Performatividades e Fabricações na Economia Educacional: rumo a uma sociedade performativa. Educação e Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 35, n. 2, p. 37-55, 2010.
• BARRETTO, Margarita; TAMANINI, Elizabete; SILVA, Maria da. Discutindo o ensino universitário de turismo Campinas: Papirus, 2004.
• BIANCHINI, Barbara; LIMA, Gabriel de; GOMES, Eloiza. Formação de Professor: reflexões da educação matemática no ensino superior. Educação & Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 44, n. 1, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-623677732 Acesso em: 2 maio 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-623677732
• BRASIL. Resolução nº 03 de 16 de junho de 1987. Fixa os mínimos de conteúdo e duração a serem observados nos cursos de graduação em Educação Física (Bacharelado e/ou Licenciatura Plena). Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 10 set. 1987. Seção 1. P. 172.
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Resolução n. 6, de 18 de dezembro de 2018. Institui Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais dos Cursos de Graduação em Educação Física e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 19 dez. 2018. Seção 1. P. 48 e 49.
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Resolução CNE/CP nº 2, de 20 de dezembro de 2019. Define as Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais para a Formação Inicial de Professores para a Educação Básica e institui a Base Nacional Comum para a Formação Inicial de Professores da Educação Básica (BNC-Formação). Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 15 abr. 2019. Seção 1. P. 46-49.
• CARVALHO, Cristina. Cidadania cultural e a formação de professores. Educação & Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 26, n. 2, p. 75-87, 2001.
• CARVALHO, Elma. Reflexões sobre a importância dos estudos de educação comparada na atualidade. HISTEDBR, Campinas,n. 52, p. 416-435, 2013.
• CASTELLANI FILHO, Lino. Educação Física no Brasil: a história que não se conta. Campinas: Papirus Editora, 1988.
• CAUPER, Dayse. O ensino do esporte orientação na escola: possibilidades e limites de uma proposta à luz da metodologia crítico-superadora. 2018. 388 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ensino na Educação Básica) – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ensino na Educação Básica, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Centro de Pesquisa Aplicada à Educação (CEPAE), Cidade de Goiânia, 2018. Disponível em https://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/items/095c61a4-b15a-4080-bd55-6f8fe87de6eb Acesso em: 10 out 2022.
  » https://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/items/095c61a4-b15a-4080-bd55-6f8fe87de6eb
• COLETIVO DE AUTORES. Metodologia de Ensino da Educação Física São Paulo: Cortez Editora, 1992.
• CORREA, Evandro; DELGADO, Mônica. Atividades de aventura nos currículos de formação inicial em educação física no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Estudos do Lazer, Minas Gerais, v. 8, n. 2. p. 114-135, 2021. Disponível em https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/rbel/article/view/29059 Acesso em: 27 jun. 2022.
  » https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/rbel/article/view/29059
• DAVID, Nivaldo. A formação de professores na universidade: reflexões acerca da cultura, juventude e trabalho docente. 2012. 308 f. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) –Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, 2012. Disponível em: https://files.cercomp.ufg.br/weby/up/6/o/Tese_Nivaldo__A_Nogueira_David.pdf Acesso em: 1 fev. 2023.
  » https://files.cercomp.ufg.br/weby/up/6/o/Tese_Nivaldo__A_Nogueira_David.pdf
• DOSSE, François. História do tempo presente e historiografia. Tempo e Argumento, Florianópolis, v. 4, n. 1, p. 5-22, 2012.
• FRANCO, Laércio; CAVASINI Rodrigo; DARIDO Suraya. Práticas Corporais de Aventura. In: GONZÁLEZ Fernando; DARIDO Suraya; BÁSSOLI, Amauri (Org.). Lutas, Capoeira e Práticas Corporais de Aventura Maringá: Eduem, 2014. P. 101-135.
• FRANCO, Laercio Claro Pereira. Atividades físicas de aventura na escola: uma proposta nas três dimensões do conteúdo. 2008. 134 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências da Motricidade) – Instituto de Biociências de Rio Claro, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Rio Claro, 2008. Disponível em: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/96064 Acesso em: 2 fev. 2023.
  » http://hdl.handle.net/11449/96064
• FURTADO, Roberto; RIOS, Gleyson. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais de Educação Física: resistências necessárias e possíveis. Revista Fluminense de Educação Física, Niterói, Edição Especial, p. 01-09, 2021.
• HALLAL, Dalila et al. O contexto de criação dos cursos de bacharelado em turismo no Brasil. In: COLOQUIO INTERNACIONAL SOBRE GESTIÓN UNIVERSITARIA EN AMÉRICA DEL SUR, 10., 2010, Mar del Plata. Anales […]Mar del Plata: CIGUAS, 2010.
• INÁCIO, Humberto et al. Práticas corporais de aventura na escola: possibilidades e desafios - reflexões para além da Base Nacional Comum Curricular. Motrivivência, Florianópolis, UFSC, v. 28, n. 48, p. 168-187, 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8042.2016v28n48p168 Acesso em: 1 jan. 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8042.2016v28n48p168
• INÁCIO, Humberto. Práticas corporais de aventura na natureza (verbete). In: GONZÁLEZ, Fernando; FENSTERSEIFER, Paulo. Dicionário Crítico da Educação Física Ijuí: Editora Unijuí. 2014. P. 531-535.
• MAIA, Júlio; SACARDO, Michele. A produção científica sobre as diretrizes curriculares para a educação física (DCNEF): determinações históricas e implicações para formação e intervenção profissional. Movimento, Porto Alegre, v. 26, e26037, p. 01-17, 2020. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-8918.97618 Acesso em: 2 fev. 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-8918.97618
• MALET, Régis. Do Estado-Nação ao Espaço-Mundo: as condições históricas da renovação da educação comparada. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas, v. 25, n. 89, p. 1301-1332, 2004.
• METZNER, Andreia; DRIGO, Alexandre. A trajetória histórica das leis e diretrizes curriculares nacionais para a área de formação em educação física. Revista Brasileira de História da Educação, Maringá, v. 21, p. 01-27, 2021.
• MORAIS, Gleison. Práticas corporais de aventura na educação física escolar: uma proposta de ensino com base na metodologia Crítico-superadora. 2021. 160 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação Física em Rede) – Programa de Mestrado Profissional em Educação Física-PROEF, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, 2021. Disponível em: https://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/bitstream/tede/10607/3/Disserta%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20-%20Gleison%20Gomes%20de%20Morais%20-%202020.pdf Acesso em: 11 nov. 2023.
  » https://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/bitstream/tede/10607/3/Disserta%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20-%20Gleison%20Gomes%20de%20Morais%20-%202020.pdf
• NEIRA, Marcos; BORGES, Clayton. Esquadrinhar e Governar: análise das recomendações do CONFEF para a Educação Física escolar. Educação & Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 43, n. 2, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-623664150 Acesso em: 2 maio 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-623664150
• RIBEIRO, Daniele. Licenciatura e Bacharelado: a formação profissional na área da Educação Física. 2012. 105 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação Física) – Programa de Pós-graduação em Educação Física, Universidade Federal do Triangulo Mineiro, Ubereba, 2012.
• SIGAA. Sistema Integrado de Gestão de Atividades Acadêmicas. Autenticação UFG Goiânia: UFG, 2022. Disponível em: https://sigaa.sistemas.ufg.br/sigaa/portais/docente/turmas.jsf Acesso em: 24 maio 2022.
  » https://sigaa.sistemas.ufg.br/sigaa/portais/docente/turmas.jsf
• SILVA, Fabiany. Estudos comparados como método de pesquisa: a escrita de uma história curricular por documentos curriculares. Revista Brasileira de Educação, v. 21, n. 64, p. 209-224, 2016.
• SOARES, Carmen. Educação física: raízes europeias. Campinas: Autores Associados, 2017.
• TAHARA, Alexander; CARNICELLI FILHO, Sandro. A presença das atividades de aventura nas aulas de educação física. Arquivos de Ciências do Esporte, Minas Gerais, UFTM, v. 1, n. 1, p. 60-66, 2013.
• UFG/FEFD. Universidade Federal de Goiás. Faculdade de Educação Física e Dança Projeto pedagógico do curso de Educação Física Goiânia: Coordenadoria dos Cursos de Educação Física UFG, 2021.
• UFSC/CDS. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Centro de Desportos. Projeto pedagógico do curso de Educação Física Florianópolis: Coordenadoria dos Cursos de Educação Física UFSC/CDS, 2021.
• VIANA, Marger. Representações sociais acerca da formação do bom professor de Matemática. In: SEMINÁRIO DE PESQUISA EM EDUCAÇÃO MATEMÁTICA, 4., 2009, Taguatinga. Anais […] Taguatinga: SPEM, 2009. P. 1-26.

• Editor in charge
  Luis Armando Gandin

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  08 Nov 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  08 May 2023
• Accepted
  23 Jan 2024