Research Question and Reflection
Before partaking on my field
experience to Brazil in June, my research question initially focused around the
issue of human rights and education. I
wanted to know how funding for the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games
affected the Brazilian education system.
Upon visiting our first city (Brasilia) however, my research question
shifted to focus solely on the issue of disparate funding in Brazilian
schools. In essence, I wanted to know
how does disparate funding affect Brazil’s schools (both public and
private).
While visiting the city of Brasilia, we were fortunate to discuss this issue in some of our in country seminars, as well as witness the disparity in our visits to different schools. I discovered that although free and mandatory education for 4-17 year olds was enacted as a result of the 1996 National Education Law, that does not mean that educational opportunities are equal. In fact, similar to our system in the United States, students who have more financial resources at home, wind up having more access to better educational opportunities in Brazil.
At the Secondary Level, private schools are considered “better” than public schools, though that flip-flops when one gets the university level. Due to the fact that the public universities are so well-funded (and free), they are difficult to get into. Consequently, wealthy, elite kids who can afford to go to private elementary and secondary school are the ones who dominate the admission slots in the public universities. What is left for poor kids are slots in private universities, which often times have no or limited funding, and thus cannot afford to run full academic programs. For example, a private university may not be able to have a full Biology program because they cannot afford the equipment.
While in Brasilia, we visited the Colegio Serios; a private pre-K through high school that boasted an impressive array of resources and programs for students, in state-of-the-art facilities. Additionally, the school has adopted a full-day schedule, which is not the norm in public schools throughout Brazil. Some of the programs and resouces offered to students include a 21st century science lab, a gastronomy program in which students prepare the lunches for the school, fashion, woodworking, a computer lab, plastic arts, a math laboratory, and a fully equipped room for those interested in learning circus arts. In essence, these private schools, which are much better funded than private schools, tend to have more qualified students when they graduate from high school, thus opening the doors for them to the elite public universities.
Disparate funding also affects the teachers in Brazil, which I also learned during our time in Brasilia, as well as during my field experience in Teresina. Placed with an experienced English teacher in the Central Cultural De Linguas Teresina, I had the opportunity to talk with numerous language teachers, many of whom were teaching at the center in addition to teaching in other schools. Disparate funding not only exists between private and public schools, but also between the different states in Brazil. For example, teachers in one state can make half the salary as a teacher in a neighboring state, which causes some teachers to abandon their state’s public schools, to go teach in another state. This is also very similar to our educational system in America. Indeed, while visiting the State Secretary for Education in Brasilia, we learned that of Brazil’s education fund, 60% goes to teachers’ wages, yet teachers are frequently absent. The reason being that many teachers need to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, and so will often negotiate a 20 hour contract with one school, and then a 40 hour contract with another. They then must “call in sick” to one school in order to meet the contract of the other.
Often times teachers in the United States (myself included) complain how we do not have enough time to get things done, that we do not have enough prep-periods built into our schedules, and that we do not have adequate resources to meet the increasingly demanding needs of our students. As a result of my field experience in Brazil however, I am realizing that relatively speaking, ourselves, and our students are much more fortunate than many students in foreign nations. That said, in the spirit of thinking globally, I wonder, how is it that two very different nations such as Brazil and the United States can face many of the same issues in education, particularly in terms of equal access and disparate funding. As pointed out in our collaborative debrief with ILEP fellows in Salvador, whether in Brazil or the United States, funding equals resources, and resources equal opportunities. Without equal opportunity how can we have an equal playing field? How can either nation claim to offer free education to all, when there is so clearly a disparity in that education, and how can both nations work to improve this situation?
While visiting the city of Brasilia, we were fortunate to discuss this issue in some of our in country seminars, as well as witness the disparity in our visits to different schools. I discovered that although free and mandatory education for 4-17 year olds was enacted as a result of the 1996 National Education Law, that does not mean that educational opportunities are equal. In fact, similar to our system in the United States, students who have more financial resources at home, wind up having more access to better educational opportunities in Brazil.
At the Secondary Level, private schools are considered “better” than public schools, though that flip-flops when one gets the university level. Due to the fact that the public universities are so well-funded (and free), they are difficult to get into. Consequently, wealthy, elite kids who can afford to go to private elementary and secondary school are the ones who dominate the admission slots in the public universities. What is left for poor kids are slots in private universities, which often times have no or limited funding, and thus cannot afford to run full academic programs. For example, a private university may not be able to have a full Biology program because they cannot afford the equipment.
While in Brasilia, we visited the Colegio Serios; a private pre-K through high school that boasted an impressive array of resources and programs for students, in state-of-the-art facilities. Additionally, the school has adopted a full-day schedule, which is not the norm in public schools throughout Brazil. Some of the programs and resouces offered to students include a 21st century science lab, a gastronomy program in which students prepare the lunches for the school, fashion, woodworking, a computer lab, plastic arts, a math laboratory, and a fully equipped room for those interested in learning circus arts. In essence, these private schools, which are much better funded than private schools, tend to have more qualified students when they graduate from high school, thus opening the doors for them to the elite public universities.
Disparate funding also affects the teachers in Brazil, which I also learned during our time in Brasilia, as well as during my field experience in Teresina. Placed with an experienced English teacher in the Central Cultural De Linguas Teresina, I had the opportunity to talk with numerous language teachers, many of whom were teaching at the center in addition to teaching in other schools. Disparate funding not only exists between private and public schools, but also between the different states in Brazil. For example, teachers in one state can make half the salary as a teacher in a neighboring state, which causes some teachers to abandon their state’s public schools, to go teach in another state. This is also very similar to our educational system in America. Indeed, while visiting the State Secretary for Education in Brasilia, we learned that of Brazil’s education fund, 60% goes to teachers’ wages, yet teachers are frequently absent. The reason being that many teachers need to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, and so will often negotiate a 20 hour contract with one school, and then a 40 hour contract with another. They then must “call in sick” to one school in order to meet the contract of the other.
Often times teachers in the United States (myself included) complain how we do not have enough time to get things done, that we do not have enough prep-periods built into our schedules, and that we do not have adequate resources to meet the increasingly demanding needs of our students. As a result of my field experience in Brazil however, I am realizing that relatively speaking, ourselves, and our students are much more fortunate than many students in foreign nations. That said, in the spirit of thinking globally, I wonder, how is it that two very different nations such as Brazil and the United States can face many of the same issues in education, particularly in terms of equal access and disparate funding. As pointed out in our collaborative debrief with ILEP fellows in Salvador, whether in Brazil or the United States, funding equals resources, and resources equal opportunities. Without equal opportunity how can we have an equal playing field? How can either nation claim to offer free education to all, when there is so clearly a disparity in that education, and how can both nations work to improve this situation?