This paper aims at problematizing the ideologies and language ideologies that are refracted in two Brazilian educational policies: BNCC and PNLD. In order to accomplish this purpose, our analysis will focus on the views of language and literacies (des)legitimized in these policies and the extent to which they establish dialogues with critical views of education.
For at least two decades language educational policies in Brazil have been highly inspired by sociohistorical approaches to pedagogy and language as well as by conceptions of critical literacies. Framed especially on the theory about learning and development designed by Vygotsky (1930, 1934), the philosophy of language proposed by the Circle of Bakhtin (VOLÓCHINOV, 1929; BAKHTIN, 1953) and notions concerning critical education developed by Freire (1967, 1970, 1979), policies such as the Brazilian National Curricular Framework (PCN, 1998), the Curricular Guidelines for High School (OCEM, 2006) and the National Program of Textbooks (PNLD) are clearly oriented by comprehensive and complex views on language and (multi)literacies which emphasize the role of multiple semiotic resources in both constructing and transforming the social world. The replacement of curricular frameworks like PCN and OCEM by a Common Core Curriculum (BNCC) in 2017 coincided with President Dilma Roussef’s impeachment and the emergence of more conservative economic, social and educational policies during Temer´s government and more emphatically after Bolsonaro took office in January 2019. Parting from the principle that BNCC answers both to neoliberal ideologies concerning the commodification of education and conservative perspectives on what counts as legitimate teaching and learning practices, this paper aims at problematizing the ideologies (VOLÓCHINOV, 1929) and language ideologies (WOOLARD, 1998; KROSKITY, 2004) that are refracted in two Brazilian educational policies: BNCC and PNLD. In order to accomplish this purpose, our analysis will focus on the views of language and literacies (des)legitimized in these policies and the extent to which they establish (or not) dialogues with critical views of education proposed by Paulo Freire.
