Critical Reflection for the Change of Educational Practice

This study is based on a doctoral research developed by the Postgraduate Program in Education of the Federal University of Piauí (UFPI), which analyzes the changes in the educational practice of teachers working in rural schools after participating in the Degree in Education of the Field (LEdoC). The clipping presented through this purpose aims to discuss the principle of crit ical reflection as an important element for the change in educational practice. The discussions that support these stages are supported by theorists such as: Contreras (2012), Freire (2013 and 2014), Molina and Hage (2015), Pimenta e Lima (2012), among oth ers. The data production employed the Richardson-oriented documentary analysis (2012) and conversation wheels from the perspective of Freire (2002). The data production employed the Richardson-oriented documentary analysis (2012) and conversation wheels from the perspective of Freire (2002). The results show that the interfaces between the curricular activities of teacher training, based on the specific knowledge of the formation and the relation between them and the knowledge of the peasant culture, produce critical reflections, contributing to the change of educational practice. Keywords— Initial teacher training. Educational practice. Critical reflection.


INTRODUCTION
The Degree in Field Education (LEdoC), linked to the Center of Educational Sciences (CCE) of the Federal University of Piauí (UFPI), the background of this research, is aimed at training educators for the rural schools in the area of Nature Sciences, has a regular character and duration of four years, being carried out in a system of semester blocks.
According to the Political Pedagogical Project of the Course (PPC), its intention is to offer the graduates the knowledge necessary to understand nature within a multidisciplinary vision. In addition to learning the scientific knowledge inherent in teacher training, it also aims to provide students with a solid foundation for understanding the dynamics of the field in its historical, cultural, economic and social aspects, enabling the development of pedagogical work committed to the supply and with the social quality of education for the rural population (UFPI, 2013).
The LEdoC has the following guidelines: a) Its object is the school of basic education, with emphasis on the organization of schools and pedagogical work for the final years of Elementary and Secondary Education; b) its objective is to prepare educators to act in teaching, in the management of educational processes and in the management of community educational processes; c) its curricular organization provides for presential courses (equivalent to regular semesters), offered in alternation between school time and community time; d) its curricular matrix develops a multidisciplinary teaching work strategy, organizing the curricular components from the Natural Sciences knowledge areas.
The course has a regular character and is based on two integrated dimensions of formative alternation: Time -University (TU) and Time-Community (TC). TU activities are carried out in the months of January / February and July / August, and during systematic meetings in the interval of each university time, constituent part of the disciplines and the Integrative Seminar. The activities that configure the TC dimension are carried out in the socio-professional space of the student, so that he can reflect on the problems, discuss with the community and colleagues and raise hypotheses about pos sible solutions. This dimension materializes in the classroom, with each return to TU activities, through discussions and socializations.
The beneficiaries are students from the rural area to work in rural schools located in diverse socio-cultural contexts or in schools located in the city, but which serve students from the countryside, among them teachers from rural schools that do not have higher education, 2018 represent 27.9% of the course's students. These students are selected annually through a specific selection process, which guarantees democratic access to the Course.
In the context of teacher education policies, there are expectations about this course, both in terms of promoting higher education for teachers working in rural schools, thus exceeding current levels of qualified teachers only at the intermediate level or baccalaureate, or in the context of ensuring formative processes that take into account the specificities of the field and its subjects, transcending the formal university spaces to enable the meeting of specific knowledge of the formation with the knowledge of the peasant culture, seeking to develop the capacity for reflection and action of the teachers for critical pedagogical rationality.
Considering these contextual issues, we feel instigated to know: how the principle of critical reflection contributes to the change in the educational practice of teachers working in rural schools, based on their participation in the Field Education Licentiate Course, UFPI of Teresina? Based on the assumption that, through the curriculum of the course, work specific knowledge of the training, contextualizing it with the students' reality, favors a critical reflection on the practices developed. Regarding this issue, Freire (2013, p. 40) affirms that "teacher training should contemplate in its curriculu m studies of theories that favor the critical reflection on the contexts and the practices developed by the teachers, in such a deep way, that these studies to be confused with practices. " The training is a pedagogical method of course, the social context and the experiences lived as a starting point for an understanding of reality in a process of articulation through the formation of other knowledge are produced and socialized. The proposal of the PPC of the LEdoC / UFPI that is specific to the formation can be articulated with the knowledge of the culture through the integration of activities carried out in the Time University and in the Community Time, a being "function in a strictly articulated way, enabling the the activities are brought by the student of the socio-cultural environment are expanded, constituting sources of reflection and learning "(UFPI, 2013, p.16).
It is important that it be a classroom with the capacity to improve the teaching capacity that develops and that carries out the teaching function and practice that improves the capacity to form a critical, politicized school critique and committed to social justice. This is an important study because it discusses the formative processes developed in this course, evidencing permanences and ruptures resulting from the confrontation between what is studied in the course and what is done in practice, contributing with the production of scientific knowledge and theoretical reflections on processes based on the conceptions of Field Education, enabling LEd o C readers, researchers and teachers to know about this public policy, as well as their contribution to changing the educational practice of teachers working in rural schools.
Our desire is to contribute to the advancement of discussions about teacher education, to strengthen debates about the specifics of formation and the link with their social subjects and their realities, considering the universality of the formative process es, the specificities of the LEdoC and its characterization, making it possible to recognize it, in order to rethink it from the aspects around which it is developed.

II.
METHODOLOGY We conducted the study guided by the epistemological biases of critical qualitative research, understood as an approach that, in addition to providing an understanding of the real, exposed and translated in the speeches of the interlocutors, also favors the awareness of the people to change the reality of which they are part.
The critical qualitative research is a modality that allows the insertion of the researcher in the context of the research, approaching the problem to be researched, as well as of the interlocutors who live and share a given reality marked by diverse professional and personal experiences, subject to a relationship which is characterized by its dynamic, lively, interactive, contradictory nature.
One of the most relevant aspects of qualitative research inspired by critical theory is the interpretation of information, and it is necessary for the researcher to carefully analyze the object of study, observing the historical context and its relation to the present time, the explicit and implicit information of form to communicat e the understanding about the result (KINCHELO E; MACLAREN, 2007).
According to Carspecken (2011), through the production of knowledge, critical qualitative research explicitly links power relations and social injustices, contributing to people's awareness and social change. Thus, it is necessary for the researcher to make a commitment to unveil social inequalities, offering the interlocutors theoretical-practical elements that effectively contribute to social transformation.
For the production of the data we did the documentary analysis of the Pedagogical Project of the Course (PPC), defined by Richardson (2012, page 228) "as the one that has as its object not the social phenomena, when and how they are produced, but the manifestations that record these phenomena and the ideas elaborated from them. " The documentary analysis of the PPC consisted of a rigorous study carried out in three stages: in the first one, called pre-analysis, we carried out the selection and superficial reading of the material; in the second, entitled material analysis, we did the codification, categorization and quantification of the information, through careful and repeated readings of the document. In the last step, called the treatment of results, we performed the inferences and interpretations of the document, and selected clippings In the documentary analysis we use as data the text of the PPC itself of the LEdoC / UFPI and its modes of operationalization, analyzing the philosophical and pedagogical theories and trends that underlie it, the guiding elements of Field Education contained in the document, the curriculum, the bibliographies indicated , the educational practices suggested and developed, as well as aspects that reveal the challenges of teacher training in this course.
The production of data was also carried out through the wheels of conversations, a research strategy that gives the interlocutors critical reflections on their conceptions and practices. As a result, they collaborate with the expansion of the knowledge about the object of study, favoring the socialization and the exchange of knowledge, as well as the shared analysis of the interpretations of the subjects. In Freire (2002) we find the description that the wheel is a space of sharing and confrontation of ideas, where freedom of speech and expression gives the group, and each individual in particular, the growth in understanding their own conflicts.
The wheels of conversation prefigure, in their capacity as data production technique, a way for the research interlocutors to perform a self-reflexiv e movement, socialization and exchange of knowledge about the object of study. As a data production strateg y, the discussion wheels allow participants to be involved and aware of their contribution, and can not be reproduced without the participants' awareness and involvement (WARSCHAUER, 2004).
The field of research comprises two scenarios: the Field Education Licentiate Course (LEdoC), linked to the Education Sciences Center of the Federal University of Piauí, Teresina Campus (Piauí), where the training processes are developed and the municipality of Timo n (Maranhão), where the study interlocutors reside and work. The choice of this municipality was guided by the fact that it has the largest number of students enrolled in the Course of Licenciatura in Education of the Field, from 2013 to 2017.
The interlocutors were 05 (five) teachers from the field schools enrolled in the course of the Licentiate course in Field Education, whose entry occurred in the years 2014 and 2015 and currently attend the 8th period of the LEdo C. In the process of selecting the participants of the research, we consider the following criteria: to be a teacher of rural schools for more than five years; being in the last two blocks of the course; preferably acting as a science teacher in the final years of elementary school or acting as a high school teacher in the areas of Biology, Chemistry or Physics. To preserve their identities, they were named: PROF 01, PROF 02, PROF 03, PROF 04 and PROF 05.

III. CRITICAL REFLECTION IN THE INITIAL TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF THE FIELD
Teacher education has been expanding as an educational policy and as a field of knowledge and knows, whose purposes need to be advanced in order to interfere in the educational reality, contributing to improve teaching and learning processes. For us to succeed in training, an important aspect to be considered in its design, as well as in its implementation are the factors that contribute, a priori, to the change in the educational practice.
We know that a formative process does not occur in a linear and simple way, its development occurs amid conflicts, imbalances and changes of conceptions. Thus, to promote the formation of teachers with a focus on changing the educational practice is to develop actions and emotions that can promote aspirations, will, solidarity and knowledge, critical reflection is a fundamental step.
The effectiveness and quality of teacher training initially implies that the curriculum is associated and based on a proposal of subject, society and school based on principles that should inform the formative actions. Illustratively, principles are like the roots of a tree, which draw the sap from the earth (knowledge), nourish the formation and cause it to have flowers and fruit (teacher trained and acting according to specifications expressed in the political pedagogical project of the course).
They are the starting point for formativ e actions, the curricular organization of the course and the role of the educational institution (HEI), enabling the conditions for the formation to be developed with quality and also the responsibility of the trainers in executing the processes, according to the delineation of the proposal.
The documentary analysis of the CCP of the LEdoC allowed us to know the principles that guide this formation, among them: critical reflection, the relation theory and practice, research as an educational principle, tolerance, respect for differences and diversity and interdisciplinarity. However, in the dialogues held in the conversational wheels, the speakers emphasized critical reflection as one of the most significant for the change in educational practice, which is why it is discussed in this work.

The principle of critical reflection
Confirming the understandings of the teachers who participated in this study, critical reflection is understood by Freire (2016) as the first condition for a professional to take a committed act, occupies a prominent place in the process of training the teachers of the field, since it contributes to improve teachers' lucidity about the social reality, the educational policies and the educational practice they develop. Also, we reflect: what characterizes a critical reflection? Based on Freire (2016, pp. 53-54) we understand that these are reflections nurtured in dialogue, elaborated in depth in the analysis of social / educational problems, recognizing that reality is changeable, trying to test discoveries and, in the face of the new, not repelling "The old for being old, nor accepting the new for being new, but accepting to the extent that they are valid." Thus, in addition to reflecting on school educational practice, as the perspective of reflective practice provides, the critical reflection proposed by Freire and discussed in this research, understands that the teacher is a critical professional who reflects on the practice, but also, on the social context in which the school is inserted, as proposed by the perspective of social reconstruction, characterized in the previous chapter.
The PCC of the LEdoC makes several references to critical reflection, according to excerpts fro m the document: [...] "Empowering graduates to formulat e and propose solutions to" problems in the various fields of knowledge; to develop a critical awareness of the sociohistorical-political reality "(UFPI, 2013, p. The graduates should have "the capacity to relate the exercise of critical reflection with the integral promotion of citizenship and with respect for the person, within the tradition of defending human rights" (UFPI, 2013, 30).
The formation of critical awareness about the socio-historical-political reality and its relationship with educational purposes contributes to evidence of the education we have, the education we want and the profile of a human being that we wish to form in order to act in society. The absence of such clarifications can erase the concept of change, so uttered today in neoliberal educational policies. It is as Pimenta (2012, 24) states when he says that "education portrays and reproduces society; but also projects the society he wants ." Through dialogue on the wheels of conversation, the teachers demonstrated that the formation promotes broad reflections on the reality in which they live, as they state in their statements: After the LEdoC I came to realize that society is a space of exclusion, has always been and continues to be. Whoever supports the status of the most favored classes is us, the poor and hardworking people. The rural school is a learning space for change, provided conditions are guaranteed (PROF 01). Reality is a dynamic of society and the course has helped me a lot to understand this, that our reality does not have to remain what it is today, but that it can be changed, depending on the way we act. The country school is very important; it must meet the wishes of the students. It should be inclusive and accommodating, geared to the needs of the students. The LEdoC made me understand that it is necessary to develop methodologies that favor learning, that students build knowledge, because, teaching is not transmitting knowledge, it is creating conditions for learning (PROF 04). According to the interlocutors, the Undergraduate Course in Field Education of the UFPI of Teresina promotes critical reflections on the social reality in which they are inserted and, after their participation in this training, obtained the understanding that reality is socially unjust and dynamic, can be changed from the action of the subjects. They also point out that this perception is a result not only of the studies and practices they carry out in the course, but also of the situations of discrimination that they experience at university, as Prof 05 states: "Society is exclusive. So far in the university we have realized this exclusion. They are different looks questioning what we are doing here. " In this respect, Contreras (2012, 182) points out that the teacher should reflect on the meaning of his practices and on the need to critically construct a new intellectual work in the service of social transformation, since, as an institutionalized practice, the education is subject to "the influences of heterogeneous groups defending interests that may be in opposition to educational values." He adds that teachers live in a world not only plural, but also unequal and unjust, immersed in pressures, contradictions and setbacks of which it is not always easy to leave, or even grasp them with lucidity. In this scenario it is important to implement training policies that foster critical reflections, developed through the relation between theory and practice, aiming to contribute to the personal coherence between actions and convictions that generate changes in the educational practice. Changing practice requires broader understandings of social issues and their relation to the role of schools and the profile of educated human beings, so that teachers, understanding the power relations that are placed in society, alter the fatalistic view about it and identify themselves as subjects that can contribute to social change.
Freire (2013) argues that the know-how of critical self-reflection and the wisdom of being exercised can permanently help us to make the necessary critical reading of the true causes of human degradation and the raison being of the fatalistic discourse of globalization. In this way, awareness about the educational practice is amplified through critical reflection on the social, historical and cultural contexts in which teachers are inserted. This is what Prof 03 says when he says that "Today, I understand that the reality of society is dynamic and I am living proof of it. I do not know if knowledge is transmission, I'm not sure anymore about that. " .
What do they do, is a challenge for the progress of the LEF propositions, as, once, a new educational projects for the rural schools is needed? with capacity to organize the curriculum, considering the type of society to be built in the field and recognizing the profile of the individual to be formed to live in this space. Moreover, we are convinced of the limits of teacher training that are not applied to the transformation of society, since they agree with Moreira (1995) when he states, dissociated from a larger process of transformation, that teacher training can not be thought of as a lever for change social issues; In addition, by promoting the production and appropriation of knowledge and knows, there will be a preferential role for the less favored groups, for the practice of personal education.
The dialogues show understandings about the role of the rural school and its teachers in the construction of this new project of society aimed at the Field Education, as stated in PROF 01: The rural school is a space of learning for change. ] and PROF 04: The country school [...] must meet the students' wishes. It should be inclusive and accommodating, geared to the needs of the students.
[...] it is necessary to develop methodologies that favor the learning, that the students build the knowledge. According to the understanding of the interlocutors, the construction of society is also the responsibility of the school, and this should be configured as a space for the education of people to promote the changes that wish to operate within society, and must therefore meet the wishes of their subjects, as well as their training needs for life.
They point out that the role of teachers is to develop learning situations that focus on the construction of knowledge, thus necessitating conditions such as the specific training for teachers of rural schools. On this issue, Lima (2011) states that teachers need to identify the knowledge and knowledge that field subjects possess to think about development policies for where they live, as well as to work on content that is a priority in the school curriculum, all of which with the aim of promoting critical education for learners.
Thus, the (re) construction of the rural schools requires investments in the area of teacher training so that they have the opportunity to (re) elaborate their knowledge and knows and exercise them through a critical and politicized educational practice that promotes change in these institutions, which are predominantly characterized as areas of valorization of homogeneity, competitiveness and exclusion. In this sense, we reinforce the need for education systems to invest in teacher education as a positive strategy for discussing, deepening and appropriating the proposals of the Field Education so that these orientations can become practices and forms of conduct and values practiced by educators . Resolution CNE / CEB n. 01/02, Art. 12, recommends that education systems develop policies of initial and continuous training, enabling all lay teachers and promoting the permanent improvement of teachers, and in art. 13, recommends respecting the diversity and protagonism of students, educators and rural communities.
Considering the fact that we live in a society of exclusion, it is necessary that the formation of teachers be developed in a critical perspective, recognizing the school as an educational institution that should be at the service of the formation of people who think, decide, are responsible, committed and emancipated. Freire (2013) states that critical reflection helps teachers to read the true causes of human degradation. In this way, it is increasingly necessary that teacher education be based on a critical perspective, recognizing the school as an educational institution that is at the service of the formation of people committed to social causes.
It is a question of rethinking school education, redeeming its role as humanizing, recognizing its value for the construction of a fraternal, just society, which implies in overcoming the concept of school only as a space for schooling of people, an institution that, Piaui, has predominantly prioritized the cognitive aspects, to the detriment of a full human formation.

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol-6, Issue-7, Jul-2019] https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.6714 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
However, many challenges need to be overcome, since "transforming schools and their traditional practices and cultures that, through retention and evasion, accentuate social exclusion, is neither a simple task nor a few" (PIMENTA, 2012, p.12). In the peasant scenario, these challenges are even greater, as it is a space marked by the absence or insufficiency of public policies in the most diverse areas, including education. Thus, critical reflection contributes to the change in the educational practice, by providing questions not only about society, education, educational practice, but also about educational policies, including teacher education, such as the area of knowledge, example of what they reflect on LEdoC: The other day I was thinking.
The impact of leaving a high school student for the LEd o C is much higher than the exit from Fundamental to the Middle, because in Basic Education he is more supported, here we are very alone. To be a teacher, you have to be sensitive. It does not justify a teacher to reprove a student for a tenth. This is lack of humanity (PROF 01). I only think about the problems of this course and I came to the conclusion that one of the main ones is the fact that many students have an aversion to the Sciences of Nature. It adds to this the question of the majorit y having not had the opportunity to do a basic education of quality. Imagin e the difficulty of a person who has not even learned the contents of High School and then arrives here and faces the need to learn the contents of Chemistry, Physics and Biology in just four years? (PROF 02). For many times I wonder: what were the criteria used to carry out the hiring of these teachers (referring to some LEdoC teachers). At no time was it to bring teachers with elitist and urban vision. I also ask myself: why these teachers, when they arrived at the course, did not study and seek to know this proposal (referring to Field Education) in order to develop it (expressed indignation) (PROF 03). It seems that the proponents did not also consider the fact that we field students did not have the opportunity to attend a basic education that would enable them to learn the contents of the disciplines of the Natural Sciences area with ease. Imagine our difficulty in learning everything that we did not have the opportunity and in record time (PROF 04) One of the biggest difficulties I have is learning the content because of the way they are passed on to us. I think teachers should be more sensitive. Teachers who have no ties to the field, who do not recognize the field's knowledge (PROF 05). The teachers' dialogues point out that, when experiencing training, they make critical reflections about the power relations that permeate the field of educational policies, including training; they question the curriculu m, the forms of organization of pedagogical work and the difficulties related to the field of knowledge (Natural Sciences), and especially the coherence between the training proposal and the educational practice of higher education teachers. During the conversations, and also through simple observation, we hear many complaints from academics about the insensitivity of some professors in relation to their difficulties, as well as the distance between the propositions of Field Education and the educational practice of some professionals who work in this course. Lopes (2002) states that in higher education the teaching and learning system is predominantly centered on teachers, expository classes and assessment, which is limited to the mere verification of memorized contents, resulting in situations of student failure. In the case of the

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS)
[ Vol-6, Issue-7, Jul-2019]  https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.6714  ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O) Teresina LEdoC, the difficulties arising from the lack of quality of the previous stages are added to these questions. On the transition from basic to higher education, Costa et al (2014) affirm that learning processes in higher education are new and different for students, since secondary education provides guidance and materials made available by teachers, while higher education requires a greater degree of autonomy of the studies and adoption of own methods of work.
The lack of quality of secondary schools and consequent difficulties to learn the contents of the area of knowledge (natural sciences) was referenced by all teachers studied, either in relation to the absence of a more articulated transition process of a level of education to the other, or because the students did not have the opportunity to learn basic contents in basic education, the question of the course is also added to work with an area considered challenging, as reinforced in other testimonies: [...] in my high school I did not see Physics and Chemistry, because I did it was teaching, so when I got here, it was a surprise for me (PROF 02). [...] When I arrived here at the university I did not have the basic knowledge, my difficulty was this (PROF 03).
In the State of Piaui, the access, permanence and success of the students of the field in public high schools has been an enormous challenge. Data from the QEdu (2017) report that the number of enrollments at this level of education is 103,365 (one hundred and three thousand, three hundred and sixty-five), of which only 6,016 (six thousand and sixteen) are offered in schools located in the countryside, corresponding to 5.8% of the total. Data from this same information platform show that secondary education is offered in schools with poor infrastructure, since only 27% have access to public water, only 1% have access to sewage, 7% have a library and no school has a science laboratory. Added to all this is the fact that most high school teachers do not have training in the field. With regard to the guarantee of learning, data fro m the Basic Education Development Index (IDEB) 2017 show that Piaui was unable to reach the goals stipulated by the federal government for high school, which was 4.3, the grade obtained was 3.6.
In Maranhao state where reside the interlocutors of this study, enrollment in public schools, in the year 2017, according to QEdu, was 287,254 (two hundred and eighty-seven thousand two hundred and fiftyfour) of which only 44. 188 (forty-four thousand, one hundred and eighty-eight) were offered in schools located in the countryside, that is, 15.3%. With regard to infrastructure, 44% of schools have water via the public network, only 3% have sewage, 20% have a library, 4% have science lab. According to data from the Basic Education Development Index (IDEB), in 2017, Maranhão also failed to reach the goals stipulated by the federal government for high school. The stipulated target for 2017 was 3.7, however the grade obtained was 3.4.
The educational data of these two states (Piaui and Maranhão) show enormous challenges faced by rural people, in the sense of access and completion of secondary education, with the essential learning to pursue successfully in higher education. Thus, the universalization of basic education has as limit the overcoming of the structural problems of secondary education, among them the lack of teachers, especially of the natural sciences. In addition, we can not deny that, according to the interlocutors, despite the difficulties, the disciplines of Physics, Chemistry and Biology provided much knowledge that I did not know, but today, thanks to these disciplines, I have knowledge that allows me to act as a teacher (PROF 01) . However, it is necessary for the teaching and management teams of the course to develop parallel, face-to-face and distance learning activities so that students can overcome their difficulties.
As reported by the interlocutors, in Teresina's LEdoC some teachers have a conservative practice that overestimates the learning of the knowledge of the Natural Sciences area and the reproduction of this knowledge in the evaluations, usually in written tests. In terms of performance in the course, the trainees must reach a mean of 7.0 (seven), failing which they will be disallowed in the course, as PROF 02 states: It does not justify a teacher to disapprove a student for a tenth. This is a lack of humanity. Thus, the optics of school exclusion and the devaluation of other contents, such as attitudinal ones, prevail, considering that some teachers value factual and conceptual content (ZABALA, 1998), evaluated by written test. According to Freire (2016), teachers can not and should not put themselves in a position of superiority to those who teach a group of ignorant people, but in a humble way, as one who communicates a relative knowledge (scholarly knowledge / academic knowledge) to others who possess other knowledge that are equally relevant.
A similar situation was also observed in the Field of Education course at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), where the researchers Arruda and Oliveira (2014) identified that among the challenges that needed to be overcome, the need was highlighted of the university structure classes and evaluation proposals through a differentiated curriculum, as recommended by alternation training, since the content and practice focus has been limited to the reproduction and / or appropriation In spite of the difficulties, the training of teachers in the scope of the Course of graduation in Field Education of the UFPI of Teresina develops a body of specific knowledge, whose purpose is the preparation of a qualified professional to understand the historical, social, cultural and educational contexts in the which educational practice is developed, aware of the rationality that underlies its pedagogical practice.
The PPC of the LEdoC / UFPI refers to the critical reflection on the pedagogical doing as a relevant action for the change of the educational practice. This perspective deals with the propositions of Freire (2013), which includes critical reflection as one of the most significant principles of teacher education, since, through "right thinking about doing", teachers revisit the educational practice they develop -spontaneously and producer of a naive knowledge -and begin to develop a critical educational practice -based on epistemological curiosity (2013, 39). This process necessarily implies that teachers in the field reflect on the practice they already practice, as they refer to in their dialogues on the wheels of conversation.
In . The training of teachers, by promoting the production and expansion of knowledge and pedagogical knows and the professional area, contextualized from the reality in which teachers work, contributes to the preparation of a critical professional reflective, with capacity to analyze and change the practice development. The two interlocutors mentioned above reflect critically on the current structure of the education system of the rural schools, where the educational work is developed predominantly from the transmission and storage of contents that are measured through evaluation processes in which the monthly and bimonthly evidence stand out as the main instruments used. On this aspect, we question: what logic supports educational processes that overvalue the transmission and memorization of content? Does this proposition contribute to the citizen and human formation necessary to the peoples of the countryside? Does it expand the production of knowledge and its use to solve latent problems in today's society? Our understanding is that the success of the curricular proposals of the Degree courses in Education of the Field need changes in the institutions of higher education where they develop, toward a paradigmatic revision. In this way, the training processes must provide critical reflections in which teachers are aware that, by adhering to this perspective (memorization / transmission), even indirectly, they value competitiveness, school exclusion, social exclusion and reinforce the interests of groups that hold greater power and privileges in society.
The analysis of the dialogues of the interlocutors of this research leads us to understand that the change in the educational practice involves critical reflections, implying the readiness of the teachers to put themselves in favor of the change and (re) learning of the teaching knowledge, especially the pedagogical knowledge, built in the daily practice, from the exercise of teaching. Ericone (2001: 43) states that "it is not the presentation of a new idea that causes change; you have to be convinced that the new one is somehow better than the previous one. " This fact explains why many government reforms designed "for" teachers are not adhered to by them; also shows that the training processes occupy a prominent place in the change in the educational practice, since they must convince the teachers that they really are necessary and important and prepare them for the execution of the other proposal.
In this perspective, Pimenta (2012, p. 14) emphasizes that "transformations of teaching practices only become effective as teachers increase their awareness of their own practice, of the classroom, and of the school as a whole. presupposes theoretical and critical knowledge about reality. " Thus, being a teacher and participating in formative processes, based on critical reflection and relationship theory and practice, broadens their understanding of the historical, social, cultural and organizational contexts in which they develop educational activities, extending the possibilities of changing educational practice.
The fact is that the LEdoC has the potential to guarantee teachers of rural schools the knowledge of teaching, fundamental to an educational practice that welcomes the interests of society, as well as the interests of the subjects involved in this process, especially students' interests. However, it is necessary that their training proposal be embraced and developed by all teachers of the course, but not only by them, as this should be a collective struggle, involving learners, their families and other social bodies and representations that fight for social justice . It also needs to be articulated with other intersectoral public policies involving universities, education secretariats, social movements and peasant populations to be strengthened in their purposes.
Summarizing the discussions on this subtopic, we note that the principle of critical reflection carried out by the teachers of the Undergraduate Course in Field Education of Teresina UFPI covers four dimensions, as shown in Figure 01. These four dimensions help teachers to think about the conditions they live in, to identify power relations and contradictions around public policies, to analyze the area of knowledge of the course, to know the different dimensions that characterize one's own educational practice, to recognize their weaknesses and potentialities and understand the role of their practice in the field schools.
The Degree in Field Education aims at, among other demands, the constitution of an educational practice in which teachers base their work on dialogue with critical pedagogy, with culture as a formative matrix, structured from the relation theory and practice. In this sense, selfformation, pedagogical accompaniment and orientation, and the socialization of knowledge among peers constitute fundamental actions to achieve this goal.
Thus, the study points out that teacher training needs to reach breadth and depth of knowledge so that the lessons learned by it are meaningful and take into account not only the specific knowledge of the training, but also knowledge and practices that enable teachers to understand the educational and social context in which the school and the subjects are inserted, respect and appreciation of the different cultures and knowledge, among the knowledge of the peasant culture, and the teaching commitment with social transformation.

IV.
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS The aim of the study was to discuss the principle of critical reflection as an important element for the change in the educational practice of teachers workin g in rural schools, after their participation in the Field Education Degree at UFPI in Teresina.
The synthesis that we are now organizing is inspired, even if at a glance, in the theoretical aspects that underlie it, without detracting from the methodological direction and the support of the data and what its analyzes have signaled about the contributions of critical reflection to the change in educational practice .
The research points out that being teachers of rural schools and being part of initial formation processes allows unique conditions for reflections on the educational practice, contributing to the expansion of their capacities to think and question their knowledge and professorial actions, seeking consistency between action and theoretical foundation of teaching. Thus, the thesis of Freire (2014, p.40) conforms to the fact that: in the formation of teachers, the "fundamental moment is that of critical reflection on practice, because it is critically thinking about the practice of today or yesterday that the next practice can be improved. " The Degree in Field Education (LEdoC) has an innovative way of organizing pedagogical work, as well as teaching and learning. It breaks with the traditional organizational and curricular structures of higher education, contributes both to the re-signification of teacher training processes and to the (re) construction of educational practices that favor the construction of a critical view of contradictions experienced by peasant populations and reveals the capacity of intervention in this reality.
Thus, the interfaces between the curricular activities of teacher training, based on the specific knowledge of the formation and the relation between them and the knowledge of the peasant culture, produce critical reflections, contributing to the change of the educational practice.