HIGHER EDUCATION PROFESSOR QUALIFICATION AND THE APPROPRIATION OF THE GENRES OF THE PROFESSIONAL MÉTIER

ABSTRACT

Immersed in the themes of language and teacher and professor qualification, based on the theoretical frameworks of Literacy Studies and the theory of discourse genres, in dialogue with studies on identity (Cultural Studies), in this paper, we seek to conduct an inventory of the discourse genres that constitute the higher education professor metier and to reflect on its importance as artifacts that are part of the professor’s work and which, consequently, also constitute himself/herself. Research on the identity and training/qualification of the professor led to the understanding that, depending on the institution and the institutional and socio-cultural contexts in which these professors are inserted, they have increasing and different demands which also affect the identity of these professionals. The study reveals that such demands are associated with scientific-pedagogical, political-administrative and personal competencies, necessary for the performance of the numerous activities related to teaching, research, extension and university management, all of which are intertwined with language and they inform us about the need to insert this professional in those literacy events and practices.

higher education professor qualification; teaching literacy; discourse genres of the professor’s metier; professor identity

RESUMO

Tendo em vista as temáticas de linguagem e formação docente, com base nos quadros teóricos dos Estudos do Letramento e da teoria dos gêneros do discurso, neste artigo, buscou-se realizar um inventário dos gêneros do discurso constitutivos do métier docente universitário e refletir sobre a sua importância, enquanto artefatos que fazem parte do trabalho, do letramento e da identidade do professor. As pesquisas bibliográficas em torno da identidade e da formação do professor universitário levaram à compreensão de que, dependendo da instituição e dos contextos institucionais e socioculturais em que se inserem, as demandas que chegam ao docente são diferentes e crescentes, incidindo sobre a identidade desse profissional. A pesquisa de campo revelou que tais demandas estão vinculadas a competências científico-pedagógicas, político-administrativas e pessoais, necessárias ao exercício das inúmeras atividades relativas ao ensino, à pesquisa, à extensão e à gestão universitária. Essas atividades estão imbricadas com a linguagem e revelam tanto a amplitude de gêneros profissionais exigidos do professor, quanto a necessidade da inserção desse profissional em práticas de letramento.

formação do professor universitário; letramento docente; gêneros do métier docente; identidade do professor universitário

Preliminary and methodological considerations

How do you learn to be a teacher? This apparently simple question has sparked a lot of research in the field of teacher education. In his studies, Tardif (1999, 2002) alerts to the fact that the knowledge that serves as a basis for teaching encompasses numerous objects and work related issues of different natures. Among these knowledge, Nóvoa (2017) points out those related to the collective dimension of work, arguing that there is knowledge and responsibilities to be shared between teacher educators, those trained in activity and those in initial training. As professors and researchers, we understand, as well as these scholars, that teacher¹ training occurs with the construction of knowledge that is not limited to specialized disciplinary content. They advance to other fields, especially those related to language, which, in large part, allow the performance of professional action (KLEIMAN, 1995). Thus, continuing the research that we have undertaken on the professional teaching discourse and the place of discourse genres in teacher education processes in Brazil², in this article, we aim to reflect on the role of professional literacy in the development of the professor’s work and identity, to present the discourse genres that constitute the teaching activity in Higher Education, and reflect on their implication in the professor’s work.

The 2019 Higher Education Census reveals that there are 2,537 higher education institutions in Brazil, 37,962 undergraduate courses, 1,628,676 students and 397,893 professors (INEP, 2019), in addition to 4,593 graduate programs, including academic master’s and doctoral degrees and professional master’s and doctoral’s (CAPES, 2019a, 2019b). The number of institutions and people involved in this field calls attention to their potential interference capacity in the Brazilian socio-educational reality. From this reflection, the question arises about how the process of training higher education professors has been conducted so that they can perform the many tasks that constitute their professional routine. In previous research³, in which we addressed the professional teaching discourse, we came to the conclusion that such activities are distributed in different discursive functions (routine activities, interpersonal communication, planning and documentation) which are materialized in the discourse genres (BAKHTIN, 2011) that is, teaching work becomes action through language.

The teaching tasks of preparing reports, assessments, assessment sheets, portfolios, diagnostic activities, handouts, invitations, power points, minutes, routine occurrences, teaching projects, didactic sequences and other texts – oral, written, multimodal – are part of his/her métier, a French term that refers to the global conception of the teacher’s work. Based on studies of activity ergonomics, Machado and Lousada (2010, p. 626) explain that the teaching metier is “made up of multiple activities, developed in different situations, which need to be investigated, as they are interrelated”⁴. The authors also add the importance of being fully mobilized so that he/she can create an environment conducive to activity and promote the development of students’ capacity. Hence, it is assumed that, when starting the profession, the teacher has already appropriated this knowledge, so that he can act professionally, with technical and scientific competence. However, at what point in the teacher training process, are such discursive skills formally taken as teaching objects?

In preliminary documentary research, as a sample, which we conducted in eight curricular matrices of Pedagogy and Letters courses in Brazilian federal public universities⁵, we found that the Supervised Internship disciplines point to the discourse genres: lesson plan, didactic sequence, internship report, course plan and class report as texts listed in the internship process. Academic-scientific genres such as the abstract, the review, the essay, the research article, the experience report, the research project and the course conclusion paper (TCC) appear scattered in some subjects of the matrices. However, in such documents, there are no subjects that have as their teaching object, or as objectives for teaching, the genres of the professional teaching discourse. This evidence ignited a warning to the existing assumption in academia that professional genres do not need to be taught. Would they then be supposed to be learned in professional practice?

In this regard, the Basic Education Teacher’s Training References - Referenciais para Formação de Professores da Educação Básica - (BRASIL, 2002) provide that the pedagogical knowledge demands the construction of a systematic discourse about the practice, capable of communicating the constituted knowledge. They also affirm that all of this is learned by doing. The document contains two assumptions: that the teacher needs to appropriate genres of professional discourse, in order to systematize and communicate his/her knowledge; and that it is, in practice, that one learns to be a teacher.

In Higher Education, on the other hand, what prevails is silence, both in the text of the Law of Guidelines and Bases (Lei de Diretrizes e Bases - BRASIL, 1996), and in the absence of guidelines that advocate on the training of university⁶. Despite this, the mission of Higher Education, as a whole, is clearly established, mainly in Document II of the Higher Education Reform (BRASIL, 2004). In view of this situation, many professors who pursue a career as a professor, search for their qualification for teaching in Higher Education, in Master’s and Doctoral degree courses, without having to go through the exercise of teaching in Basic Education and, many times, enter the profession without understanding the practice that constitutes it.

In order to better understand the engagement of the stricto sensu training programs with the professional literacy process for teaching, we undertook another documentary research⁷. This time, we researched the themes and projects of 12 postgraduate programs (master’s and doctoral degrees⁸) and found that, in the programs studied, there is little, if any, emphasis on the training of higher education professors. The two programs identified with this focus are exclusively aimed at teaching skills, that is, teaching activities.

Our studies of those documents mentioned above also showed an emphasis on the theoretical and methodological training that is specific to each area, which is understandable given the focus on the researcher qualification, with very few spaces for teaching practice and the discussion of aspects inherent to this practice, such function is often taken by the stricto sensu education programs, which offer some optional subjects related to didactics. The curricula are prepared by postgraduate courses and, legally, there is no obligation regarding the offer of subjects that include training for teaching in higher education, it is up to the university to assign the curricula of the programs (BRASIL, 1996). In this sense, stricto sensu training presents gaps regarding the professor’s professional training. This can represent difficulty for professors to carry out routine tasks, such as: preparing an assessment or a course plan, conducting a research orientation, participating in academic debates, giving an opinion in research, building a didactic sequence, submitting projects to official public and private notices, actions that involve language and that are part of the professor’s métier.

In order to be able to contribute to the reflections around this problem, this research assumes an exploratory purpose, to assist in the reconstruction of the lived reality, and takes language from the perspective of work, embraced by the studies of the French school Activity Clinic (CLOT, 2010) and by the dialogic and sociocultural perspectives (BAKHTIN, 2011). In addition to the bibliographic studies, an empirical corpus is included in the collection of this research, collected through an open interview (BRASILEIRO, 2016) composed of a single generating question sent through WhatsApp or e-mail to 10 higher education professors, 5 from public universities and 5 from private faculties/universities, from different contexts. The collected data were recorded in a field diary, from January 2019 to March 2020. The question addressed to the professors was: What textual genres⁹ do you need to master it in order to exercise your teaching job? In the referral message, we alerted the participants to the need to contemplate all activities inherent to their work, in addition to those activities related to teaching. The data collected in this research were compiled and grouped around the four types of activities inherent to the work of the professor: teaching, research, extension and management. We also grouped the representative genres of teaching to the discursive functions of routine activities, interpersonal communication, planning and documentation, which were inventoried.

Aware of the potential contribution of this study to research and reflections on teacher education, we present, in this section, the path experienced in the research. In the following section, we build a reflection that starts from the identity of the higher education professor, historically contextualized in the context of Higher Education, as well as in the roles assumed by this professional, in view of the official mission for this level of education in Brazil. We started, then, the discussion about the literacy of the higher education professor and its implications, and then we present the results achieved, relative to the discourse genres used by the Higher Education professor in carrying out his/her work. This entire path was permeated by analyzes and reflections about the role of professional literacy in the development of teaching work and the innumerable genres of discourse that constitute the reality of the professor’s activity.

Higher education professor: who are they and what do they do?

This section aims to contribute to the reflection on the identity of the higher education professor and the work performed by him. To this end, it starts with the discussion about the identity of this professor, bringing to the reflection historical and legal implications, as well as the roles and functions of this worker. Finally, it offers an understanding of how the ambivalent identity of the higher education professor is intertwined with language and demands a process of continuous literacy.

The concept of identity as something that is built historically, socially and discursively around social representations and roles, thus an unstable, fragmented, unfinished, contradictory process, associated with representations that the subject has of himself and of the other (HALL, 2006), deserves attention at this point in our study. This is because this “mobile celebration”, which changes as the systems of signification and cultural representation are transformed, to which we are confronted by a “bewildering and changing number of possible identities with each of which we could identify with” (HALL, 2006, p. 13), adjusts to the professor’s identity. We refer, therefore, to the ambivalent ways in which this subject recognizes himself and the other, based on the roles and functions he/she exercises in society, as well as the positions he/she assumes.

As transformation is also inherent to the Brazilian educational system and to the social roles assigned to teachers/professors at the different levels of education in which they work, it is not surprising that their identity also undergoes changes. Masetto (2003) reflects on the complexity of teaching and points out that its exercise involves specific conditions that demand a multiplicity of knowledge, skills and attitudes to be interpreted by this subject. The teacher’s identity is directly related to pedagogical training and is built on the basis of several references, such as: “the social significance of the profession, the revision of these meanings and traditions and the establishment of culturally established practices that remain meaningful” (PIMENTA, 1999, p. 19).

When referring to the identity of the professor of higher education, Nóvoa (1992) affirms that it must be built from the knowledge of the realities of teaching, its representations, knowledge and practices. In addition, the author also points out that the teaching pedagogical training process must be considered. Thus, in order to understand the constitution of the university teaching profession in Brazil, here we make a brief historical digression of this path.

Dating back to the 19th century, professional accreditation for higher education in Brazil was an act of competence for the prince regent. In 1931, Law 19,850 instituted the Statute of the Brazilian University and created teacher training courses in the areas of Education, Sciences, and Letters. At that time, the chair system was in force, in which the higher education professor owned a chair and mentored the good practices to be adopted in the academic environment (BRASIL, 1931, Art. 52).

LDB, from 1961, expanded the offer of courses for postgraduate, improvement and extension, also expanding the functions/work of the professor. In 1968, the Higher Education Reform, Law 5,540, organized the university structure into departments and defined the university as a model for higher education. There, the integration between research and teaching begins, leading to a new concept of teaching. The reform also indicated the definition of a policy for the professor improvement and qualification, based on the merit of professors’ production. The last LDB, 9. 394, of 1996, recommends that: “Art. 207. Universities have didactic-scientific, administrative and financial and patrimonial management autonomy, and will obey the principle of inseparability between teaching, research and extension” (BRASIL, 1996).

Thus, according to Santos (2004, p. 31), “the insertion of the university in society and its insertion in the university” was sought. From the LDB (BRASIL, 1996), it is abstracted that the teaching activities refer to the processes of construction of knowledge and appropriation of knowledge historically produced by man and that are produced, more specifically, in the teacher-student relationship, valuing the formative and critical character; those related to research concern intellectual activities of a handmade nature, the processes of construction of new knowledge mobilized by problems emerging in the social environment, based on the use of the scientific method; and those related to extension are related to educational, cultural and scientific processes, of knowledge, insertion and intervention in social reality, providing an exchange of experiences and knowledge between the university and society. It is explicit in the document that these three pillars are inseparable, which means that it is not possible to conceive one without the existence of the other.

It is also worth mentioning the Higher Education mission defined in the most recent reform:

[...] create, develop, systematize and disseminate knowledge, in their areas of activity, based on freedom of thought and opinion, with the goal of participating and contributing to the nation’s social, economic, cultural and scientific development, promoting the inclusion of ethnic-cultural diversity and the reduction of social and regional inequalities in the country (BRASIL, 2004).

Taking as an assumption that the responsibility for all these activities, today, is assigned to the professor, one can have an idea of the volume of work destined for this professional. To ensure autonomy in university management, teaching, research and extension, the activities related to management were also added (ANDES, 2013). In order to do that, professors have to participate in collegiates, deliberate, write documents, and they are even eligible for executive functions, such as Dean. It should be noted that the performance of these professionals is assessed by a self-management system, conducted by bodies of the Ministry of Education.

As a result of all these reforms and attributions, the administration system is instituted at the university with a business focus, in which several departments come together with the purpose of reducing costs (MOROSINI, 2000). The 2004 reform also establishes that the Career Plan for the University must be supported by systems of evaluation and progression on merit, with stability being an achievement of this progression (BRASIL, 2004). This justifies, in part, the silent positioning of the MEC in relation to the professional training process for Higher Education, since the meritocracy system establishes competences to be evaluated and that the professor, being a self-manager, must develop in favor of his/her own productivity and department to which he/she belongs. The official manifestation we have related to the requirements of the higher education professor is in Law 9.394 / 96, which establishes that such preparation should be carried out, primarily, through stricto-sensu training courses. “Art. 66: The preparation for the exercise of higher education will be done at the postgraduate level, primarily in master’s and doctoral programs” (BRASIL, 1996).

This accreditation granted to the stricto-sensu degree has been questioned insistently within the programs, since the focus of the Masters and Doctorate courses is not teaching, but the training of researchers. Thus, titles and knowledge of the specific area that professors carry when they arrive at Higher Education, although the qualification is valued by the criteria of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), have been insufficient to face the complex challenges that constitute the activities of this professional, which demand political-administrative (in management activities), scientific-pedagogical (in research, teaching and extension) and personal (in activities related to intra and interpersonal development around professional relationships) competences.

Lindino (2016), in a study on the professionalization of the higher education professor, alerts us to the fact that “the competence model does not refer to the notion of training professionals capable of building emancipation projects; on the contrary, there is an incitement, on the part of the market, to supply the market with professionals who must play the role that the productive system imposes” (LINDINO, 2005, p. 42), thus giving rise to an intellectual productivity system that stimulates competitiveness among colleagues, between departments and institutions, which are placed in rankings through periodic evaluations by CAPES, while instilling in the professors an idea of unattainable excellence. Thus, even before engaging in discussions about the validity of the system to which it is imposed and the questionable quality of the research that is produced, the professor needs to ensure the survival of the institution to which he/she belongs and, to do that, he/she “rolls up his/her sleeves”, that is, they invest in productivity, many times, in an excessive way (SANTOS, 2008).

In a study that dealt with the challenges of the reality of university teaching, Morosini (2000) documented for MEC, 20 years ago, five points of view that reveal, in a certain way, the attributions of the Higher Education professor. As we will see, such responsibilities reveal how much the teaching work is related to language, which is materialized in different oral, written and multimodal genres of professional discourse. According to Morosini (2000), the higher education professor, from a situational point of view,

[…] is one who works at a large and complex Brazilian university, whether public or private, with a solid postgraduate system and with the presence of consolidated research groups. It is also who works in an isolated higher education institution and in which teaching is the very reason for being. It is both the one who works at the market-oriented university and who works at the community institution anchored in its environment (MOROSINI, 2000, p. 62).

The differences between the two groups of professors are striking. In public institutions, the professor is charged with the productivity related to teaching, research, extension and administration tasks. Private institutions, which are more directly committed to teaching, demand the mastery of knowledge from various fields and, often, management activities are even related to advertising and marketing actions to attract students (BRASILEIRO, 2019).

From an institutional point of view, Morosini (2000, p.62) highlights that it is that professor “whose work plan has hours for research, but it is also the one whose teaching hours are so many that there is no room for investigations. Sometimes, not even to prepare his/her lessons”. In this context, the time spent on teleworking¹⁰ stands out today. Nóvoa (2017) also points out that low wage levels, the discourse of efficiency and control, in addition to the possibility of hiring people with the said “notorious knowledge” are factors that have contributed to the discredit of the profession. The fact is that, for the reflection that we propose in this space, this evidence exposes how complex the process of training this professional is becoming.

Morosini (2000, p.62) also indicates that “from the political point of view, the professor is the one who experiences the tensions of his/her own knowledge area, often imbued with corporatism, added to the tensions of the other areas in the struggle for spaces and financing”. In this bias, countless calls for bids for which the professor needs to compete to gain space and funding for his/her projects, fighting internal and external struggles to the university, to strengthen and give visibility to his/her work, to his/her category, to his/her subject matter, and object of knowledge. This subject-professor, in whose identity the intellectual formation is stamped, sees his/her time disappearing, many times, in bureaucratic and administrative matters, time that becomes scarce, even, to prepare the daily lessons.

The author also highlights the teacher from the professional point of view who, according to her,

[…] privileges the university as a work space, but also what is inserted in a professional context with its specific demands, as it is the prevalent case of professors in areas. It is the one who sees the student as a driver of work, but also as the future competitor in a recessive market. It is that professional permanently evaluated, since entering the career, through competitions, systematic assessments for professional advancement, the submission of works in events, the presentation of projects for financing and the reports of activities and research (MOROSINI, 2000, p. 63).

It seems to be in this professional dimension that the other points of view are performed in the real of the activity. The professor shows himself/herself as a kind of handyman, who cannot be an amateur and who needs to defend his/her employability. He/she needs to have mastery of his/her métier, but he/she also needs to demonstrate agility to take up work in volume and variety, which happens both in the public and private institutional contexts, both in universities and in isolated colleges.

Finally, the author draws attention to the point of view of the advancement of knowledge, which, according to her, “is what is inserted in the productive process that makes up the advance, collaborating in some way for this, but it is also what disseminates the advance when not alienated from the revolutions that take place in the surrounding world” (MOROSINI, 2000, p. 63). This last topic is what, at first, was considered most noble in the work of the full professor, considering his/her contribution to social development, which is driven by the ability/possibility that he/she has to undertake continuous research programs and give returns with products that respond to social needs.

As it can be seen, from the educational history of the higher education professor, the changes observed in the official documents and these five aspects listed by Morosini (2000), it is that, depending on the institution and the context lived, the demands that reach the teacher are different and ever increasing, reflecting on the identity of this professional, generating activities imbricated with language and the need for continuous professor literacy.

The higher education professor literacy process

Considering that a professor is also a literacy agent, it is necessary to reflect on the events related to the social practices of reading and writing through which the phenomenon of literacy is addressed at the university level. It is known that the discussion on literacy practices is very widespread and discussed in the spheres of basic education, however, in the university world, it still deserves investment. Thus, we believe in the need to expand this discussion, through theoretical contributions such as those of Soares (2005), Kleiman (2016), Street (2003, 2013), Fiad (2015), Lea and Street (2006) among others, in sense of reflecting on the literacy practices of professors associated with different social languages, positions, construction of the teaching identity and academic-scientific-professional development through the genres of the discourse triggered, characterizing the notion of literacy(ies) and the aspects therein specifically, those of the higher education professor.

For Soares (2004, p. 145), literacy is the “state or condition of individuals or social groups of literate societies that effectively exercise the social practices of reading and writing”. Kleiman (1995, p. 74), in the same direction, defines literacy as “a set of social practices that use writing, as a symbolic system and as technology, in specific contexts, for specific purposes”. In this perspective, social practice is understood as “a sequence of recurring activities and with a common objective, which depend on technologies, specific knowledge systems and capacities for action that allow the application of these knowledge systems in a specific situation” (KLEIMAN, 2008, p.82) Street (2003) argues that literacy approaches lead us to understand that a single concept of literacy encompassing the entire social structure would not be possible, considering the great heterogeneity of societies and the activities that the subjects develop. Thus, the author proposes that it would be more appropriate to refer to “literacies” than to a single “literacy” (STREET, 2003, p. 81). The perspective of “literacies” connects the notion of literacy to a way of conceiving the discursive practices in their socio-historical context, which leads us to the constitution of the subject based on his/her experiences, practices and social events in which the subject is inscribed and subscribed.

Considering the objectives of this research, we seek to understand the processes and factors involved in the construction of the literate condition in the sphere of the academic-scientific discursive community. Thus, we are interested in literacy practices at the university level, which are carried out through the use of discourse genres which are specific to the teaching activity of higher education professors. Based on the principle that writing is part of the general process of discourse constitution, and that it takes place as a continuous work of cognitive elaboration through insertion in the world of writing through social interactions, the discussion about the professor’s “literacies” is, therefore, dense, complex and crossed by the political-ideological bias¹¹.

We believe, therefore, that in relation to the literacy of the higher education professor, this professional should have access, at some point in his/her education, to the professional discourse genres. He/she should be explicitly introduced to the genres that make his/her academic-scientific work possible. Since literacies are multiple, there is no way to think of a single being who reaches teaching in Higher Education, already endowed with “all” multiple literacies, once, although the professor is a multiliterate subject, as it happens with many people in relationship to the use of digital technologies, many Higher Education professionals did not have access to specific training that would prepare them for the social use of writing in specific communicative events of the professional métier, it can be said, then, that there is a gap in relation to higher education professor literacy with regard to the use of specific discourse genres of academic-scientific practice.

The point we have reached here is that the teacher’s work situations require specific training in the field of the teaching activity discourse genres, that is, an investment in professional literacies, as defended by Pimenta (2018). As discourse genres, we understand, like Mikhail Bakhtin (2011, p. 261) and the circle, that they are “statements, oral and written, concrete and unique, that emanate from the members of one or another sphere of human activity”. For him, such statements reflect the specific conditions and purposes of each of these spheres, through the thematic content (the most important aspect of the genre that derives from different assessments of value to which we react responsively), the verbal style (linguistic choices of lexicon, syntax, records etc. that we do to say what we mean) and compositional construction (form of composition, organization and finishing of the entire statement - macro, (super) structure of the text, thematic progression, coherence and cohesion etc.). For the philosopher, “these three elements are inextricably fused into the whole of the statement, and all of them are marked by the specificity of a sphere of communication” (BAKHTIN, 2011, p. 262).

These spheres are configured, according to Rojo and Barbosa (2015, p. 68), as “a wide range of possibilities: a rich repertoire of varied genres that expands as the sphere/field expands”. Such diversity of repertoire is observed in the various spheres of activity (journalistic, academic, literary, legal, personal, etc.) and they are also configured as part of the production context.

Restricting our view to the focus of this study, we take the discourse of the teaching métier as an object of observation and we are faced with a diversity of texts that constitute this sphere of social activity. To exemplify how each text is embedded in the core of teaching activity, we can mention a sequence of activities by a Higher Education professor. The professor must organize a course plan for the subject matter that he/she will teach. To do so, he must choose or analyze a vast material and make choices about the theoretical framework to be used, the time required by each syllabus, how students will be assessed, the type of assessment (formative, summative) etc. Then, he must launch this course plan on electronic guidelines, depending on the university/college where he works. The professor will then teach his/her classes and assign students some papers - such as reviews, abstracts, seminars, presentations. These classes, activities and assessments will be published in the class diary, which includes the list of grades and attendance in a specific form. In the meantime, the professor will also have to prepare research projects, guide research, participate in meetings for which he/she must be prepared to make oral statements and, eventually, write the agenda of the meeting or its minutes. All of these activities require mastery of various discourse genres.

When referring to one of the various work processes of the professor, we verify the need to conceptually distinguish an activity from a discourse genre and we use the studies of Travaglia (2017), which builds dialogue with Fairclough (2003), in a work that seeks to categorize oral genres.

Genres are instruments, whose appropriation leads subjects to develop individual skills and competences corresponding to genres. Such capacities and competences are linguistic and discursive capacities and competencies for the construction and choice of the appropriate genre for action in a given localized social situation. Activities are actions mediated by specific objectives, socially elaborated by previous generations and available to be carried out, using certain instruments for this constructed purpose (TRAVAGLIA et al., 2017, p. 15).

In the above referred study, Travaglia et al. (2017) present two questions that will also be useful for this research. In a practical way, it will be characterized as an activity, the object under analysis that is an answer to the question “what are people doing?”. In addition, it will be characterized as a genre, when it answers the question “what are people doing when using a certain genre as an instrument?”. For example, coordinating a meeting is an activity, as it is something someone is doing. In order to do so, it is necessary to use oral exposition instruments such as: PowerPoint presentation and meeting agenda, which are discourse genres.

This example demonstrates, with simplicity, how much the professor’s work is intertwined in the discourse genres, which organize it, being also the most concrete act of his/her activity. In this area of professional discourse, Bathia (1994) advocates that expert members of any professional community must have not only knowledge of their specific area, but also that of the structure of the genres they use in their texts. According to the author, such texts take on a character of a conventional internal textual structure. The author mentions that, although the professional is free to use the linguistic resources in the best way that suits him, he must meet certain standards that limit and establish certain ways of better developing the genres of discourse written by him. For the author, the professional can use the rules and conventions of a genre to achieve his/her professional goals and particular intentions, however, he/she cannot abandon these rules and conventions entirely, because, thus, he runs the risk of writing something absurd according to his intentions for interaction.

According to Bathia (1994), there are restrictions when operationalizing an intention, positioning and structuring a genre in a specific professional text, and this is probably the reason that many professionals tend to structure particular genres in more or less identical ways. The members of a given professional community must have knowledge of the discourse genres to be used, which the so-called “laymen”, in that specific job, do not have. Such investment is observed, for example, in the process of training journalists and lawyers, whose genres related to the real of the activity are taken as teaching objects. Such professions, as well as teaching, have language as their object of work.

Getting closer to the object of this study, Machado and Lousada (2010) focus on teacher education through oral and written genres, considering them artifacts for the activity, without yet specifying the activities and respective genres through which they take place. We understand that the professor should also “appropriate” the genres of discourse that circulate in the university sphere, so that they can carry out the interactional activities required in these spaces. When referring to the appropriation of discourse genres, we do so in line with Machado and Lousada (2010). For the authors, “to appropriate something is to adapt something to a specific use or purpose; attribute something to yourself, make it YOURS (sometimes, even improperly)” (MACHADO; LOUSADA, 2010, p. 623). They also argue that, in order for us to use genres, as mediators for communication and language development, we need to appropriate them.

In this perspective, in order to better understand what is happening with the use of the genres used by the professor in his/her métier, it is necessary to present how we conceive the teaching work. For this, we are inspired, as well as Machado and Lousada (2010) and Muniz-Oliveira (2016), in the contributions of the Activity Clinic (CLOT, 2010) and the French Activity Ergonomics (AMIGUES, 2004). Thus, we can say that the professor mobilizes his/her integral being, in multiple dimensions, to develop his/her work and occupy his/her niche. This work is permeated not only by the interaction with other actors, mainly with their students, but also with several other subjects who are directly or indirectly part of the immense network of people and institutions with which professors need to interact in order to develop their work. To this end, these professors use “material or symbolic instruments, derived from the appropriation, by themselves and for themselves, of artifacts made available by their social environment” (MACHADO; LOUSADA, 2010, p. 627) inserted in broader contexts.

As it can be seen, in addition to content and methodologies, the professor’s activity is also guided by institutional prescriptions at different levels and by models of action arising from the work group. These countless prescriptions, which affect the teaching action, must be seen as artifacts made available to the professor that shape their actions and can facilitate their work. As Amigues (2004) points out, such artifacts are usually reconceived and adapted by the teacher to his/her particular work context. We believe, however, that they allow the teacher to guide and think about his/her actions, not only in teaching situations, but in all situations required by the activity, since, to exercise his/her profession, the teacher must mobilize different genres of discourse in different situations of the activity.

For a better understanding of the network of discourses that materialize the different situations of language use in work situations, we rely, as we have already said, on the Clinic of Activity, which has been developed by scholars such as Clot et al. (2001), Clot (2010), Amigues (2004) and Nouroudine (2002). At first, we will see the three types of relationships between language and work, as presented by Nouroudine (2002): i) language as work, which is used during/to carry out the work activity; ii) language at work, which characterizes language related to the general work situation (excluding language during / for carrying out the activity), and iii) language about work, related to the production of knowledge about work.

For Clot et al. (2001), what exists between the organization of work and the subject is a task of reorganizing the task by professional groups. For the authors, this reference of common norms and rules, which represents the impersonal memory of a workplace, comes from a collective professional culture and it is often more followed than the rules and instructions formally created. This stems from the fact that these professional genres, like any discourse genre, are not totally stable and homogeneous units, but a set of activities adopted in a given work situation. On the other hand, teachers share a series of “ways of acting, doing, etc.” that do not need prescriptions, since they are known and expected in professional practice, such as, for example, time management in the classroom.

In this sense, we draw the reader’s attention to the countless difficulties encountered by the teacher who, when entering the field of work, ignores part of the professional genres inherent to his/her profession and which he needs to carry out his/her work (MUNIZ-OLIVEIRA, 2016). These are the genres demanded so that you can teach, differently, from the genres to be taught. We credit part of this lack of knowledge not only because these genres are not addressed during the period of their professional training, but also because of the evidence that, every day, the impositions of work and technological innovations bring about new genres of discourse, which demand the teacher’s attention, so that he can continue to exercise his craft. A face-to-face class, for example, is different from a remote class, in which face-to-face interaction is impaired, requiring interactants to use other language resources, such as, for example, chat, the recurring request for a return of students and forums for questions. In addition, the professional is mobilized to master the technological environment by which his/her class will reach his/her students. These are new dynamics that demand knowledge to be learned.

It is still important to emphasize that, in higher education, the academic-scientific discursive domain is intrinsically related to the professional domain, but that it goes beyond that, since the activities of the professor are not restricted to research. Thus, the need for a continuous process of teaching literacies is reinforced, thus seeking to alleviate the feeling of helplessness in the face of increasingly required demands. In the direction of contributing to this process, in the next section, we present the inventory of the genres of the teaching metier’s discourse.

The real of the university teaching activity and the teaching métier’s genres: an inventory

The inventory is a common genre in the legal environment, where it is known as a document in which the goods left by someone are listed, but it has also been used in exploratory research, when it is intended to do a “research of data for the construction of a general view about a certain subject” (BRASILEIRO, 2016, p. 97). Thus, in order to build an inventory of discourse genres, which constitute the teaching work in Higher Education, we registered, throughout our teaching experience, the countless discourse genres necessary for teaching and we sought to systematize the data, based on the question “What textual genres do you need to master in order to exercise your teaching job?”, which was addressed to 10 professors. In this case, we were not restricted to any area of the professor’s education, since every professor, regardless of the area in which he/she works, needs to produce certain texts in his/her professional practices.

We obtained the first answers from the group of professors which showed a mistake in relation to the object of the question. Participants informed the discourse genres used at work, taken as teaching content, not referring to those that indicate language as work, in the words of Clot (2010), as a mechanism to enable the activity to be carried out. The fragment presented below illustrates this conception of the interviewees.

(1)Wow! There are so many! Journalistic texts, advertising leaflets, scientific texts, e-mail (is it a genre?) ... (Answer from Professor 8).

When mentioning journalistic texts, advertising leaflets, scientific texts, e-mail, in a generic way, the professor related those genres selected for teaching the lesson itself, in their routine activity, being, therefore, the language at work, referring to the genres to be taught. Although we understood such mistakes as problematic, from the point of view of Applied Linguistics, we decided, for the purposes of this study, to emphasize the objective of the research and clarify, for each of the professors, the focus of the question. So, we rephrase the question to: “In your professional routine, what texts do you need to produce so that you can exercise your job as a professor, such as research report, meeting agenda, test, extension project etc.?

(2)Minutes of meetings (with peers, research, with the school community, with students), forms, research projects, papers, administrative documents, reports of academic activities. Is it? There are many! (Answer from Professor 3)

Based on answers like the one above, which revealed the professor’s metier in different functions, instances and circumstances, the necessary material for the production of the inventory was configured, related to the genres to teach. After compiling the data, about 100 genres of professional discourse, we started to organize each one of them, distinguishing the activities from the genres and, the latter, if they were genres at teaching or to teach.

We verified, then, that their existence was connected, objectively, to the activities carried out by the professors and that such activities comprised the functions of the professors related to the situational, institutional, political and professional points of view and to the advancement of knowledge pointed out by Morosini (2000). Considering the intersectional nature of the discourse genres that corresponded to such activities, we resort, for the purpose of grouping the categories, to the official functions defined for the Higher Education professor: teaching, research, extension, and management¹², which demand insertion in literacy practices. Four questions guided our analysis of the data for categorizing this object, as a genre (and not as an activity), and as a teaching professional genre (and not as a genre to be taught to the student):

1. What are people doing? If the object answered that question, then it was an activity;

2. What are people doing when using a particular genre as an instrument? If the answer was a discursive instrument, then it was about genre;

3. Is this instrument taken as a teaching object or a necessary object for the teacher to teach? With this answer, we distinguish the professional teaching genres, our interest in this study, from the others related to other spheres; and finally,

4. Is this instrument used in teaching, research, extension, or management activities? With this question, we were able to group the genres by type of activity.

However, such a grouping was not a simple task. We understood, right from the beginning, that the term “inseparable”, legally provided for the functions/work of the professor, reflected objectively on the categorization of discourse genres. Genres such as interview, opinion, PowerPoint presentation (Prezi, Canva etc.), orientation session, and report are used in the four types of activities of the higher education professor, having changed the compositional styles and structures, depending on the thematic contents (author’s purpose) and the contexts of production and reception in which they are inserted. That is, these two elements reflect on the variations and uses of these professional texts.

So many other intersections of this nature were observed in genres that are part of two or three sets, such as the argument or a simple handout. For a better understanding, a teaching plan, for example, has, in the teaching function, the objective of prescribing and guiding the construction of a subject matter, but also, in the management function, the objective of documenting the application of the menu of that subject matter by the professor. We therefore decided to repeat these genres in each activity group, thus assuming this characteristic of inseparability.

Having highlighted such inseparability characteristic, it is worth noting that, for the sake of consistency with our assumed sociocultural position in the face of language teaching and teacher literacy, far from proposing ready or plastered models, our intention in presenting the inventory of these genres is, mainly, to give visibility to the fact that, if it is through the genres of discourse that the real of professional activity is performed (NOUROUDINE, 2002), such genres must appear, materially, as topics for teacher/professor education. Our contribution, therefore, is to show the dimension of this corpus, which is configured as a working tool and to place the topic on the agenda of our discussions.

We started the inventory by the genres that make up teaching, the teaching function that is most socially known, and that refers to pedagogical skills for conducting knowledge-building processes. We start from the assumption that the class is the work of the teacher of greater visibility, but that it only represents the performance of many activities carried out before, during and after the class itself, which all require the appropriation of oral, written and multimodal genres, which we now present on the following chart.

PowerPoint presentation, questioning, scientific paper, diagnostic activity, online class (recorded), face-to-face class, remote class (live), learning assessment, poster, schedule of activities, interview, case study, exposition in round debates, student assessment sheets, didactic game, list of exercises, concept map, memorial, disciplinary occurrence, panel, opinion, course plan, subject matter (or teaching) plan, lesson plan, portfolio, test, record of routine occurrences, registration of technical problems, registration of meeting with students, annual activity report, internship report, pedagogical experience report, review, summary, didactic sequence, orientation session...

It was not an object of difficulty to identify a PowerPoint presentation, a class or an assessment of learning as constituting genres of teaching activity, but some genres proved to be multifaceted, such as the scientific paper. Observing the production processes, it is a text related to the research activity, however, the teaching activity in higher education requires working with such a genre in the classroom, to subsidize teaching and the construction of specific knowledge, and may also be taken as an assessment tool for the subject matter, which requires appropriation by the professor. This reasoning led us to consider artifacts of this nature as a genre of the professor’s activity, which can be demanded in more than one grouping of functions.

We were also faced with genres of multigeneric composition, as it is the case of the class itself, which contains, in its constitution, innumerable oral, written and multimodal genres. Thinking about the class itself, we understand that it would be necessary to distinguish it in 3 (three) different types (recorded online, live and face-to-face), since each one, even dealing with the same content, undergoes changes in the compositional structure and style of language, in view of the socio-cultural contexts of production and reception.

Finally, it is important to highlight the complexity involved in teaching work (MUNIZ-OLIVEIRA, 2016). An apparently simple exercise, worked on in the classroom, needs to be connected to and build a coherent dialogue with several other activities and instances, namely: the lesson plan, the subject’s teaching plan, the course project, the institutional project, national plans, and legislation (MACHADO; LOUSADA, 2010). It is, therefore, a plot of plans and discourses that materializes in the real of the activity, which is the exercise applied in the classroom. In this sense, the appropriation of the most varied genres that constitute the teacher’s metier interferes in the process of inserting this professional in the referred literacy practices and events (KLEIMAN, 2008; SOARES, 2004) and, consequently, in the construction of identities (HALL, 2006).

Stepping forward in the construction of the inventory towards the research function, the one that requires the professor to contribute to scientific development in the area in which he/she works and for the intellectual stimulation of his/her students, we come to the following genres of discourse, as it is presented in the following chart.

Oral opening of events, annals of events (hybrid genre), lecture presentation, questioning/argumentation, PowerPoint presentation, scientific paper, book chapter, logbook, dissertation, essay, interview, case study, exposition in round debates, file, form, presentation handout, scientific report, oral intervention in research meetings and round debates, memorial, monograph, panel, paper, opinion, research plan, portfolio, poster, research line project, research project, project for requisition of resources for events, project for participation in public notices, registration of guidelines, annual activity report, orientation report, review, summary, orientation session, thesis...

As we have already mentioned about some teaching genres, saying that a research project, a poster, a presentation handout are genres to be appropriated by the professor for the exercise of the research activity, is a simple assertion, since, objectively, we can relate these artifacts to the processes of building new knowledge. However, we found obstacles when analyzing some activities that are routinely performed in the research field, such as conducting meetings before, during and after events, mediation of group discussions, mediation of seminars and, from the first question “What are people doing?”, we were able to identify that these are activities (and not the genre itself) that demand the appropriation of one or more genres of discourse to become real. In the mediation activity of a round group discussion/debate, for example, the professor needs to do: a handout for presentation, some notes for articulation of the group discussion, intervention with the participants etc.

It is worth noting that the institutional investment in these activities has taken place in isolation, throughout professional experience, as it is demanded, without there being a systematic commitment to these literacy practices that represent the professor’s practice.

We now resort to genres related to extension, commonly treated as the university investment return to society, but which, in addition, advances towards educational, cultural and scientific processes, in which university and community build spaces for the exchange of knowledge, which can result in interventions in social reality.

PowerPoint presentation, questioning/argumentation, book chapter, logbook, interview, oral presentation, forms, presentation handout, orientation record, opinion, extension project, annual activity report, orientation report, lecture...

In this analysis, we were able to identify the inseparability between the three pillars of higher education, showing, with a lot of evidence, in the real of extension activities, whose initiatives feedback teaching and research, at the same time that they subsidize the dialogue initiatives with the field.

In this sense, we highlight in our analysis that the extension orientation activity is different from the research orientation, since the student needs to be oriented in relation to society’s demands towards the University and vice-versa. We also emphasize that the disclosure of an extension activity may require several genres, such as a book chapter, for example. These different demands highlight the multiple and fragmented nature of the professor, whose identity (HALL, 2006; MOROSINI, 2000) emerges from the appropriation of the discourse genres that circulate in the teaching environment and the literacy practices in which he participates. So, his/her identity is being constructed, he/she is constituting himself/herself and recognizing himself/herself as the subject of his/her discourse.

Closing this inventory, we present the genres that signify the real nature of the professor’s activity in the management field (ANDES, 2013), required so that the professor can participate in administrative instances in the context of Higher Education. In this instance, professors participate in college, defend institutional positions, deliberate, write documents, in order to conduct and sustain a system of self-management or management of institutional indicators. The identified genres were as shown in the following chart.

oral opening of events, presentation in PowerPoint, questioning in selection boards, meeting minutes, notes, registration of projects on online platforms, letter, poster, contract of internships agreements, invitation, call for meetings, schedule, curriculum lattes, logbook, online class diary, interview, meeting exposition, peer and teacher assessment sheets, form, checklist, memo, memorial, craft, opinion, meeting agenda, discipline (or teaching) plan, project of course, political pedagogical project, resource requisition project, project for participation in public notices, registration of research and extension meetings, registration of research and extension groups, annual activity report, management indicator report, grades report, guidance report, travel report, application, oral support in meetings...

On concluding the segmentation of the genres of the management activity, it was evident, in the variety of genres demanded in this function, how much the administrative functions have demanded from the higher education professor. In the function of course coordinator, for example, to hold a simple meeting (an activity), the professor makes a call for meeting, the agenda, oral presentation, minutes, in short, there are many genres produced before, during and after the activity, which do not appear in the training/qualification processes of that professional, but that constitute the real of his/her activity. Considering Bakhtin’s (1998) postulate about the author’s individual style, an aspect still to be considered, in later studies, it is the one related to the interference of models and standardized forms used in the university environment for the production of some of these genres.

The oral opening of an event, for example, seemed, at first, not to be an activity related to management. However, we found that, often, the coordinator, the head of the department, the leader of a research group needs to carry out this activity, which is also an oral genre, exactly, due to the managerial role he performs. Thus, for the proper exercise of these management functions, the professor needs to develop all the political-administrative, scientific-pedagogical and personal skills required in his evaluation. For this exercise, literacy practices are necessary, related to the appropriation of the genres of professional discourse. All these activities related to the most varied environments and university contexts contribute to the constitution of multifaceted subjects, with multiple identities (NÓVOA, 1992; HALL, 2006).

So, even though we know that the inventory built is still incomplete and that the teaching, research, extension, and management frameworks still do not present the genres that work in intersection, we decided to present it, as a way to raise the discussion within the professor training/qualification courses, especially in Master’s and Doctorate courses, in order to highlight the fact that all these genres refer to professional literacy and that they have been neglected in these training instances.

In times of online communication, when the professor is required to be able to communicate with the most diverse interlocutors and in the most diverse situations of interaction, it is essential that language training is something formal, in order to make the linguistic-discursive artifacts, which are the discourse genres, instruments of effective interventions for teaching, research, extension and management processes.

Final considerations

With the aim of contributing to the reflections around the role of professional literacy in the development of the identity and work of the professor, as well as presenting the genres of discourse that constitute the real of teaching activity in Higher Education, we started this endeavor that proved to be much more complex and broader than we had initially assumed.

Research on the identity and training/qualification of the higher education professor led us to understand that, depending on the institution and the institutional and socio-cultural contexts in which he/she is inserted, the demands that come to the professor are different and ever growing, which reflects on the identity of this professional. These demands are related to scientific-pedagogical, political-administrative and personal competencies, necessary for the exercise of the numerous activities related to teaching, research, extension and management, all of which are intertwined with language and reveal the need for continued events of literacy training/qualification.

Going a bit deeper into this issue, we found that this literacy goes beyond the charts presented which demonstrate an attempt to represent the complexity and volume of the professor’s work. Such activities reveal that, in addition to knowing the genres in style, thematic content and compositional construction, professors need to invest in the contexts of production and reception, in the socio-cultural factors that impact the processes, in the roles and functions they play/perform.

Thus, with the aim of objectively defending the need to invest in continuing professor education, which necessarily involves professional literacy, we presented the inventory of discourse genres that concretize the reality of higher education professor activity, organized in the four groups of activities that constitute the activities performed by him/her, which also fulfills the functions of providing clues about the dimension and complexity of the teaching metier in Higher Education.

We believe that this inventory presented here, in a way, reveals the materiality of the innumerable roles and functions assumed by higher education professors, as well as indicating how their identities are crossed by the appropriation and use of the discourse genres and the discursive mechanisms they use to interact and produce meaning in the reality of their activity. We assume, however, the incomplete nature of the research, in view of the diversity of the professor’s fields of work. This is, in our view, a field that still deserves investment, even in the direction of organizing the genres, considering the intersection that exists between the various domains of activities.

We conclude our work with the defense that it is necessary to formally assume the literacy of higher education professor, not to incite, even more, competitive productivity in pursuit of said excellence, but to contribute to the emancipation of professors in the face of their intellectual work, which must collaborate to strengthen the social role of the university: to contribute to human development.

REFERÊNCIAS

• AMIGUES, R. Trabalho do professor e trabalho de ensino. In: MACHADO, A. R. (org.). O ensino como trabalho: uma abordagem discursiva. Londrina: Eduel, 2004. p. 35-53.
• BAKHTIN, M. Estética da criação verbal. Tradução de Paulo Bezerra. 6. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2011.
• BAKHTIN, M. Questões de literatura e de estética: A teoria do romance. Tradução de Aurora F. Bernadini, José Pereira Júnior, Augusto Góes Júnior, Helena S. Nazário e Homero F. de Andrade. 4. ed. São Paulo: UNESP, 1998.
• BATHIA, V. K. Analysing genre: language use in professional settings. London: Longman, 1994.
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Reforma da educação superior: reafirmando princípios e consolidando diretrizes da reforma da educação superior. In: ANPED, 11., 2004, Rio de Janeiro. Anais [...], Rio de Janeiro: ANPED, 2004. Disponível em: http://www.anped11.uerj.br/MEC2agos2004.doc Acesso em: 21 ago. 2021.
  » http://www.anped11.uerj.br/MEC2agos2004.doc
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Secretaria da Educação Fundamental. Referenciais para formação de professores. Brasília: MEC/SEF, 2002. Disponível em: http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=48631-reformprof1&category_slug=documentos-pdf&Itemid=30192 Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=48631-reformprof1&category_slug=documentos-pdf&Itemid=30192
• BRASIL. Congresso Nacional. Lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 1996. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9394.htm Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9394.htm
• BRASIL. Congresso Nacional. Lei nº 5.540, de 18 de novembro de 1968. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 1968. Disponível em: https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1960-1969/lei-5540-28-novembro-1968-359201-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1960-1969/lei-5540-28-novembro-1968-359201-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html
• BRASIL. Congresso Nacional. Lei nº 4.024, de 20 de dezembro de 1961. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 1961. Disponível em: https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1960-1969/lei-4024-20-dezembro-1961-353722-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1960-1969/lei-4024-20-dezembro-1961-353722-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html
• BRASIL. Chefe do Governo Provisório da Republica dos Estados Unidos do Brasil. Decreto 19851 de 11 de abril de 1931. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, Seção 1, p. 5800, 15 abr. 1931. Disponível em: https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/decret/1930-1939/decreto-19851-11-abril-1931-505837-publicacaooriginal-1-pe.html Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/decret/1930-1939/decreto-19851-11-abril-1931-505837-publicacaooriginal-1-pe.html
• BRASILEIRO, A. C. M. A acumulação flexível e os direitos trabalhistas dos docentes: estudo do fenômeno das companhias de educação em Minas Gerais. 2019. 152f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Direito) - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2019.
• BRASILEIRO, A. M. M. Manual de produção de textos acadêmicos e científicos. São Paulo: Atlas, 2016.
• BRASILEIRO, A. M. M.; PIMENTA, V. R. Os gêneros do métier docente: a linguagem como instrumentalização do trabalho do professor. D.E.L.T.A., São Paulo, v.37, n.2, 2021. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/delta/a/Hvvz9mQXTJgYXHV7s4RNZBs/ Acesso em: 14 fev. 2022.
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/delta/a/Hvvz9mQXTJgYXHV7s4RNZBs/
• CAPES. Ficha de avaliação dos programas de pós-graduação. Brasília, 2019a. Disponível em: https://www.gov.br/capes/pt-br/centrais-de-conteudo/10062019-ficha avaliacao-pdf Acesso em: 07 mai. 2021.
  » https://www.gov.br/capes/pt-br/centrais-de-conteudo/10062019-ficha avaliacao-pdf
• CAPES. Sistema Nacional de Pós-Graduação Brasileira: atualidades e perspectivas. Brasília, ago. 2019b. Disponível em: https://www2.camara.leg.br/atividade-legislativa/comissoes/comissoes-temporarias/externas/56a-legislatura/ministerio-da-educacao-e-planejamento-estrategico/documentos/audiencias-publicas/SoniaNairBao.pdf Acesso em: 07 mai. 2021.
  » https://www2.camara.leg.br/atividade-legislativa/comissoes/comissoes-temporarias/externas/56a-legislatura/ministerio-da-educacao-e-planejamento-estrategico/documentos/audiencias-publicas/SoniaNairBao.pdf
• CLOT, Y. Trabalho e poder de agir. Tradução de Guilherme João de Freitas Teixeira e Marlene Machado Zica Vianna. Belo Horizonte: Fabrecatum, 2010.
• CLOT, Y. et al. Clínica do trabalho, clínica do real. Trad.: Kátia Santorum e Suyanna Linhales Barker. Le journal des psychologues, Revigny-sur-Ornain, n. 185, mars 2001.
• EUROPEAN COMISSION. Benchmarking progress on new ways of working and new forms of business across Europe: ECaTT final report 2000. Bruxelas: IST, 2000.
• FAIRCLOUGH, N. Analyzing discourse: textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge, 2003.
• FIAD, R. S. Algumas considerações sobre os letramentos acadêmicos no contexto brasileiro. Pensares em Revista, São Gonçalo, RJ, n. 6, p. 23-34, jan./jun. 2015.
• FOUCAULT, M. A ordem do discurso. São Paulo: Edições Loyola, 2007.
• HALL, S. A identidade cultural na pós-modernidade. Tradução de Tomaz Tadeu da Silva e Guaracira Lopes Louro. 11. ed. Rio de Janeiro: DP&A, 2006.
• INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTUDOS E PESQUISAS EDUCACIONAIS ANÍSIO TEIXEIRA [INEP]. Sinopse estatística da Educação Superior 2018. Brasília: Inep, 2019. Disponível em: https://download.inep.gov.br/informacoes_estatisticas/sinopses_estatisticas/sinopses_educacao_superior/sinopse_educacao_superior_2019.zip Acesso em: 14 abr. 2020.
  » https://download.inep.gov.br/informacoes_estatisticas/sinopses_estatisticas/sinopses_educacao_superior/sinopse_educacao_superior_2019.zip
• KLEIMAN, A. B. Os estudos de letramento e a formação do professor de língua materna. Linguagem em (dis)curso, Tubarão, v. 8, n. 3, p. 487-517, 2008.
• KLEIMAN, A. B. (org.). Os significados do letramento: uma nova perspectiva sobre a prática social da escrita. Campinas, SP: Mercado da Letras, 1995.
• KLEIMAN, A.; SITO, L. Multiletramentos, interdições e marginalidades. In: KLEIMAN, A.; ASSIS, J. A. (org.). Significados e ressignificações do letramento: desdobramentos de uma perspectiva sociocultural sobre a escrita. Campinas (SP): Mercado de Letras, 2016. p. 169-198.
• LEA, M.; STREET, B. The Academic Literacies Model: Theory and Applications. Theory into Practice. Theory into practice, Philadelphia, v. 45, n. 4, p. 368-377, 2006.
• LINDINO, T. C. Quem tu és? Eu? Um professor universitário! Revista Docência do Ensino Superior, Belo Horizonte, v. 6, n. 2, p. 35-62, out. 2016.
• LINDINO, T. C. Pós-graduação e mercado de trabalho: exigência de formação continuada como qualificação docente. 2005. 245 f. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) – Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Marília, 2005.
• MACHADO, A. R; LOUSADA, E. G. A apropriação de gêneros textuais pelo professor: em direção ao desenvolvimento pessoal e à evolução do “métier”. Linguagem em (Dis)curso, Tubarão, v. 10, n. 3, p. 619-633, 2010.
• MASETTO, M. T. Docência na Universidade. Campinas: Papirus, 2003.
• MOROSINI, M. C. Professor do ensino superior identidade, docência e formação. Brasília: INEP, 2000.
• MUNIZ-OLIVEIRA, S. Uma interpretação discursiva sobre o real da atividade docente no ensino superior: dificuldades e super-ações. DELTA, São Paulo, v.32, n.1, p.75-97, 2016. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0102-44502016000100075&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt Acesso em: 09 ago. 2019.
  » http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0102-44502016000100075&script=sci_abstract&tlng=pt
• NOUROUDINE, A. A linguagem: dispositivo revelador da complexidade do trabalho. In: SOUZA-E-SILVA, M. C. P. de; FAÏTA, D. (org.). Linguagem e trabalho: construção de objetos de análise no Brasil e na França. São Paulo: Cortez, 2002. p. 17-30.
• NÓVOA, A. Firmar a posição como professor, afirmar a profissão docente. Cadernos de Pesquisa, São Paulo, v.47, n.166, p.1106-1133, out./dez. 2017. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/cp/v47n166/1980-5314-cp-47-166-1106.pdf Acesso em: 14 abr. 2020.
  » http://www.scielo.br/pdf/cp/v47n166/1980-5314-cp-47-166-1106.pdf
• NÓVOA, A. Formação de professores e formação docente. In: NÓVOA, A. (org.). Os professores e a sua formação. Lisboa: Publicações Dom Quixote, 1992. p. 13-33.
• PIMENTA, S. G. Formação de professores: identidade e saberes da docência. In: PIMENTA, S, G. (org.). Saberes pedagógicos e atividade docente. São Paulo: Cortez, 1999. p. 15-34.
• PIMENTA, V. R. Letramento acadêmico e uso das tecnologias digitais: a construção discursiva de sujeitos autônomos e autonomizados nos/pelos processos dialógicos de produção acadêmico-científica. 2018. 323f. Tese (Doutorado em Letras) – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Letras, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2018.
• ROJO, R. H. R.; BARBOSA, J. P. Hipermodernidade, multiletramentos e gêneros discursivos. São Paulo, SP: Parábola Editorial, 2015.
• ROSENFIELD, C. L.; ALVES, D. A. Teletrabalho. In: CATTANI, A. D.; HOLZMANN, L. (org.). Dicionário de trabalho e tecnologia. Porto Alegre: Zouk, 2011. p. 414-418.
• SANTOS, B, de S. A universidade no século XXI: para uma reforma democrática e emancipatória da universidade. 2008. Disponível em: https://www.ces.uc.pt/bss/documentos/auniversidadedosecXXI.pdf Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://www.ces.uc.pt/bss/documentos/auniversidadedosecXXI.pdf
• SINDICATO NACIONAL DOS DOCENTES DAS INSTITUIÇÕES DE ENSINO SUPERIOR [ANDES]. Caderno Andes. Brasília, jan. 2013. n.2. Disponível em: https://www.andes.org.br/img/caderno2.pdf Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://www.andes.org.br/img/caderno2.pdf
• SOARES, M. B. Letramento e Escolarização. In: RIBEIRO, V. M. (org.). Letramento no Brasil. São Paulo: Global, 2004. p.89-113.
• STREET, B. Letramentos sociais: abordagens críticas do letramento no desenvolvimento, na etnografia e na educação. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial, 2013.
• STREET, B. What’s “new” in New Literacy Studies?: Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, London, n. 5, 2003. Disponível em: https://docs.ufpr.br/~clarissa/pdfs/NewInLiteracy_Street.pdf Acesso em: 28 set. 2020.
  » https://docs.ufpr.br/~clarissa/pdfs/NewInLiteracy_Street.pdf
• TARDIF, M. Saberes docentes e formação profissional. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes, 2002.
• TARDIF, M. Saberes profissionais dos professores e conhecimentos universitários. Rio de Janeiro: PUC, 1999.
• TRAVAGLIA, L. C et al. Gêneros orais: conceituação e caracterização. Revista Olhares & Trilhas, Uberlândia, v. 19, n. 2, 2017.

• 1
  In Portuguese the words “teacher” and “professor” have two different meanings: the first one is related to the basic school teachers and the second one is related to the “university” professor. When referring to authors whose studies are related to basic school teacher, we will use the word used by them.
• 2
  This research is part of a larger investment in exploring the genres of professional teaching discourse at all levels of education.
• 3
  The researchers “Teacher training and the genres of professional discourse” and “I finished my undergraduate/ course: what about now? What kinds of discourse do I need to master to perform the teaching profession?” were presented at the VI ISD and the VII International Symposium on Portuguese Language Teaching, respectively.
• 4
  Whenever we mention texts written in Portuguese, we present in this paper our free translation of the authors texts to the English language.
• 5
  The universities that took part in this exploratory documentary research, carried out in 2019, were: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP), Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU), Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF) e Universidade de Brasília (UnB).
• 6
  We understand that the terminology “higher education professor” does not represent the entire category of teachers who work at the higher education level, due to the innumerable institutional and contextual variations that will also be addressed in this article. Even so, we decided to oscillate in the use of the terms “professor, College professor, and higher education”, considering more the internal articulation of the text than a political position.
• 7
  This research is not assumed to be the methodology of this study. It was just a qualitative sample, whose results were used as arguments to justify the investment in this research. Such a delimitation is still lacking in the Brazilian literature on university teacher training and deserves other studies.
• 8
  The analyzed documents were taken from 12 Stricto Sensu Post Graduate Programs: Civil Engineering at UFSM, Civil Engineering at UFPB, Medicine at USP, Medicine at UFPB, Mathematics at UnB, Education at UFPR, Education at UFGO, Education at UFRJ, Law at UFMG, Law at UFBA, Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at Unicamp, Linguistics at UFSC, in addition to a UFPB Graduate Program for the higher-level auxiliary body in charge of planning, coordinating and controlling all graduate activities and teacher training maintained by this university.
• 9
  Although there is terminological variation, we decided to use, in the interview, the term textual genre, instead of discourse genre, as Bakhtin (2011) does, because we understand that this is a more common term in the academic environment.
• 10
  The European Commission (2000) carried out a study with thousands of teleworkers in 10 European countries, plus Japan and the United States and presented 6 categories of telework, which were transcribed by Rosenfield and Alves (2011): work at home, work in satellite offices, work in telecenters, mobile work, work in remote companies and informal work or mixed teleworking.
• 11
  In this research, we understand that the political-ideological bias refers to discursive formations (FOUCAULT, 2007), which professors have to adapt to when they enter an institution.
• 12
  In a previous study (BRASILEIRO; PIMENTA, 2021), in which we analyzed the teacher’s work at different levels of education, the data were categorized according to the thematic content, having been oriented to: routine activities, interpersonal communication, planning and documentation. We understand that these functions are also part of the real activity of the Higher Education professor, but that, also, the legal prescription of the work of that professor specifies other functions.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  30 Mar 2022
• Date of issue
  2022

History

• Received
  01 July 2020
• Accepted
  22 Sept 2020