By WELLINGTON OLIVEIRA DOS SANTOS*
A critical analysis of the “Pé-de-Meia Licenciaturas” program of the Lula III government
1.
In a survey carried out in 2024 on the main problems faced by Brazil,[I] Education was identified as the sixth biggest concern of the population, mentioned by 8% of those interviewed. This percentage is below other issues such as the economy (21%), violence (19%), social issues related to hunger, misery, homelessness and extreme poverty (18%), health (15%) and corruption (12%).
As researchers in the field of educational policies, particularly affirmative action policies, we dare to interpret the results of the survey – carried out a few months before the municipal elections of the same year – as examples of the concessive conjunction “although”: “although” the Brazilian population recognizes the relevance of education for the future of the country, its importance is often relegated to the background, being remembered only when social challenges emerge in a more pronounced way, almost as a patch.
This mania for postponing education is reflected in the formulation of public policies throughout Brazilian history. And the current term of Luís Inácio Lula da Silva, Lula III (2023-2026), despite campaign promises, tends to follow the same path. In the document “Letter for the Brazil of Tomorrow”,[ii]” released during the 2022 presidential campaign, among the 13 government proposals, education appears in fourth place. In addition, recent measures, such as cutting education spending,[iii] justified to comply with the spending cap, as well as the government's clash with administrative technicians in education and university professors during the 2024 strike, suggest that even the document's most general promises in the educational field are at risk of not being implemented.
In this article, we will briefly reflect on one of the recent government proposals in the educational field: the valorization of teacher training through the Pé-de-Meia Licenciaturas program.
2.
The Licenciaturas Fund is part of the Mais Professores program, launched in 2025 with the aim of promoting the appreciation and qualification of Basic Education teachers. Its main goals include attracting students with high academic performance to teaching careers; reducing dropout rates in undergraduate courses; and encouraging graduates to enter the public education system.
To this end, the program provides for the granting of scholarships worth R$1.050, of which R$700 are made available monthly, while R$350 are added to a savings account to be withdrawn at the end of the course, upon meeting basic criteria.
The justifications for the Undergraduate Savings Fund are diverse and coherent. One of the determining factors is the prediction of a possible “teacher shortage” in the coming decades,[iv] This is a result of the low demand for undergraduate courses and the high dropout rate of 58%. This teaching deficit is more pronounced in the final years of elementary school and high school, in subjects such as mathematics, biology, physics and chemistry.
Another relevant element is the uncontrolled expansion of undergraduate courses in the Distance Education (EaD) modality: according to the 2023 Higher Education Census, more than 67% of undergraduate students were enrolled in distance learning courses,[v] compromising the quality of teacher training. In response to this reality, the Ministry of Education (MEC) changed the format of these courses to include at least 50% of in-person hours from 2025 onwards.
Another justification concerns the profile of those entering undergraduate courses, who historically perform below the average of high school graduates, opting for this course due to the lower entry requirements.[vi] Furthermore, there is a relationship between the quality of teachers and the performance of students in Basic Education.[vii]: in Elementary School, 57,8% of student performance depends on the teacher, while in High School this influence corresponds to 36%. In view of this, the requirement of a minimum score of 650 points in the National High School Exam (ENEM) to compete for the scholarship, aiming to attract students with the best academic performance, in an attempt to qualify for entry into teaching.
Despite the good intentions, an analysis of the official announcement of the program, and even of the first notice,[viii] and the ordinance that complements it,[ix] reveals that he was born with some holes. We list the ones we consider most relevant below.
3.
First loophole. Where are the affirmative actions with scholarships reserved for black students, students from public schools, low-income students, students with disabilities, among others? We did not find any in the first call for proposals, and we consider this to be the biggest loophole in the program, one that could jeopardize the entire process.
The cut-off score of 650 points, introduced to select “high-performing” students, segregates students who have the worst averages in the ENEM, black students, low-income students and students from public schools.[X] To use a concept created by Silva (2012)[xi] in the analysis of Brazilian discursive production, the notice remains silent in the face of social inequalities that, contradictorily, are part of the context that generated its creation.
The discourse of merit, implicit in the choice of the cut-off grade, may result in the strengthening of material inequalities among undergraduate students: if only students with grades above 650 points will receive the scholarship, and considering that most students with high ENEM scores have at least average income, are white and attend private schools, the program runs the risk of granting scholarships to those who need them the least.
Second hole. Only 12 thousand scholarships will be offered, to be disputed among students of the Unified Selection System SiSU (from public institutions); in the case of remaining vacancies, they will be allocated to students of Prouni and Fies. Not much. According to data from the MEC, thanks to the Pé-de-Meia Licenciaturas, the demand for undergraduate courses via SiSU 2025 increased by 23,36%.[xii]: 66.282 students were approved for the SiSU in-person undergraduate course, which corresponds to 12.550 more students than in the previous year.
This is a significant increase, but still small if we consider the number of undergraduate students who do not have the grade to qualify for the scholarship: only 12.473 were considered eligible (score above 650 points). We still do not know which of these eligible students will actually enroll in undergraduate courses; in any case, even if all those eligible choose to pursue an undergraduate course, what should be done with those who did not achieve the cutoff grade and who are probably the ones who need the scholarship the most?
Third loophole. The notice does not say which courses will be covered or how the scholarships will be divided, which may create difficulties for students who opt for a bachelor's degree with the resource. For example, according to the 2023 Higher Education Census, Pedagogy courses have the highest number of enrollments among undergraduate courses,[xiii] considering the in-person and distance learning modalities; and more than half of the students in undergraduate courses are enrolled in Pedagogy courses.
However, the Pedagogy course trains teachers mainly for Early Childhood Education and the initial years of Elementary School, while the “teacher shortage” refers to the lack of teachers with specific training in subjects for the final years of Elementary School and High School, such as Mathematics. The question is: will the distribution of scholarships focus on low-demand courses or will it be independent of this?
The answer to this question is directly related to the problems we raised in the “first scoop”: if the scholarships are allocated to low-demand courses, the Pedagogy course will receive few, even though the majority of undergraduate students are women with a low-income profile. Which side will the patch be made on?
Fourth loophole. According to the notice, higher education institutions (HEIs) are responsible for the academic monitoring of scholarship students, canceling or suspending scholarships with Capes. By creating yet another demand for HEIs (as if the lack of technical and administrative staff in federal HEIs were not enough…), the government also creates a relationship of surveillance between students and teachers, since the latter will probably be required to avoid giving scholarship students bad grades, something that already happens with the search for approval rates in high schools. So wouldn't it be better to provide permanence scholarships to all students in vulnerable conditions, regardless of their ENEM score or academic performance, as is the case with the High School Savings Fund?
Fifth hole. To keep the scholarship, the student must remain enrolled, perform satisfactorily and participate in assessments promoted by CAPES. However, the notice does not specify whether students, in case of withdrawal, will be required to reimburse the amounts received during the undergraduate course.
4.
The gaps identified throughout this analysis, for the most part, can still be resolved, considering that the notice allows objections until March 26, 2025. Our intention, in this text, was to contribute to a preliminary reflection on the limits of public policies designed without considering the structural inequalities that are part of our social fabric.
International experiences in countries with high performance in educational assessments indicate that the attractiveness of a teaching career, combined with rigorous entry and training criteria, has a direct impact on the quality of teaching and student performance.[xiv]. In this sense, the emergency nature of the Undergraduate Grant does not replace structural reforms to enhance the value of teaching, such as effective compliance with the minimum wage for teachers (and subsequent increase); the extension of activity hours; the reduction in the number of students per class; the monitoring of a multidisciplinary team to ensure the inclusion of students with disabilities; the creation of links between school and family, etc.
All of these measures require heavy investment from the federal government, states and municipalities. However, in a scenario where the government is barely able to guarantee scholarships for all undergraduate students, the decisive step towards quality education is far from reality.
*Wellington Oliveira dos Santos is a professor in the Department of Teaching Methodology at the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC).
Notes
[iii] Available in stock here.
[viii] Available in stock here.
[xii] Available in stock here.
[xiii] Available in stock here.
[xiv] Available in stock here.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
