THE AGGLUTINATION OF EDUCATION, HIGHER EDUCATION AND CULTURE: NEW CHALLENGES FOR SCIENCE IN MOZAMBIQUE

Paulo Vilanculo"

Education is widely recognized as one of the fundamental pillars for the social and economic development of a nation. The intersection between education, higher education and culture represents a field of tension and complexity in the contemporary scenario. While these areas are seen as complementary, their combination has generated controversies about inclusion, quality and the impact of public policies in the promotion of science. This article examines the central issues of the controversy and points out ways to advance equity and integration between these spheres.

Basic education and higher education often operate in distinct but interdependent paradigms. According to Bourdieu (1986), the cultural capital accumulated during initial training is crucial for access to and success in higher education. However, structural inequalities present in educational systems make this transition difficult (UNESCO, 2021).

On the other hand, culture plays a fundamental role in building critical thinking and promoting diversity, but it is often relegated to a secondary role in relation to science and technology. Hall (1997) argues that cultural practices not only reflect society, but also shape it, providing an essential counterbalance to scientific pragmatism. Culture is intrinsically diverse, reflecting the historical, social and geographical differences of communities. However, higher education and science often operate under a logic of universalization and standardization. Hall (1997) argues that this tension can lead to the marginalization of local cultural expressions in favor of dominant global paradigms that do not fully recognize the richness of cultural diversity.

Hall (1997) suggests that recognizing local and global cultural practices can strengthen the foundations of higher education, promoting a more balanced and inclusive integration. Interaction between different cultures and disciplines is essential to enrich the production of knowledge. Although education and culture are often extolled as spaces of emancipation and creativity, they are also subject to processes of political and economic instrumentalization. Freire (1996) emphasizes that education needs to be a liberating act and not a tool of control.

The integration of education, higher education, and culture faces challenges in both policy formulation and implementation. Sen (1999) emphasizes that human development requires a broad approach that integrates these dimensions without compromising the specificity of each. Furthermore, regional and socioeconomic inequalities make it difficult to build an equitable basis for this integration (OECD, 2019). The integration of education, higher education, and culture in the context of scientific challenges raises several paradoxes. These paradoxes arise from structural, ideological, and pragmatic tensions that call into question the effectiveness of this integration in promoting equity and scientific advancement. This text explores these contradictions and bases its analyses on quotes from relevant authors.

In the combination of education, higher education and culture, we also find the paradigm of standardizing careers in the fields of education and culture, which presents significant challenges, especially in the context of an increasingly globalized world. This paradigm seeks to align professional paths in both areas, but faces contradictions between respect for cultural diversity and demands for standardization and efficiency. The paradigm of standardizing careers in education and culture must be reviewed in light of the complexity of contemporary social demands. Recognizing diversity as an intrinsic value is essential for the construction of more inclusive and effective policies. The standardization of careers often conflicts with the need to value cultural and regional specificities. Hall (1997) states that “culture is not static, but continually negotiated and transformed”. This means that the imposition of uniform models can disregard local practices and knowledge, which are essential for cultural diversity.

In the field of education, standardization can lead to a homogeneous education that does not meet the specific needs of different social contexts. Freire (1996) emphasizes that “education should be a dialogic process, where teachers and students share experiences and knowledge”. However, standardized structures can restrict this dynamic, transforming education into a merely technical process. The paradoxes of integration between education, higher education and culture demand creative and multidimensional solutions to be materialized in an equitable and effective way. This text proposes some solutions based on principles of equity, diversity and sustainability, in addition to being based on relevant authors. The increasing dependence of higher education on external funding can compromise its autonomy, shaping educational and cultural agendas according to corporate interests. However, the concentration of resources in technical areas can weaken cultural diversity, generating an imbalance in knowledge production (Freire, 1996).

The quest for integration often faces the dilemma between promoting inclusion and maintaining standards of academic excellence. According to Bourdieu (1986), educational systems tend to reproduce inequalities by valuing the cultural and social capital of privileged groups. This results in a tension between democratizing access to knowledge and ensuring a high standard of scientific and cultural production. In the cultural sector, the standardization of careers can reduce creative autonomy, favoring a more commercial and less diversified vision of artistic productions. According to Bourdieu (1986), the cultural field is marked by a symbolic struggle, where standardization can weaken authentic cultural manifestations, favoring hegemonic models of production.

To prevent solutions from being merely theoretical, it is essential to adopt monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Bourdieu (1986) highlights that policies must be adjusted according to their effectiveness in practice, considering the specificities of each region and population.

One solution is to develop policies that promote inclusion and equity without compromising academic excellence. Amartya Sen (1999) highlights that human development is an essential condition for overcoming structural inequalities, and this requires the adoption of approaches that value both cultural diversity and universal access to knowledge. A practical example: the National Culture Plan (Law 12,343/2010) in Brazil, which seeks to integrate culture and education in favor of diversity and development. Adequate infrastructure is vital to overcoming paradoxes, especially with regard to access to technology. According to UNESCO (2021), it is essential to ensure that marginalized populations have access to technological and digital resources, expanding educational and cultural opportunities. Technology has been seen as a solution for integrating education, culture, and science. However, this dependence on digital can exacerbate existing inequalities. According to Sen (1999), unequal access to digital infrastructure reproduces social disparities, limiting the positive impact of technological integration.

The controversy surrounding the combination of education, higher education and culture in the challenges of science reflects the complexities and tensions inherent in this integration. The combination of education, higher education and culture in the challenges of science is full of paradoxes that need to be addressed with an integrated and sensitive approach. Such an approach not only strengthens science and education, but can also enrich culture and promote sustainable development. However, it is possible to build a path towards convergence, based on principles of equity, diversity and interdependence. Recognizing and mitigating contradictions is essential to building more equitable and effective systems that promote both inclusion and excellence.

The materialization of the paradoxes of the amalgamation of education, higher education and culture requires a coordinated effort between governments, institutions and communities. Through inclusive policies, institutional autonomy, investment in infrastructure, intercultural dialogue and effective monitoring, it is possible to transform these challenges into opportunities for advancement for society. Universities and cultural centers must operate with greater independence from political and corporate interests. Freire (1996) emphasizes that education must be liberating and not subordinated to market logic. To this end, it is necessary to diversify sources of funding and create accountability mechanisms that ensure academic autonomy.

Proposals for a Balanced Approach

1. Strengthening intersectoral policies: Initiatives that integrate education, culture and science are fundamental to expanding the social impact of these areas (Brazil, Law 12,343/2010).
2. Investment in infrastructure and training: Expanding access to cultural and educational resources in vulnerable regions is essential to promoting equity (Sen, 1999).
3. Contextualized Education: Reforming curricula to include local knowledge and regional pedagogical practices, as suggested by Freire (1996), can strengthen the relationship between education and community.

4.       Promoting critical thinking: Incorporating cultural and philosophical approaches into scientific teaching can enrich the training of individuals (Freire, 1996).

5. Strengthening academic autonomy: Encouraging independent sources of funding for higher education can reduce the instrumentalization of institutions and preserve their emancipatory vocation (OECD, 2019).
6. Investment in inclusive digital infrastructure: Ensuring that less-favored regions have access to technology is essential to avoid new forms of exclusion (UNESCO, 2021).
7. Recognition of Diversity: Public policies should consider regional and cultural specificities, promoting a flexible career model. The National Culture Plan (Brazil, Law 12.343/2010) is an example that seeks to align development and cultural diversity.

8.       Encouraging cultural diversity:Programs that value cultural diversity can act as catalysts for scientific and educational innovation (UNESCO, 2021).

9. Creative Autonomy in the Cultural Field: Encouraging independent and diverse cultural production through public funding and incentive prizes can help avoid the homogenizing effects of standardization (UNESCO, 2021).

Bibliographic References

• Bourdieu, P. (1986). "The Forms of Capital." In: Richardson, J. (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood.
• Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of Autonomy: Knowledge Necessary for Educational Practice. Peace and Land.
• Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. Sage.
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. OxfordUniversity Press.
• UNESCO (2021). Global Education Monitoring Report. UNESCO Publishing.
• Brazil. Law 12,343/2010. Institutes the National Culture Plan - PNC and contains other provisions. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br.

• Collins, R. (1979). The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification. Academic Press.
• Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of Autonomy: Knowledge Necessary for Educational Practice. Peace and Land.
• OECD (2019). Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. OxfordUniversity Press.
• UNESCO (2021). Global Education Monitoring Report. UNESCO Publishing.

Brazil. Law 12,343/2010. Institutes the National Culture Plan - PNC and contains other provisions. Available at:http://www.planalto.gov.br

2025/12/3