PRACTICAL TRAINING OF EDUCATION STUDENTS IN CONFINEMENT CONTEXTS AND JUVENILE FACILITIES. DIDACTIC-PEDAGOGICAL

Objective : The purpose is to analyze the issues and challenges faced by education students in secondary education who conduct part of their training in a pedagogical project aimed at delivering socio-educational workshops in juvenile facilities for adolescent offenders. Theoretical Framework : The research is based on studies on initial teacher training (ITT) and the clash between university training and classroom reality, as well as critical perspectives on the standardization of teaching performance, which do not consider the unpredictability, uncertainty, and high complexity of teaching in confinement contexts. Method: A qualitative methodology is chosen. The sample consists of 23 students and 14 graduates. Data is collected sequentially over an academic semester through the writing of various narrative and a semi-structured interviews with students. In the case of graduate students, a discussion group is conducted. Results and Discussion : The results, consistent with the literature, indicates that the students often reproduce a standardized education that clashes with the complexity and unpredictability of confinement contexts, leading to feelings of fear and a search for security in specific indicators. Research Implications : The results have implications for the teacher training programs that aims to provide training for highly complex and uncertain contexts, which requires breaks and openings in people’s imaginaries and subjectivity. Originality/Value: This study contributes to the field of practical and didactic teacher training for them to perform in highly uncertain and complex contexts.


INTRODUCTION
One of the problems related to education in prison contexts and for adolescents who 3 pass through protection centers or for law offenders is the lack of initial and ongoing teacher training for teachers to function in such contexts.In some countries this area is addressed by social pedagogy or through diplomas or master's degrees that address this area.In the case of Chile, the universities that teach pedagogy courses have not taken on this challenge and have not incorporated into their undergraduate and postgraduate study plans training that prepares teachers to perform in highly complex and challenging contexts such as of punitive confinement and protection centers for children and adolescents.Only, in some Differential Education careers or in Adult Education Programs, training in confinement contexts has been addressed more systematically, but covering a limited number of teachers.
For their part, the secondary school teachers who work in the 95 schools located inside penal facilities and centers for adolescent lawbreakers, as well as those who develop non-formal educational programs in the child protection system, girls and adolescents, nor do they have specialized training courses at the national level.This differs enormously from the situation of teachers who work in schools in the free environment, who have had a wide range of courses available since the mid-1990s, many of them free of charge, since they are financed by the State.
In this scenario, in 2011, in the Department of Pedagogical Studies of the Faculty of Philosophy and Humanities of the University of Chile, a practical training project was born for students of Secondary Education Pedagogy with various majors, including: History, Philosophy, Language, Visual Arts, Music, Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics, who can carry out part of the credit for their internship in protection centers or for adolescent lawbreakers for three semesters, in parallel with internships in their specialty in schools.regular.
The development of these professional practices has reinforced both the graduation profile of the Pedagogy majors that participate in the project, as well as the hallmark competencies and mission of the University of Chile.It is important to point out that it is not possible to intervene in training in the direction we have been doing without institutional support, since education at all levels is crossed by epistemic-political conceptions and positions.
Thus, the practice experience in confinement contexts has been developed through two components.
The first involves a restructuring of a section of the line of Research and Practice Workshops, through the constitution of a collective project called "Pedagogy in Contexts of Confinement and Social Exclusion" (hereinafter, CEES) made up of 2 teachers and around 30 students each semester inside.We have called this modality "Practice by context", because the middle-level pedagogy students, regardless of the major and semester, attend the same Practice In this way, the linear epistemological structure that usually prevails in practical training paths is subverted, since the practitioners attend the "same" course-workshop for three semesters, that is, they develop a spiral path of deepening, not being never the same experience, because it is never really the same course, since it is taken from another place, than when it is done for the second or third time, assuming other roles, responsibilities, understandings and actions.
The purpose of this article is to discuss part of the results of a research that investigates the processes experienced by teachers in training, specifically the critical issues they face, their questions and challenges, with the aim of problematizing what it means train secondary school teachers "for", "in", "from" confinement contexts and what would be the specificity of said training, in order to contribute from research to the discussion on the subject., 2021, p .8).
This evaluation system has had an impact on initial teacher training, which has to prepare future teachers with the knowledge and skills that allow them to overcome the teacher evaluation processes.In addition, a National Diagnostic Evaluation has been installed that yields a year before finishing the pedagogy courses with the purpose of providing information to the institutions to develop improvement plans in their training programs according to the results obtained by the students.Added to this is the mandatory accreditation in Pedagogy courses, which puts pressure on institutions to comply with standards and indicators.In this scenario, the most complex educational contexts such as prisons, adult education, hospital or rural education have practically not been considered in initial teacher training, to the extent that they are not required contexts in the accreditation processes and that the The development of disciplinary and didactic-pedagogical standards seems more feasible to develop in regular education contexts.
Although the option for standardization of teaching performance has been the response of Chilean public policy, in the attempt to improve the quality of training and teaching practice , it has been criticized (Rodríguez, 2017;Carrasco et al., 2023 )  6 standardization tends to make " collective educational projects invisible (…) leaving in second place the senses of community that strengthen the identity of teachers (…)" (p.22 ).
Furthermore, standardization does not solve the problems experienced by teachers in schools with highly complex contexts, which far exceed the standardized determinations of how to teach, which do not consider situations such as student rotation, high heterogeneity, hierarchical relationships between peers ( in the case of prisons), violence of all kinds and lives marked by  (Montero, 2001;Tardif, 2004; According to such distinctions, teachers' knowledge would depend on their biographical experiences, the conditions in which they carry out their work, their personality, expectations and professional experience.In this sense, the disciplinary and pedagogical knowledge in which they are trained in their university careers would not constitute the fundamental reference of their knowledge and their teaching action. Even the same studies suggest that the knowledge acquired at the university is considered by teachers to be useless, not very significant and too theoretical (Tardif, 2004 ) so they quickly forget it, which is why in their professional life they usually act by reproducing in classrooms the same instituted logics, internalized in their school biography, and that are reinforced by educational institutions (Alliaud, 2015), in this case, the logics of an education that standardizes and homogenizes.Issue that has been presented as a central problem when pedagogy students develop their teaching action with adolescents in contexts of confinement, 7 because despite the reflection, the spaces for transformation, the autonomy for the creation and implementation of Their pedagogical proposals tend to reproduce, at some points in the process, the same welfare, tax, exclusionary and hegemonic practices that they seek to overcome, even demanding clear and specific performance standards to act in these contexts, to the extent that the legislation is not relevant. .This position in the face of circumstances (Zemelman, 2006) is strongly reinforced by a certain practical rationality (belief frameworks, values, political, epistemological perspectives, etc.), through which future teachers filter the knowledge received throughout their university education.Thus, the pedagogical knowledge that the students develop corresponds to a process of construction from experience, where constant dynamic, dialectical and recursive transactions occur between the knowledge they possess and their actions.
This process is where the greatest tensions occur in pedagogy in contexts of confinement and social exclusion due to the double function of the standards that "point out "a "what", referring to a set of aspects or dimensions that should be observed.in the performance of a future teacher; and also, they establish a "how much" or measure, which allows evaluating how far or close a new teacher is from achieving a certain performance" (MINEDUC, 2012, p.7), they are not relevant when one must face the uncertainty (high turnover, interruptions, high heterogeneity of young people, etc.), develop a pedagogical commitment that helps to overcome lack of motivation for learning, attitudes of verbal or physical violence in the classroom, develop listening skills and a teaching position Of course, legitimize the other as a legitimate other, consider the prisonization processes of people deprived of liberty (Pérez, 2021, Gaete andRamírez, 2022).

METHODOLOGY
The qualitative research investigates the experience lived by pedagogy students who develop professional practices in contexts of punitive confinement and child protection centers.
To this end, all students (26) from a fall semester (March to July) who are voluntarily taking the Research and Practice Workshop in these contexts are invited to participate, of which 24 accept the invitation.It should be noted that the semester in which the research is carried out corresponds for some to the beginning of the project, for others it is the second or third time that they carry out part of the credit for their internship in this modality.In addition, graduates who were part of the CEES project during their initial teacher training are invited to participate, of which 14 agree to be part of the research.The participants are from various specialties, levels 8 of practice and number of semesters in the project.In the case of graduates, generally, they only completed 1 or 2 levels of practice in the CEES project because in its beginnings it was not implemented over 3 semesters.
The data is collected through: a) the writing of biographical accounts of the reasons why they are incorporated into the project, b) the writing and rewriting of critical incidents experienced in practice, an activity that is carried out each year as part of the process.formative, c) a report at the end of the practice about the experience lived in the semester, d) a semistructured interview between 15 to 30 days after the end of the semester.In the case of graduates, data is collected from discussion groups in which they discuss their practice history in the CEES project.
As an ethical safeguard, everyone must sign informed consents and to ensure the rigor of the research, the interviews and focus groups are not carried out by the teachers responsible for this project, but by other researchers who make up the team of this research, who They also collaborate in data analysis, which is carried out through the lifting of categories based on the triangulation of instruments applied to the same practitioner, in order to have the analysis of each case, as well as the triangulation of subjects, by which compares the differences and similarities between the experiences of practitioners of different profiles.
The coding to reference the research participants throughout the writing, firstly, identifies whether they are students or graduates: the letter "E" for students and "T" for graduates.Adjacent to the letter is a number that corresponds to each case, thus E1, corresponds to a student case 1 or T8 to the titled case 8.In addition, when pertinent, the data collection instrument is identified, with a lowercase "e".identifies the interview, GF, the focus group, IC, the critical incident and RF, the final story.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In what follows we will delve into two key categories that emerge from the analysis of data related to the tensions experienced by teachers in training, the first between fear and safety and the second, between the same and the different.
Before developing the section, it seems relevant to point out that, in general terms, all participants value their time in the initial training in the CEES project, identifying the potential of said practice, the opportunities to look at themselves and transform themselves in the process.
, to the point that many of them decide to participate once they graduate as volunteer tutors, with all the demands that this implies and they recommend others live this experience.9 The experience meant a process of deconstruction (…) Being in that center helped me a lot to know where I had constructed myself as a subject (…) why I thought such things, why I did such things.That experience has led me to position myself much more politically, to be more conscious, although at times it has been painful (T4: e).
This practice leads you to be super self-critical of yourself and that is the most difficult thing.It is difficult for us to look at the things that we are failing and even more so when someone else tells you (E20: e).

BETWEEN FEAR AND SAFETY
Fear is a category little explored in teacher training, some authors such as Montgomery (2005), González, (2013), Llaña (2015), Gaete (2018) agree from their research that fear is one of the emotions present. in the teaching task: fear of criticism, of others, of work life, of making mistakes, among others.Fears that prevent us from breaking the circle of reproduction of the practices in which we have been trained and that make us remain inactive, out of fear.Although the feeling of fear is natural and allows survival, we currently live in a society of fear, which is not innocent, but a political device to maintain control ( Bude , 2017) and avoid the audacity of subordination or transformation.(Freire and Shor. 2019).Furthermore, in a market society, fear is a feeling that security companies generate to offer a solution that can be bought.
A state of personal and social insecurity is generated that brings back all types of fears, fears and panics and then an extensive line of artifacts, processes and so on is offered to "free us" from such burdens.We can go live in walled places with police surveillance (...) In short, the offer of means to resolve our fears can overwhelm our imagination and judgment (Lara, 2009: 13).
Working with people who are going through confinement contexts is running directly to the source of all fears, since it involves relating to subjects whom we have been taught to fear since we were very young.Although most of us who work in these contexts declare that we are not afraid, we are not always aware that our practices are guided by this emotion.The practitioners who participate in the project experience something similar, although not all of them recognize that fear underlies their decisions and didactic action; many of their attitudes towards the adolescents seem to obey that feeling, as they approach them timidly, They do not look them in the eye when adolescents challenge them, they do not know what to say to them, what activities to schedule, how to treat them.Perceiving the other as a criminal means granting them power over me, the power to harm me, take away my security, minimize me.(1970) points out, in our society the child in danger begins to be perceived like a dangerous teenager, especially because of the culture of fear and criminalization in which we are immersed.Fear, then, appears based on internalized prejudices towards "delinquent" or "poor" adolescents and, consequently, the insecurity of being able to fulfill the teaching task with "those" adolescents.As students and graduates point out: It scared me the same way, I felt like I had a lot of things to resolve about myself because I had a lot of prejudices, I couldn't stop unconsciously seeing them as young delinquents, young people who had committed a crime...But I can see that now (E20: e).
I didn't know anything about these young people, except what was said about them in the news, so my vision of the context was strongly marked by the social stigma that we have given to these children.I'm not proud to say it, but I was really afraid (E24: e) .
In the face of fear, the need for security arises, which in the case of pedagogy translates into requirements for standardized guidelines for action that allow us to face that emotion.The security paradigm is so deeply rooted in our culture that, when trying to move from that place, that is, from the place where we see the young person as a delinquent and criminal, we move to its opposite, that is, to victimize him.Both, criminalization or victimization, are nothing more than two sides of the same coin, that is, of a dualistic and moralizing logic.In the first case, we want to punish them, in the second, redirect their lives so that they reintegrate into society as good Samaritans.Quite a widespread perspective that is hidden under phrases such as the one formulated by a practitioner in one of the interviews: "For me, people did not change, in that sense they can overcome those barriers " (E19: e).
From this perspective, the meaning of educating in contexts of confinement is reduced to ensuring that subjects change, whether due to their status as culprit or victim.Didactic action oriented in that direction quickly loses its meaning because we see that these changes do not 11 again" (E37: RF).Sometimes fear arises from perceiving some of the students as criminals and others as victims.As one student states in his final story: The problem that we were never able to solve in the accompaniment was working within the logic of sides that was installed.We worked only with one group, which did not want to work with the other.When we realized this, we did not forget to invite everyone to participate every day, but beyond that, we did not know how to deal with the issue and not continue maintaining that logic [in which the most violent girls attack the others].I think in part we were afraid of generating a conflict, or worsening the relationship between both groups, or ruining the trust we had built with the girls with whom we shared more (E16: RF).
It seems that fear, not only as a feeling, but as an epistemic and political category, is one of the components that strains the training processes, since it acts as a filter to interpret circumstances and act in the world.Fear paralyzes us, puts us on the defensive, does not allow us to think, but also mobilizes flight or attack reactions.In this sense, a pedagogy that is deployed with another perceived as a criminal or as a victim, that is, with the very source of the fears instilled by the security market and the society of control, necessarily requires making this problem visible and becoming aware of its impact on teaching action.Approach that is configured as a key axis of the experiences of the practitioners, and with absolute impact on the didactic action.
Due to the above, it seems necessary to address fear in initial teacher training in confinement contexts, not only as a psychological category but as an epistemic-didactic one, because unlike what can be understood from traditional didactics, which reduces it to the application of effective methods, in the didactic action the entire universe of meanings of the teachers is deployed, since in each decision-making, the frameworks of beliefs and expectations about the other, the political, value, social positions, are activated.Therefore, there fear plays a fundamental role as a perspective to see, understand, and act as teachers.

b) An equal or different pedagogy
A second key aspect that arises from the experience of the practitioners is related to the similarities and differences that pedagogical work with adolescents in contexts of confinement and protection centers should have and, consequently, with the way in which we approach teacher training. .This problem is central and challenges not only those of us who participate in this project, but also the community dedicated to this educational field, among whom the discussion is evident whether the education that is granted to people who pass through total institutions, for the most part Poor, excluded and uneducated, they must receive the same Practitioners experience this tension as they carry out parallel practice in schools and a protection center or for adolescent lawbreakers.It is important to note that the practice they carry out in schools corresponds to teaching in the specialty of which they are going to be teachers, not in the Center, where they carry out socio-educational workshops, which only in some cases can correspond to the area of studies. of pedagogy, however, since the purpose is not academic and is carried out with practitioners from various specialties, they usually have a very different orientation from the curricular subject, for example, a workshop on mathematics for life, curiosities of the world or sexuality comprehensive.
In general terms, the pedagogy students participating in the research point out that there should be a difference between training to teach classes in schools in the free environment and in contexts of confinement, above all, because they have the experience that in school practice centers the "Good teaching" is determined, therefore, it is enough to learn how to face the class under those parameters to navigate it fairly well, which does not happen in these complex contexts.
To be super honest, I did not consciously learn in the practice workshops at school.In the workshops that I learned were those of the CEES Project, from pedagogical theory to a different vision of didactics.The school practices were not formative, because there you cheat a little, because you know that you have certain wildcards, raising your voice, calling the inspector or accusing (T: FC2).
This experience that in school everything is protocolized, but not in these contexts, is very challenging and transformative because it breaks with the references in which we have been trained, for example, the notion of time, sequence and process, by which we assume that For a year, more or less the same students will attend our class, following a sequential progress, in classes that have the same duration with a school calendar that suffers minor last-minute modifications.None of which occurs in the contexts of confinement and protection where education is in the background, below security measures, routines, measures decreed by the courts, among others.
The confrontation with uncertainty and the responsibility of making relevant curricular adjustments or the selection of contents, methodologies and forms of evaluation that can constitute a contribution for subjects in confinement constitutes a specificity that should be taken into account when thinking and implement teacher training processes in these contexts.
In this way, professional autonomy and the ability to improvise due to the vagaries of reality 13 should be at the center of training for highly uncertain and complex contexts, skills in which teachers are generally not socialized.However, the greater complexity of society and school demands these competencies for all teachers, because it is from the plane of the imaginary that the standardization of teaching performance manages to confront the training encounter, due to its unpredictability and temporality.in present tense.
In this same sense, practitioners experience the contents they must teach as problematic, they wonder if they should be the same or different from those taught in free-range schools.
This is because the disciplinary contents are blurred in their didactic proposals and although they try otherwise, activism becomes a constant in the workshops, therefore, the question about the meaning of learning quickly emerges.In these practices they are forced by reality to ask themselves about the meaning of the discipline they teach for the training of specific subjects and, therefore, they face one of the most profound questions of pedagogy, namely, if it that have been selected to be taught has or does not make sense for the lives of the subjects.A question that is often ignored in school, given the security provided by the mandatory curriculum and the predetermined meaning of education in relation to performance, passing courses and graduating.However, when these senses are no longer there, the confrontation with the depths of pedagogy hits hard as two graduates of the project point out: At the Center I asked myself: What use is philosophy here?(…) Injustice in a space like this is radical injustice.There are thousands of other needs to meet before passing Plato or Aristotle... Somehow very recently I questioned discipline within school (T: GF1) It happened to me at some point.I said: -Crazy!Discipline doesn't make sense to me-Transforming discipline into a tool for the objective needs of children, yes (T: GF1) The difference they demand for their teacher training in contexts of confinement and child protection centers is due to the fact that the logics instituted by the school, embodied in procedures, routines and frameworks of expectations lose their meaning in this context and the teachers become They are left without the shields with which they have been taught to deal in training, on the contrary, naked, they must face their own frames of reference, paradigms, political and value positions, of which they are not always aware and which requires them to leave their comfort zone.to act based on pre-established regulations.Following Freire (2014), it is about generating in teacher training the imaginary of "the "viable unpublished", that is, "an unpublished thing, not yet known and clearly lived but already dreamed of, and when it becomes " perceived highlighted" by those who think utopianly, then they know that the 14 problem is no longer a dream and that it can become reality" (p.241).As a student with three semesters in the project states: I thought this would be impossible considering the socioeconomic background of most of my students.However, I was wrong, and I realize that it will always depend on my intention (...) (E16: RF).
In the case of interns, they do not have a guiding teacher, a study program to follow, performance standards to apply, university tests or guidelines or rubrics with which their classes are evaluated, nor a teaching team that knows the answers to a series of questions, but only with teachers who are ignorant of standards and action protocols that replace their pedagogical decision-making and the reflection of their teaching actions.
The space of the CEES project also constitutes an experience, often disconcerting, because they attend "a class that is not a class" (E27: e).In a certain sense it is the same as any class in the parallel workshops, the same weeks in the academic calendar, the same requirement to develop certain predetermined professional competencies in the graduation profile, the same exam before committees of career professors to ensure quality. of training.But, on the other hand, it is not a class, not only because in the classroom there are practitioners from different generations and careers, but because what is learned there is not the same, neither in the same way nor with exactly the same intentions.It is a class where each activity deeply affects others, where it is not possible to avoid the responsibility of what it means to build with others a proposal that a dozen teenagers are waiting for every week.

CONCLUSION
The analyzes we have carried out on the experiences of practitioners with adolescents in contexts of confinement and protection centers allow us to be attentive and alert to a series of issues that must be considered as essential knowledge and skills to be developed by teachers in training.to perform, not only in these contexts but in other highly complex and uncertain educational spaces, in which the standardization of teaching performance, rather than achieving relevant performance, becomes a corset that hinders the possibility of teaching autonomy.
Above all, in societies where the response to quality in education is crossed by the logic of standardization and individual and institutional accountability.Logics in which pedagogy students have been trained, so when faced with highly uncertain, complex and unpredictable contexts, the emotion of fear emerges and the need to obtain assurances from the only tool they 15 know, that is, standardization.or protocolization of performance, which exempts them from the political responsibility that falls to them as teachers.
The danger in incorporating these invisible educational spaces into initial teacher training and public policies is the temptation to standardize the knowledge necessary to perform in uncertain and complex contexts, since by doing so immediately the practical performance would lose its status as situated, diverse and in movement, which allows the generation of viable unpublished works (Freire) that is not possible with the standardization of teaching performance.This is because standardization tries to trap what is diverse, stagnate what flows, and stabilize uncertainty.
Although it is essential to keep in mind the historical specificity of working with people in confinement contexts, this is not to generate a specific teaching that differentiates and establishes particular purposes and standards for those who are educated in prisons or who pass through protection centers.to childhood and adolescence.Such a solution would imply a double exclusion, that of being separated from society and from education for all, reproducing an exclusive and unequal logic.
It is about initial teacher training anticipating the existence of contexts where the instituted logics of standardization collapse with reality and warning that these logics also collide in schools in the free environment, only that this is made invisible, despite the fact that education is making water everywhere.Which is why it is urgent and necessary for initial teacher training to assume new teacher training practices, to prepare them to work in uncertainty and in highly complex contexts without assuming these spaces from fear, which is the source of need for security, which is satisfied with greater protocols and standardization, producing a vicious circle that is difficult to break.
We conclude that pedagogy students, with a more flexible and less standardized university experience, will in turn be able to face uncertainty and complex contexts without being immobilized by fear, or trying to overcome it through rules of action, as a way to obtain security, in addition, that it is not about preparing teachers to perform in confinement contexts in a different way than how they should be trained to assume teaching in the free environment.
It is about training a teacher to navigate uncertainty, face his fear, project hope, question others, become aware of his belief frameworks, build community transformation projects and assume the unpredictability of didactic-pedagogical action. .

Practical
Training of Education Students in Confinement Contexts and Juvenile Facilities.Didactic-Pedagogical Dissonance ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.8 | p.1-17 | e08469 | 2024.4 Workshop course, constituting a multigrade and interdisciplinary classroom, gathering in the same space to students who under a training plan based on fragmented subjects would never have been classmates.Collaborative work teams are formed that attend the same practice centerto carry out socio-educational workshops and/or school accompaniment.In this group, one or two practitioners have already gone through the CEES project in previous semesters, so they receive and welcome the new members, in order to build a project with memory.
second component restructures what to teach, for which teaching, research and connection with the environment are articulated.In Chile there is little development in pedagogy in contexts of confinement and social exclusion, therefore, the research carried out by practitioners constitutes a relevant contribution to knowledge, which has allowed the generation of research, networks and a series of projects where Students are responsible or coresponsible.This has involved dissolving the line that separates teaching, research and connection with the environment, in a proposal that integrates it, and where university students are trained to build knowledge through the experience of real research processes that are associated with social transformation and the public role that concerns us as educators.From this perspective, more than a class and a practice course, it is a group that makes decisions regarding what to learn and what to research from a position that fights for the right to education for all without exclusions, for a pedagogy situated, (self-)critical and historically conscious, suffering.In this regard, not only what to teach implies political, ideological, value-based and epistemological options but also the devices by which they determine how training spaces are structured.In this sense, intervening in the how necessarily implies resignifying the what.And this is what has happened with the practical training experience of middle-level pedagogy students in confinement contexts that we have implemented and investigated.Traditionally, the internship path required for pedagogy careers and for which accountability must be held in the accreditation processes is characterized by a linear and progressive model, from observation to action, which seems of little significance for the students of pedagogy, according to research by Pedraja (2012),Gaete (2015), among others, which is why the rupture of this model faces strong tensions related to both accountability and the fundamental knowledge that students would have to develop.Teachers who intend to practice in contexts of confinement where the logic of standardization has no place, such as contexts of confinement.It is not enough to change the training scenarios or even the contents or methodologies, if we do not keep in mind what the research of the last 50 years indicates in relation to the experiential, plural, historical, biographical and sociocultural aspect of teaching knowledge

Practical
Training of Education Students in Confinement Contexts and Juvenile Facilities.Didactic-Pedagogical Dissonance ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.8 | p.1-17 | e08469 | 2024.12 education as people who are educated in the free environment, and whether teachers require specialization, and if so, in what content and what skills.
occur.Doubts appear, as do insecurities and fear of not doing what should be done in front of a group of victims.Fear thus moves from the danger caused by the criminal to the fear caused by the helplessness of the victim.In both cases, the reaction is paralyzing.Practitioners recognize this second type of fear more easily, with phrases such as: "I didn't dare to say anything to him because he has suffered so much" (E29: RF) or "I don't know how to act when he attacks a partner or doesn't want to." work, I better leave it alone, I'm afraid of violating it Practical Training of Education Students in Confinement Contexts and Juvenile Facilities.Didactic-Pedagogical Dissonance ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.8 | p.1-17 | e08469 | 2024.