Abstract:
This research addresses decoloniality in Religious Education, focusing on the analysis
and proposal of curricular approaches for indigenous schools in Caucaia. The central
problem lies in understanding the tensions between the curriculum prescribed in official
documents and the educational practices experienced by the Tapeba and Anacé
communities, from a decolonial perspective. This study is grounded in the recognition
that Religious Education has historically been shaped by colonial, catechetical, and
homogenizing practices, thereby posing the challenge of overcoming such legacies
through intercultural and decolonial approaches. The general objective is to analyze
the official curriculum of this component, identifying its limitations, potential, and
possibilities for proposals committed to decoloniality. The investigation understands
the curriculum and legislation of Indigenous School Education as fields traversed by
symbolic, epistemological, and political disputes. A qualitative approach is adopted,
with bibliographic and documentary research, including laws, opinions, resolutions,
and normative documents, as well as Political-Pedagogical Projects, Internal
Regulations, and materials produced by indigenous communities, recognized as
legitimate records of knowledge, memories, and spiritualities. This study analyzes the
extent to which documents affirm a differentiated Religious Education curriculum,
highlighting the participation of Indigenous leaders, teachers, and communities, as well
as the recognition of spiritualities as constitutive dimensions of educational processes.
The results indicate formal consonance with guidelines and highlight Indigenous
identities, cultures, languages, and territorialities, advocating for educational practices
rooted in the territory, the community, and ancestral narratives. However, limitations
arising from the institutionalization of Indigenous schools are evident, as the
differentiated curriculum does not always fully guide practices. Thus, a tension is
identified between the prescribed and lived curriculum, in the face of specific
educational logics that transcend disciplinary organization and are not always officially
recognized.
