Then now do not see the individual in the background as explains Zemelman, but already to a third and even fourth plane. The second aspect which attracted my attention, but that follows this same order of ideas, is the reflection which reached Zemelman, where exhibits that reality can be constructed in various shapes and orientations, and there that > break in the same sequential thread of ideas, Estela Quintar exposes that she looks at education as a process of training and actual scope of transformation. Part from the perspective of pain and historical consciousness as mechanism of sensitization and contextualization of teaching. Lashes out against a downtown euro education system, demand a civilizing teaching system that strives to create a subject that should be and is not under the guidance of the State, which was not based on form, but in creating minds subordinate and molded to certain interests; and that in that same process of modeling, needed the castration of autonomous thoughts that curtail the possibility that such subjects create their own realities in bases to their experiences, aspirations and historical consciousness (the so-called bonsai pedagogy). Is at this point that the idea of a new social contract for education, since education is stained and polluted by certain factors that go in the opposite direction to what education is expected and their most fundamental principles.
Education is about form, create realities and subjects (erect subjects which is the duty to be), but how to create this new social contract for education? Here’s an interesting point, where the thesis proposal, enrumbando towards anarchism in education (pedagogy Libertaria) can be born. The foregoing above may serve as bases and foundations which can sustain or support the new educational paradigm based on the libertarian pedagogy. And which agrees in some edges with the proposals made by Hugo Zemelman and Estela Quintar. The first paradigm would be: education as a process of liberation and autonomisation of the subject in contrast to modernism, which valued the social, the collective to the individual, we seek a process of humanization of the process, and starting with the release of the individual, automatically be reflected to the social.