With this we believe that a subject devalued within the classroom, achieveing and different with respect to the other, on the basis of their place of "repitente" "slow" "confrontational", "silent" "son of", "brother", "integrated" ,will be located from a place that the same institution intended for the , is a place that does not allow the construction of new knowledge and to be different compared to the school setting.
According to Greek mythology, Procrustes was a traveler who forced them to their visitors "to lie on a bed of iron, and who did not conform to it, because its height was greater than the bed, you serraba the feet that jutted out of the bed; and if the unhappy era of shorter stature, you will then i stretched my legs until will be adjusted exactly to the fateful cot"
Recalling the events of the Greek mythology: this legend of the Procrustean bed has always remained in the popular tradition and in the universal literature as a proverbial expression to refer to those who always seek to accommodate the reality of the narrowness of their interests or to his particular vision of things and tells us that we are talking about what would be expected and normal, with little tolerance for the difference.
This led to the educational scenario is the "no tolerance to difference" , of something different, what is not in keeping with the "model" as a subject of learning that I intend to form , a model that emphasizes the uniformity by on the heterogeneity, a model that is fuelling the differences and does not promote equality of opportunities.
The institutions are plagued by labels or school constructs ( Karina Kaplan) that pass through the school history of that student /a , and in some way that construct if not it is "laying down of the subject" , brings with it in that child/to school failure. But we think that what subject learns in a school space where it is not reviewed or valued by their adult what have the gaze of colleagues that child and/or what some way " the gaze of the teacher and what explicit to close to the " no impact in the eyes of his colleagues?.
With this we believe that the pedagogical link(Frigerio and others) established with that child in particular, it will be the basis on which will favor the appropriation of knowledge and development of skills, abilities, and with the development of social skills that in this particular case we are dealing with.
When we talk about social skills, we assume knowledge of the student/to himself and is linked intimately to the esteem of the subject, the latter linked to the welfare of the child /a.
We cannot think of a child that learns and becomes socialized, in a state of permanent anxiety , because he knows that the gaze of the adult does not "Shoas" as child with their particular differences from its family history , school career , until the particularity in the way of appropriating the knowledge.
