The network of meanings and educational psychology: theoretical and practical possibilities

This document has been downloaded from TamPub – The Institutional Repository of University of Tampere Publisher's version The permanent address of the publication is http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:uta-201603161323 Author(s): Madureira Ferreira, Juliene; de Suoza Amorim, Katia; Mäkinen, Marita; Garcia Moura, Gabriela Title: The network of meanings and educational psychology: theoretical and practical possibilities Year: 2016 Journal Title: Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences Vol and number: 217 : - Pages: 501-511 ISSN: 1877-0428 Discipline: Psychology; Educational sciences School /Other Unit: School of Education Item Type: Journal Article Language: en DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.027 URN: URN:NBN:fi:uta-201603161323 Subject: educational psychology; human development; network of meanings All material supplied via TamPub is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, and duplication or sale of all part of any of the repository collections is not permitted, except that material may be duplicated by you for your research use or educational purposes in electronic or print form. You must obtain permission for any other use. Electronic or print copies may not be offered, whether for sale or otherwise to anyone who is not an authorized user. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect 1877-0428 © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Future Academy® Cognitive Trading doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.027 Future Academy®’s Multidisciplinary Conference The Network of Meanings and Educational Psychology: Theoretical and Practical Possibilities Juliene Madureira Ferreiraa, Kátia de Souza Amorima, Marita Mäkinenb, Gabriella Garcia Mouraa, aUniversity of São Paulo, Avenida Bandeirantes 3000, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil a University of Tampere, Akerlundinkatu 5, Tampere 33014, Finland Abstract This paper raises questions regarding the practices of educational psychologists in the school context. The aim is to contribute to the construction of practical knowledge by presenting a study of how the theoretical perspective of the Network of Meanings can help professionals structure their practices in school settings. The dialogue surrounding the practice and the theoretical perspective of the Network of Meanings reveals that educational psychology is involved in all work levels of the school space: pedagogical, administrative and political. In addition, the theory’s multi-dimensional approach to human development provides input to reflect on the role of educational psychologists in schools as a whole. Thus, the Network of Meanings approach is considered as an important framework to discuss, elaborate and implement educational psychology practices in the school space. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of Future Academy® Cognitive Trading. Keywords: Network of Meanings; Educational Psychology; Human development. 1. Introduction Reporting research results is always a task that challenges the author’s ability to identify and prioritize findings that are guided by the objectives of the research. However, reporting considerations related to practice is more complex, as the researcher must narrow down the important elements seen, through the eyes of those who have lived the experience and which are inter-connected, equal parts of the process. The discussions revealed here originated from an analysis of the systematized practices of five educational psychologists and an examination of the theoretical © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Future Academy® Cognitive Trading 502 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 perspective of the Network of Meanings as a methodological framework to understand human development and to structure actions towards that development in the school context. The purpose is to raise questions regarding educational psychologists’ objectives in schools, highlighting the possibilities and contributions for pedagogical matters, with a focus on human development rather than health\clinical services in school. In this sense, and with the intention of preserving objectivity in this limited space, the ideas are presented from four perspectives. First, we point out important considerations regarding the theoretical perspective of the Network of Meanings, while understanding the educational psychologist’s role in the contemporary educational setting, especially the Brazilian environment. Next, we briefly explain how the data was constructed and offer a contextualization of the educational setting where this work originated, thereby establishing a platform for those discussions considered relevant in the interlacing of the specific theoretical framework and educational psychology. Finally, are addressed elements that were found to be important but not yet explored, such as concerns with the training of educational psychologists that thus far, in some graduate universities in Brazil, have not prepared psychology students to perform in schools, but more often in psychological offices. 1.1 Educational Psychology and its challenges Educational psychology as a field of study and a focus of psychological research is a relatively recent phenomenon that is growing and becoming widely debated globally due to its potential contributions in the educational context. However, despite efforts to disseminate research results and the accumulated field knowledge, difficulties with identifying the outcomes in school practices and educational policies persist (Anderman, 2011). Educational psychology is more often recognized in studies directly related to health and the education of teachers in the school context (e.g., Caprara, Barbanelli, Steca & Malone, 2006; Garner & Waajid, 2008; Pyhältö, Soini, & Pietarinen, 2010; Patrick, Anderman, Bruening & Duffin, 2011; Lohse-Bossenz, Kunina-Habenicht & Kunter, 2013). Thus, this research aims to contribute to educational practices by analysing the role of the educational psychologist in the school space, reinforcing the potential of this practice through a critical educational view (Marinho-Araújo, 2010; Maluf, 2003). This critical perspective means that topics such as violence, learning difficulties, school engagement and dropout, that were and still are the focus of studies in the area (Meira & Tanamachi, 2003; Goeke-Morey et al., 2012; Borges et al., 2011), must be reviewed within the practical perspective of psychological work inside schools. The initial exploration of these subjects will revolve around discussions about the environment where these phenomena occur and the individuals who participate in the process (Martinez, 2005; 2010; Almeida, 2003; Souza, 2007; MarinhoAraújo, 2010). These discussions aim to build two main ideas. First, in the professional practice sphere, the aim is to dissect the structure of psychotherapeutic service and the follow-ups that are exclusively focused on questions related to mental health in school. The second is to develop a work that is oriented to assist the schooling process and to develop the social relationships within school space/institutions (Oliveira & Marinho-Araújo, 2009; Patto 1990; Angelucci, Kalmus, Paparelli & Patto, 2004), thereby deconstructing ideas that deposit exclusively the responsibility of development on the individual and disregard the social processes (Souza, 2007). Therefore, by considering the situation where the educational psychologist is part of the school’s staff, questions are raised regarding the professional education/training to act in the school context, an issue that has been examined from different perspectives. Referring to the Brazilian setting, aligned with the continuous demand for consideration and discussion about this topic, the struggle for recognition and amplification of the psychologist’s work within schools still faces great challenges. In the political\economic arena, obstacles exist regarding the implementation of the regulation (PL 3688/2000) that addresses educational psychology services in all public schools; and, also, in the educational ambit, regarding the appropriate training for these professionals. Therefore, it is necessary to illuminate the reflections and practices about educational psychology that indicate its possible role and contributions to this field of knowledge in the school community, especially to elementary education. 503 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 1.2 The Network of Meanings as a theoretical basis to the understanding of human development and educational psychologist’s formation Faced with the challenges of understanding the complexities of human development in the context of daycare centres, a group of researchers structured the Network of Meanings RedSig* (Rossetti-Ferreira, Amorim, Silva & Carvalho, 2004), a theoretical/methodological framework that would allow them to deal with the multiple and dynamic elements present in the phenomena. Based in the social-historical perspective (Vygotsky, 1991, 1996), the perspective establishes a dialogue among theorists that bring into the discussion references that could complement and amplify the overview of the study of human development. But what is the Network of Meanings? RedSig, from the theoretical-methodological perspective, is characterized as “a tool able to assist the construction of investigative procedures in the comprehension of the process of human development” (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2004, p. 23). The Network of Meanings proposes understanding about the process of human development, working as lenses for researchers in this field to design their studies. Therefore, the Network of Meanings does not define, a priori and by itself, a specific method of research or action, but works as a mediator to the look at human development, helping us to widen ways to understand and access the phenomenon. The theoretical referential underlying the construction of the Network of Meanings are the Bioecological Theory of Development and the systemic character of social relationship comprehension (Bronfrenbrenner, 1996); the notion of complexity (Morin, 1990); and the cultural-historical theory, with special emphasis on dialectic and dialogic conception (Valsiner, 2000; Vygotsky, 1991, 1996; Bakhtin, 1979). In each of these theories, points are found that structure the idea of processes and/or networks, which allow for interlacing elements to compose a way to look into the developmental phenomenon. This “way of looking” searches to comprehend the complexities that involve such human development processes, incorporating a whole set of its contradictions, dynamics and influences. In this approach, human development is understand as occurring as immersed in an interlacing of semiotic elements. These elements are conceived as interrelating dialectically; and, the people interacting and the specific contexts are understood as constituting each other mutually. RedSig highlights the interactive character of human development, comprising not just a specific being, but the set of relational processes established in a specific context. Thus, using the network metaphor, it is assumed that “the analysis of psychological development processes might consider the people in development as part of systems and search to apprehend the relationship between he, others and the phenomenon around” (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2008, p. 151). The conception of development raised through the elaboration of the theoretical perspective opposes a deterministic vision of the process (through the sequence of predetermined stages). In contrast, it highlights the “possibilities for multiple paths of development, “(. . .) unexpected path, in a continuous flow, constant, co-constructing and changing, at the same time that contribute to constitute the other and the situation” (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2004, p. 30). The element that defines or influences the path that the development will take is the composition of the meanings that the networks provide to each individual at a certain time in the process. To fully understand the development, it is necessary to incorporate those connections, attempting to grasp the way in which the composition is circumscribing the individual’s relations and development. Therefore, this research briefly addresses four main ideas that surround the definition of human development and that mark the Network of Meanings concept, and which are important for the discussions to be highlighted here. The first is the connection between different elements: according to the moment, the context and the characteristics of people interacting, some meanings and sense acquire major importance. Accordingly, through analysis of the interactive configurations present in the different situations, a semiotic universe will be structured, promoting the emergence of a set of meanings and senses to possibly be attributed to the situation. When some changes occur in some of the involved dimensions, its diverse elements can be re-linked, thereby reorganizing its configuration. This 504 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 new configuration can lead to the emergence of new meanings, changing the trajectory of the actions, emotions and conceptions of an individual’s development. Another important point involves the comprehension of development unfold from the interactions between different individuals. Thus, it is stated that the social relationship is the arena and the motor of the developmental process. In interactions, people negotiate places and roles, sharing meanings and constructing culture. They constitute one another in a dynamic and dialogical way. In the same direction, in this theoretical perspective, social roles are performed in different contexts and in the presence of different people; the same person can perform different roles in different social relationships in different contexts. Therefore, the flow of people’s behaviour is delimited and interpreted by the others and by themselves. This idea acknowledges the possibility of multiple behaviours under similar situations but with different persons, and the necessity to incorporate multiple social identities that are part of the individual during the process of development. Human development does not follow a unique and predictable path. In opposition, multiple and unexpected possibilities of trajectories/paths can emerge. Every network configuration can open a set of meanings, each one guiding to specific (and maybe diverse) trajectories. Simultaneously, the same configuration restricts and limits some actions, circumscribing certain places and positions. All the above-mentioned elements emphasise the complex factors in the process of human development. It is important to highlight that one of the main points in RedSig is exactly its acknowledgement that human development is constituted “in” and “through” the complexities that involve human singularity (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2008). It is impossible, then, to neglect, disregard or divide the elements of the equation that structures the human development analysis. In contrast, it is necessary to accept the contradictions, the incompleteness and the defaults that will come with the phenomena. Therefore, RedSig enables the consideration of the intersection of many histories and experiences of each one of these individuals, within environments with specific dynamics. The first stage to constructing an investigative process (researches, institutional analysis, etc.) based on the perspective of the Network of Meanings is the Preliminary Analysis. This consists of an initial research experience in/with the research site, following the situation as a whole, drawing upon the different configurations of networks in which the diverse people interact, linking them. It is necessary to “immerse” the researcher into the situation, allowing him or her to comprehend the overall elements involved. This initial experience establishes an empiric basis to systematize the research, the data collection, and the research corpus construction. To design the study, The Network of Meanings is based on the assumption that the researcher should be considered a “toolmaker”. This assumption is based on Vygotsky’s social-historical perspective, which refutes the dominant position that the method is separate from the results and content of the research. Rather, the method is something to be practiced and not applied. The author refused the idea of “Instrument-to-result” and proposed the dialectic notion, “Instrument-and-result”. Therefore, the methodology will be understood in the interior of the studied situation and not outside of it. Hence, the method is not defined and not even predetermined (Newman & Holzman, 2002). In this regard, the construction of an investigation’s corpus, the data collection and its analytical strategies can happen through different instruments, such as interviews, observations, video-recording, field diaries and questionnaires. Analysis can be made through data interpretation with content analysis, discourse analysis, microgenetic analysis, etc. The instrument’s composition will be directly related to the type of question (study question) and the research/action field. Further, the Network of Meanings helps the researcher to observe the field and identify the best way to structure the data collection process, by considering the system involved and the interlacing of the network constituted by the system’s components. One of the limits of this methodological approach is the researcher’s difficulty working with a high volume of data (Rossetti-Ferreira, Amorim, Soares-Silva & Oliveira, 2008). At the same time, while the researcher is concerned with the huge volume of data, the number of complex elements belonging to the phenomenon should not be reduced. From this perspective, despite the Network of Meanings helps to structure ways of looking at the complexity, it does not involve the phenomenon’s totality (also stating that any method would be able to do this), 505 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 and always indicates the need of considering the incompleteness, ambiguity and contradictions present in the studied phenomenon. On the other hand, the Network of Meanings offers significant advances to the study of human development, once it relates many sources and distinct elements in the phenomenon’s analysis. It allows the researcher to study the processes and the meanings produced in different contexts, amplifying observations of the phenomenon studied and offering strategies of practical intervention. 2. Methods This study is the result of a particular reflective process by a group of five educational psychologists about their own practices in the school field. This group of professionals is part of the academic staff of a training school in one of the Federal Universities in Brazil (public institutions). The reflective process occurred due to the demand for a reorganization of the activities and the work’s methodology in the educational psychology department of that unit. This reorganization demanded that the group reflect on their own activities and the role of educational psychology in the elementary school. The data allowing for the assumptions raised here were constructed in the second semester of 2013, but the elaboration of the argumentation presented in this paper is as a result of ongoing discussions about this topic with members in different academic contexts. As the purpose of the whole process was to collect data that would allow the professionals to reflect on their practices and not to carry out any specific research on the topic, the methodology was designed to be simple and coherent with the objective. Observations of the activities and its reports, as well as field notes of the discussions between the professionals, are the main material for analysis. 2.1 Participants The participants were five educational psychologists who are members of the teaching staff of a training school in one of the Federal Universities in Brazil. They work in permanent positions as educational psychologists and are responsible for the follow-up of 1,000 students from early childhood education to the 9th grade of elementary education. In addition, they are responsible for the education/training of psychology students who are doing their internship and practical placements. 2.2 Context The training school where the data was constructed is characterized as Special Unit of a Federal University in Brazil. The teachers of that school are part of the university staff and are responsible for lecturing on elementary education and supervising the activities of the undergraduate students. Five teachers (psychologists with bachelor degrees and pedagogical training) compose the educational psychology department; each one is responsible for a sector of the school, guaranteeing that all students have assistance if needed. 2.3 Data Each of the five psychologists registered their individual demands, activities and the theories that sustained their work methodology. The participants also observed each other’s practices, and field notes made throughout the process were discussed in regular weekly meetings. From that process, the personal notes of one of the components of the group were considered to support the discussions presented here. Therefore, the data used are the materials acquired from the field notes of the observations and the written records of the discussions taken during the meetings. It is important to highlight that the researcher personally constructed these materials, which the group of psychologists are free to use as they wish since all records are available in the records’ book of the school. 506 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 2.4 Analysis Taking into consideration the group’s reflective task at hand, the procedures followed the following steps: (1) Categorizing the data based on the demands that were identified in the professionals’ work; (2) Analysis of the categories under different theoretical perspectives; and (3) Elaboration of a methodology that could systematize and help to prioritize the demands and, therefore, the actions of the professionals. During the categorization, simple and standard content analysis was applied. Each of the demands were described and gathered in categories according to whom they referred (student, parents, teachers or the school’s managers). With the descriptions of each school demand and its categorization, it was possible to gain an insight into the kind of work the educational psychology department performed in this specific school. During the categorization process, it was possible to identify that, in this particular school, the group’s demands are mainly distributed in four areas: (1) Actions that require interacting directly with the children: evaluation of cognitive abilities; interventions due to disciplinary matters and violence in school; interventions due to health and psychological issues – evaluation and orientation; collective interventions to deal with inter-relational problems between students in the classroom; (2) Actions that require interactions among the teachers: assistance with elaborating pedagogical planning for children with special needs; orientations to elaborate interventions due to disciplinary problems; care of teacher’s personal matters (providing guidance for further treatments); (3) Actions that require interacting with parents: feedback on the children’s development in school; attention to family problems that may be affecting the student’s school life; mediating matters between family and teachers/family and school management and families, when children are having problems with each other in school; and (4) Actions that require interacting with the management of the school: assistance with providing continuous training for teachers on specific topics that are related to human development or other aspects of psychology; assistance with the organization and coordination of school which also includes policies; and assistance with pedagogical organization in other school departments. Clearly, educational psychologists who are part of the school staff are involved in a wide net of actions and perform different roles. However, what is the main purpose of this professional in the school space? How could psychology be involved in all these fields, and deliver a critical and reflective perspective about the phenomena present in the school space? How does the psychologist remain objective while dealing with various different and complex elements simultaneously that share the same space? The purpose of the reflective process was to prioritize actions, and then divide or redistribute the work. Therefore, those questions guided the following step – the analysis under different theoretical perspectives – and led us to the incorporation of the Network of Meanings in the process of the analyses. 3. Results and discussions The RedSig approach contributes to the definition of some investigative ways, the object and the instrument in which this practice can be structured and realized. In other words, the role of the psychologist is acknowledged as offering a regular critical discussion within the school, in an attempt to prevent discriminatory processes and contribute to a democratic, laic and quality school. However, this critical/political look is not a privilege exclusive to the psychology professional, other knowledge or scientific fields can perform this role, sometimes in a contemplative way as, for example, philosophy or anthropology. When in dialogue with the Network of Meanings, it becomes evident that educational psychology performs a more specific role and makes important contributions, 507 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 providing a deeper view towards human development and the processes of meaning construction taking place in this space. With RedSig perspective, analysis is delimited by the investigative process, with its main focus on the interactions and multiple possibilities of interlacing through careful, meticulous and continuous observation of actions and reactions caused and lived in this environment. Understanding human development through these interactive processes, which are immersed in a complex interlacing of social, political and cultural elements, helps the school psychologist to enable interventions focused on the construction of pedagogical practices tailored to the needs of the individual (student). The Network of Meanings, besides its evidence, offers theoretical resources to understand these processes, bringing to this context of analysis the systemic view of social functioning. At the same time, it indicates paths to structure an investigative methodology of the human development phenomenon. In this aspect, RedSig opens space for a discussion about the investigative role, one which the school psychologist should/could adopt to understand the context in which he or she will act. This should happen without losing sight of the main objective of the work, which is the feasibility of the processes that contribute to the human development of the subject within this space, whether they are students, teachers or other employees. 3.1 Identification, analysis and actions towards school’s demands: discussing the aim of the educational psychologist in the educational institution The technical functions of the educational psychologist appear in all documents concerning professional performance, such as the School/Education Psychology Manual (Cassins et al., 2007), as well as numerous works on the topic, such as Guzzo (2005), Martinez (2010) and Souza (2010) who emphasize the extensive possibilities of the actions of educational psychology in different situations regarding schooling and school demands. Three main areas for school/educational psychologist acting are identified in these works: (1) student service – mainly concerning responding to school complaints; (2) teachers – a continuous education/training process and employee health assistance; and, (3) school management – both the institutional analysis and the coordination of specific projects, such as relations with family/school. Admittedly, these demands can be answered with the intervention of educational psychology, and as can be seen, they are present among the demands of the group of psychologists in this study. However, the possibility of amplifying the work field of this professional by considering the perspective of RedSig and how it deals with the analytical complexity of the phenomenon can be added to the discussion, keeping the focus on the human development processes within school. This perspective might change the paradigm of how to deal and intervene in the school space, since under this theoretical perspective, instead of dividing and dealing with each of the demands separately, it indicates incorporating all elements simultaneously. The focus is no longer the demand, but the child itself, and more specifically, his or her development. Bringing the Network of Meanings into the discussion, it is possible to see that the way to deliver the work is perhaps by accepting its complexity and dealing with its multiple elements. The Network of Meanings not only justifies the paradigm of incorporation, but also shows through the methodology in which it was constructed, how it might be possible to structure a professional action in educational psychology. It is understood that the basic objective of the school/educational psychologist in an elementary education institution is to understand the dynamics of institutional functioning and enable situations that contribute to individuals’ processes of development. For this, the professional must participate in this process, and help in the construction of individuals’ identities, while offering space for personal and institutional transformation. By considering the whole system as a field for a continuous and multiple individual or collective intervention (from the needs of each subject’s development, rather than working with a specific requirement (i.e., student treatment, teacher training, family, etc.), school psychologists can change their perspective on identity construction. Thus, the contribution of RedSig to the field of school/education psychology emphasises the importance of understanding the 508 Juliene Madureira Ferreira et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 217 ( 2016 ) 501 – 511 multiple paths of human development and their interrelation with pedagogy, didactics and school curricula. This view corroborates Marinho-Araújo (2010), who maintains that the pillar of an educational psychologist’s work, “should be a conscious and intentional choice for a preventive acting sustained for psychological theories whose focus privileges a vision of man and society dialectically constructed in its historical and cultural relationships.” (p. 27). Thus, it is possible, for example, to conduct works among students that have as an objective the construction of the teacher’s identity. Or, consider interventions in the classroom that aim to help students develop internal resources more adequate for the resolution of personal problems. Elements that, considered separately, may not have been possible to view as a demand for educational psychology, but analysed within the perspective of a complex and multi-determined system unleash actions and reactions that interfere with the processes of human development and schooling. 3.2 A concern: the education/training of educational psychologists to act in the school space The education and training of future educational psychologists is one of the major points yet to be discussed. In this regard, this discussion opens by raising two crucial points on the topic: (1) the space and context of the school/educational psychologist’s performance; and (2) the psychology undergraduate course curriculum. On the first point, it is understood and defended that there is a big difference between being an educational psychologist on the staff of a school, and acting as a school psychologist in a private office outside the institution. Even though the profession is defined by education (degree) and the purpose of the work (responding to school’s demands), it is understood that the local/position in which the professional stands makes a big difference in the role of its actions. Consequently, different elements are required in the process of the individual’s education/training, such as: knowledge about educational policies, organization and laws; training to deal with institution dynamic and continues education and etc. On the second point, it is defended that the school environment and the whole structure that delimits this space should be considered when choosing disciplines and the method of knowledge construction for undergraduate curricula design, thereby expanding the professional’s insight into other knowledge fields, such as education and politics, among others. About the performance of educational psychologists outside (as consultants or autonomous professionals) and inside the school (as part of the teacher/functionary board), a discussion is proposed between the professional practice and the reflections enabled by the conceptual application of the Network of Meanings (Pedrosa, 2004). Such discussion is based on the assumptions that sustain RedSig theory, considering especially that “it is in the interaction with their peers that human being is constituted as person (. . .) therefore, constructing and sharing social, cultural and historical processes”, and that “the psychic reality derived from interaction with his environment, in this environment, the other person is his privileged target (. . .) define and link senses, roles and positioning, it constitutes his identity (. . .)” (Pedrosa, 2004, p. 211-212) within the historical context/space. In the face of what is exposed, it is understood that there are distinct and basic elements that define differences in the acting of this professional. When analysing the variances in performance of the educational psychologist who has as reference the interactive processes (relationships) that may arise in these two situations, it is understood that the professional constitution also changes; once the Network of Meanings produced in the two situations differ, the senses and meanings constructed will also be distinct. In the first case, the psychologist is a professional who is not in the space and constructions inside the institution on a daily basis. Then, his or her actions are structured as someone “outside the problem” and whose goal is to help in the process, but not necessarily be part of it. In this condition, the psychologist acts much more as a researcher in the analysis of human development. His or her actions can be directly related to working with the student (answering the demand of a school complaint), teachers (teacher’s formation processes), or school management (as a consultant of many fields). However, the psychologist’s participation in this space is a result of a combination of different mesosystems – the school and the office/company where the professional works. Therefore, it is elaborated that this performance will not necessarily consider all the complexities present in the two interlaced mesosystems.