Search

This paper will develop what is understood by the right to education and how it is specifically regulated in the contexts of confinement, taking into account how the educational stimulus regulated in article 140 of Law 24.660 operates and its importance in the process of social reintegration of inmates. A comparison will be made between what is sanctioned by the National Education Law and the international human rights instruments with constitutional hierarchy that support this right and what actually happens in the penitentiary system. Likewise, an analysis will be made of Argentine jurisprudence that recognizes the right to education of persons deprived of liberty and its importance for the system of progressiveness regulated by the law of penal execution. On the other hand, an analysis will be made of how, in practice, the reduction regulated by article 140 has lost its virtuality due to the introduction of a group of offenses that are not eligible for the liberatory institutes through Law 27.375. The main objective lies in the need to emphasize that education in prison contexts is essential for social reintegration and that the State has the obligation to guarantee this right. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes and discusses the Law Nº 7446 named “Educación Pública de Gestión Comunitaria Bilingüe Intercultural Indígena” (Public Management Community Bilingual Intercultural Indigenous Education) approved in the Chaco province in 2014. Specifically reviews the discussions on the name of these Schools: Gestión Social (Social Management) and Gestión Comunitaria (Community Management). It also analyzes the involvement of the Community Council in the designation of the educational staff. The data used for this paper is: different versions of the Project Law, regional news press between 2010 and 2014, official speeches and some interviews with the people involved in this educational process (Union Educational Leaders and native teachers). This paper concludes thinking on the meanings of interculturality notion observed in the speeches of the social actors involved in Indigenous Education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to make a description of the process in which the National Education Law Number 26206 (NEL) was promulgated and to make a critical comparative analysis of some topics regulated by that law to point out continuities' and differences with the Federal Law of Education Number 24521. The analysis is focused, on the one hand, on the political style of the NEL based on decisions rather than on deliberations and, on the other hand, on aspects regarding the governability of the education system. The topics were chosen giving priority to those connected with the distribution of attributions among the different education agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Prohistoria is the property of Prohistoria Ediciones and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)