Under this fact Canarian (2006, P. 16) it standes out that … throughout the last centuries, this form of organization that is historical and contingent, suffered a process from naturalization, passing to be faced as something unavoidable, that is, as ' ' natural' '. This naturalization disarms the educators for a perspective of critical understanding in the way as they exert its profession. On the other hand it is this naturalization that explains the permanence of this organizacional model, although the change winds that they sweep the pertaining to school systems after the years of 1960. She is necessary to recognize that, instead of the reform to change the schools, they had been the schools that had changed the reforms.
But, the school that we have today is not the same one that it marked the first half of sc. XX, therefore, it passed of a context of certezas for one of promises, inserting itself, currently, in a scene of uncertainties. The school of the certainty was of the first half of century XX, that is, the one that from a set of intrinsic and steady values, formed citizens, supplying the bases an insertion in the social division of the work. It was the central pillar of the State-Nation only allowing to some the social ascension, therefore she functioned as an elitist register. After World War II the school starts to be of mass since, with the quantitative expansion of the pertaining to school systems, more people had started to frequent it with the intention to insert itself more easily in the cultural standards and the partner-economic model. The people associated the biggest amount of schools the three promises: development, social mobility and equality. Not the concretion of these expectations its current platform took the school, that is, school of the uncertainties, therefore the fact of the individual to be in the school is not synonymous of efetivao of such promises.