Video Clip
Video Clip

June 5^th to june 26^th, 2002

May 8^th to May 22^th, 2002

Summary of the Second Report
April 3, 2002 to april 24, 2002

We may considerthis moment being second phase of our project. After their first field trip to Itariri, our studentd were able to combine concrete observations altogether whit informatio and data of real situation. At the present moment, they are already working based on concrete facts, and not anymore with their imaginary.

All through the month of  april, atudents and mentoring teachers met several times. All groups were asked to undergo a survey so as to record all positive and negative facts observed in Itariri town. They were also asked to discuss their exeptations and frustrations about their first field trip so they may assume their real play role: that of researchers investigating issues and problems, and most of all, working up to solutions.

Developed  Activities

URBANIZATION
During the first trip, students were fully aware of the amount of problems related to: basic sanitation, recycling waste, clandestine allotments, and touw signals; they also discussed the best way to obtain more subsides for the country. They projected and produced a pamphlet describing interesting aspects of both the country and the Itariri town.

CULTURE
Based on specific literature, students are discuting the concept of enviromental sustentainable development. In order to understand the influence of japanese immigration on local cuture, they are presently collecting specific information and data about it.

CAIÇARAS
Based on information collected during their filed trip. the students were able to draw a picture of the most critical problems: predatory fishing, middlemen, fiscal inspections versus bribing and bureaucracy for fishing licence obtainment. The group titled its report "Behind the Fish we Eat" and already had initiated the project  justification formalizing a working hipothesis.

JUREIA
The group is discussing the best solutions to be undertaken by local community, looking forwards to social well being and in close association with nature.

TOURISM
The group is still discussing the "sustainable tourism topic" and its environmental impacts, originated by a disable tourism; they examined closey and carefully accidents suffered by pratitioners of radical sports.

AGRICULTURE
After interviewing Mr. Miguel, agricultural technician from de Coutry Agriculture Department (Casa da Agrucultura), the students were able to draw up the following situations: economical difficulties due to decraising banana production; problems provoked by banana residual and viable alternative to take advantage of it.

SERRA DO MAR
Theoretical researches about devastation, soil sliding, jungles clearings and critical questions, such squatters land invasions, illegal hunting, and heart of palm extration. They are in contact with IBAMA, SOS Mata Atlantica and Green Peace.

SUPERVISION
The necessity of a second field trip to the region was cogitated during the meeting together with the coordinators. A this very moment, a larger vision of the already investigated situations allows a better definition of the working hypotesis. The co-ordinators also seggested several interviews with the local population, so as students may acknowlwdge their expectations and apprehensions related to their town.

TECHNICAL CAPACITATION
In order to obtain better records of the students field trips, Magno High School, in partnership with "Fuji" was able to provide them with a theoretical and practical photographic workshop, dealing with basic notion of photography.

February 27th – Project presentation to the mentoring teachers

Through a brainstorming meeting, the project co-ordinators (Mrs. Cleide Ruy and Martha Saddi) called in question the understanding of the meaning and importance of the concepts of the words “project” and “sustainability”.

Teacher Judith Nuria Maida situated the region to be explored and explained its socio-politics and environment characteristics.

March 2 sd - Co-ordinators and mentoring teachers trip to acknowledge the field

During the trip, Teacher Judith Nuria Maida, together with the co-ordinators, exposed the themes to be worked out, as well as, the topics and issues to be developed by each group.

Mr. Pablo Dib, Director of Itariri County Environment Secretary and Mrs. Nancy Domingues Ezídio, Tourism technician, received us in the town of Itariri. They led us to sites of some importance to our
project : recycled residuals banana workshop ; a touristy natural area ; the Ana Dias sub-district , where in the beginnings of the 20th Century, the first regional railroad station was built,. In the Itariri Hall City, we watched to a video about the regional ecotourism development potentialities.



March 6th – Meeting with parents, students, mentoring teachers and co-ordinators

The meeting was opened by Mrs. Cleide Ruy – co-ordinator - when she presented to parents and students the project objectives and themes. A video, produced by our school, was exhibited, showing some moments of the first meeting (Feb. 27th) and the monitoring teachers and co-ordinators field trip.

Mr. Pablo Dib, Director of Itariri County Environment Secretary, also present at the meeting, explained the outlines and characteristics of the region. Teacher Judith Nuria Maida moved parents and students about the meaning of sustainable development and its importance nowadays.

March 6th – Meeting with monitoring teachers and co-ordinators team

The meeting with parents and students was evaluated and the outcome was considered very positive.
A schedule of the activities to be held through March and April was set up, and the first field trip of the students was established (March 26th ), so they could acknowledge and meet the region and its resources.
March 13th – First meeting with the students.
With different dynamics, all groups were approached in order to perceive their understanding of the project:
• “A project, likewise a relationship, is a team production, where differences that could emerge must be respected. Nevertheless, we have to think about it as a collaborative production, and not an individual one.” (Tatiene do Vale – Serra do Mar group).
• “In order to achieve a project, union is necessary.” (Luan Cecilio – Serra do Mar group)
• “It is a team production, where everybody participates and does researches.” (Gabriela Alcântara - Tourism group).
• “Discussing, acting, helping.” (Mila de Menezes – Tourism group)
• “ Transformation is possible by means of the project” (Thomas Bruck – Agriculture)
• “A project must have objectives and purposes.” (Isabela Veiga Atra – Agriculture group)
The mentoring teachers exposed the project phases, the evaluation procedure and orientated the students about the individual organization material.
During this first contact, some groups were asked to undertake researches about the theme to be developed and the concept of the project and sustainability. The Culture group was asked to watch the movie “Gaijin”, about the Japanese immigration .
For this meeting, employed resources and strategies were the following:
• Transparences about the Ana Dias phases (Tourism and Juréia) ;
• A journal article of the NGO WWF, about the necessity of man to walk hand in hand with nature ;
• A visit to a local supermarket, so as students could collect information about fish varieties and prices, as well as their origin.


March 20th – Second meeting with the students
This meeting was set up in order to prepare the students for their first field trip to the regions to be studied, when general directions and schedules were handed out, read and discussed.
So as to meet each theme concern, some sites and their aspects were outlined and some groups prepared lists of questions to be addressed at the time of scheduled interviews.
Resources and strategies employed were the following:
• a text about sustainability in the Serra do Mar State Park, highlighting the ecosystem of Serra do Mar ;
• a brochure about Pedro de Toledo Core – Serra do Mar State Park – containing orientations about attitudes and concerns with environment (Tourism and Juréia groups) ;
• Mrs. Nancy Domingues Ezídio’ s (Itariri Tourism technician) comics publication “Itariri Zine”, narrating the origins of Itariri County ( Tourism group) ;
• a visit to a local supermarket, so as the students could collect information about prices of banana and its sub-products, since this product represents the economical basis and sustenance of Itariri region (Agriculture group) ;
• an excerpt of Carta Agenda 21 about sustainable development (Culture).
March 20th – Meeting with the Project team – mentoring teachers and co-ordinators
Each teacher displayed the activities progress held by the students.
The co-ordinators brought out to the mentoring teachers directions and schedules for the field trip on March 23rd.
March 23rd – Students’ field trip to the region
Since the areas under study are diversified, and consequently the sites to be visited not the same, five groups (Agriculture, Tourism, Urbanization, Culture and Serra do Mar) went to Itariri and two groups (Juréia and Caiçaras) went to Peruíbe.
In the morning, the Itariri groups developed the following activities :
• heading from one of the regional touristy site, a group undertook a 40 min hike, and visited an Indian school. From this point begins a track heading to the forest and to a waterfall ;
• escorted by Mrs. Nancy Domingues Ezídio, the Serra do Mar group presented a sensibility dynamics to a local classroom. They prepared a report about their activities and that should have been handed to the other groups, but this did not occurred ;
• the Culture group visited and rappelled at the waterfall; they were also asked to dramatize about environment for the very young students of the school. This material should have been handed to the other groups, but this did not occurred ;
• the Agriculture, Tourism and Urbanization groups followed the track and visited the waterfall ;
• all groups met at the initial meeting point and appreciated the riverside.

In the afternoon:
• lunch in a town restaurant ;
• some groups held scheduled interviews and visits .
It is very important to stand out that the whole group has been aware of the natural resources richness of the region, as well as to the town inadequacies to receive tourist groups. From then on, the whole group was able to point out the following issues:
I Local Monitoring
• Local monitors left aside some very important aspects of the region to attain to the success of the visit, such as :
• they did not bound to the groups ;
• language and attitudes were not in accordance with the group average age ;
• they did not programmed properly the timing of each activity, provoking delays ;
• they did not planned an alternative schedule for unforeseen situations (they altered a morning activity with no previous notification ; some activities were not accomplished, such as crossing the river, sliding by means of ropes and sheave ( tirolesa), the track hike and the visit to the Rio das Pedras waterfall.
• they were not enough prepared to orientate the students to the regional possibilities and to its natural richness.
II Chosen sites for visitation
• The visited sites could be efficiently explored as to their natural richness due to the lack of the local monitors’ experience; during the hike, they simply ignored information that would have been very important about fauna, flora, rivers, rocks, land relied and man’ s action over nature.
• The road leading to the waterfall and to the track was of difficult access and very dangerous.
• Complete lack of signs (name of the rivers, waterfalls), speed limit signals (on the road leading the reserve area and care to be taken by visitors about the environment) ;
• Lack of rest and food stops ;
• Some scheduled visits and interviews were not carried out due to delays with activities, for example, Serra do Mar, Culture, Agricultural and Urbanization groups
III County
• The present structure of the town does not valorizes its touristy potential ;
• It was easy to notice a total lack of infrastructure, preparation and concern of the local community to receive tourist groups ;
• The restaurant where lunch was served, and apparently the only one to have room enough for a great number of persons presented the following problems:
• Food and beverage were not enough for such number of people ;
• A very poor quality food was served (great quantity of leftovers), and with great delay ,and that made the students give up eating ;
• The restaurant service was highly inefficient.
• The town does not offer restrooms, cafeterias and a proper place to gather the groups enabling them to discuss the activities that have been undertaken and the ones that had not been done yet.
The groups who went to Peruíbe developed the following activities :
• Visit to a fishermen harbor ;
• Juréia Ecological Station ;
• Visit to the Barra do Una .
Monitors indicated by the State Environment Secretary accompanied these groups. They showed a profound knowledge of the region and kept the groups very well informed about fauna, flora, the local communities routine and environment issues.
The lunch took place in a caiçara’ s house, actually a restaurant, a comprehensible adaptation, as the site is an obligatory stop for nature lovers. Our students met there a group of young Norwegians who were visiting the Juréia Ecological Station.
In a certain way, all scheduled activities for these two groups (Juréia and Caiçaras) were accomplished. However, the impression left was that a too great amount of information has been received. They also realized that the distances between the visited sites were enormous.