Financiamento da Educação Profissional no Ensino Médio: uma análise comparativa entre o SENAI e os Institutos Federais.

Abstract

This Final Course Paper, developed in the form of a Training Report, comparatively analyzes the funding models of Vocational and Technological Education (VTE) developed by the National Service for Industrial Training (SENAI) and the Federal Institutes of Education, Science and Technology, seeking to understand their implications for educational provision, the quality of vocational training, management format, and the educational purposes of these institutions. The research is grounded in a formative and professional trajectory connected to VTE and seeks to transform accumulated experience in vocational education into an object of scientific reflection. The study adopts a qualitative approach and is based on bibliographic and documentary research, drawing on educational legislation, institutional documents, management reports, educational data, and academic literature related to funding, the right to education, work, human development, and VTE. The comparative analysis considered the following categories: funding, free education, student retention, infrastructure and quality, territory, the world of work, educational conceptions, and management. The results demonstrate that SENAI and the Federal Institutes have institutionally distinct models, reflecting their different origins, purposes, and responsibilities. SENAI's funding is strongly associated with the industrial sector, fostering close links with productive demands, technological innovation, and vocational training. The Federal Institutes, predominantly funded by federal public resources, have a broader mission encompassing vocational education, teaching, research, extension, innovation, and regional development. The analysis also shows that free education, student retention, quality, and territorial equity depend not only on the volume of resources available, but also on how these resources are planned, distributed, and managed according to institutional responsibilities and territorial characteristics. The study concludes that it is not appropriate to establish a hierarchy between the two models, but rather to recognize their specificities and potentialities and explore possibilities for articulation between different institutional capacities. The research process also contributed to the researcher's professional development by transforming professional experience into an object of systematic investigation and reflection on the management of VTE.