“…The review of the literature in Chile shows that there are numerous empirical, and normative studies on the implementation of BIEP in both rural and urban contexts (ACUÑA, 2012;CALDERÓN;SIMONSEN, 2018;CASTILLO et al, 2016;FUENZALIDA, 2014;IBAÑEZ;RODRÍGUEZ;CISTERNAS, 2015;CHILE, 2017;2018;TORRES, 2017;VALDEBENITO, 2017). In general, research results at the national level have some common denominators: 1) in schools that implement the BIEP, hegemony views indigenous knowledge is only one and it ignores the fact that there are variations according to territory (ARIAS-ORTEGA, 2020; VALDEBENITO, 2017); 2) in the school system, ways of knowing and seeing reality that are different from those imposed by the Eurocentric monocultural logic are not accepted (ARIAS-ORTEGA; QUILAQUEO; QUINTRIQUEO, 2019); 3) even when there is a chance to implement the BIEP, there is a lack of an accompaniment process that enables support, monitoring and follow-up for those in charge of carrying it out in the classroom (ARIAS-ORTEGA, 2020); 4) the BIEP lacks a systematized model that allows involving and sensitizing the participation and social commitment of the indigenous peoples themselves with the materialization of intercultural education for all students (CHILE, 2018); 5) the logic of exclusion of the Mapuche family and community from the curricular management of educational centers continues being relegated, so integration instances are just considered extra-curricular activities in the school program (ARIAS-ORTEGA; QUINTRIQUEO, 2021a; ARIAS-ORTEGA; QUINTRIQUEO, 2021b;QUINTRIQUEO et al, 2021); 6) there is a lack of contextualized didactic material adapted to students level of mastery of indigenous languages, which limits their learning (VALDEBENITO, 2017); and 7) there are methodological problems in the implementation of the BIEP in the classroom, since teachers do not know the principles of indigenous education, such as teaching methods to train new generations based on their own cultural ways (ARIAS-ORTEGA, 2020).…”