“…The historical-social writing of the curriculum comes to be taken as part of a discursive universe that exists, according to Peters (2006), under two necessarily articulated forms: a) as an objectively structured space of relations among differently positioned agents according to an unequal distribution of material and symbolic resources, that is, of multiple capitals, that operate as socially efficient means in the competition for the appropriation of material goods and scarce ideas, though quite diversified, in the cases of the highly differentiated societies, in various "fields" of activity that characterize the modern West; b) as a set of subjectively internalized (via socialization) symbolic schemes of generation and organization of the practical mental and bodily activity of the individual agents, schemes that take the form of socially acquired potential dispositions or modes and tacitly activated to act, think, feel, perceive, interpret, classify and evaluate. (PETERS, 2006, p. 53-54) Thus, they create and recreate places, establishing an educational, economic and social world through an organized set of meanings and practices, related to a central, effective and dominant process of these meanings, values and actions, lived in and by the access to knowledge.…”