This article seeks to relate (trans)generational issues with the phenomenon of sociodromology and education in the COVID-19 pandemic period that began globally in the first months of 2020 and 2021. To make such crossings possible, we will initially present under which aspects we are addressing the term generation, and its respective phenomenological development, transgenerationality. Once these concepts have been properly presented it is also necessary to relate those information with the generations that are currently living within educational environments, especially schools. After such an exposition, we will present the theory that contemplates the vector of acceleration and its respective consequence for humanity. Sociodromology emerges as a theoretical instrument that makes it possible to critically glimpse how the speed of machines has dictated our lives, having a perverse facet of exclusion that determines which groups may be able or unfit at their pace. Finally the text concludes its reflection on the current educational context using the critical tools of socio-pedagogy, which views the subjects who are involved in the educational process as representatives of an even greater order in the world, which transcends schools. In this perspective, education as a pillar of knowledge acquisition should be revised in addition to its pre-determined role in society and should form individuals who could change the world and their communities.

Going to school in today's society can be a huge challenge, as new generations have shown themselves to be increasingly interested in electronic devices with internet access. A survey conducted by UNICEF in 2018 ¹ shows that about 83% of children aged 5 to 17 access the internet to conduct research associated with the school material, which exposes a predilection for children and teenagers of the new millennium to seek information from other sources besides the classrooms and physical libraries. However, there is a more interesting information revealed about the report produced by the entity that must be analysed: the data collected show enormous gaps between developed and in-development countries. While in countries like Canada and England the rates are close to 90%, countries like India and Brazil have rates between 47%. This difference becomes even more acute when the data are observed in students from public and private schools, which denounce an issue that transcends geolocation and extends to a perception beyond the question of purchasing power.

There are two important aspects here to be understood by this article. The first focuses on the generational issue, how the younger groups of children have become increasingly interested in electronic devices and how this relationship between subject and object has presented an increasing distance between students, teachers and content being taught in the classroom. The second point is based on the discussion about the speed with which information is shared among students and allows us to approach the concepts of socio-dromology and its ability to segment those who will be able and unable to keep up with the acceleration of contemporary society, which will be covered later in this article.

The first aspect that we must address here focuses on the specific group that is found in today's classrooms, the society in which they were born and the informational environment in which they are inserted. It is known that this generation receives the name Millennials and according to Strauss and Howe (1991, p. 68) precisely because they are those who "will lead our society in the new millennium of the 21st century", or, in more objective words, they will become adults in the new millennium and they will conduct the society in this new era. Such children, adolescents and young adults have been in the generational line since 1982, and many of the first representatives – called Generation Y – have already formed a family and have a millennial to call their own. The groups that we find the most concentrated in schools today are Generation Z and the Alphas, which correspond in 2021 to the most up-to-date generational line of this generational cycle within educational environments.

According to Rickens (2016, p.01 - 09), the main characteristics of these different groups that belong to Millennials are not related to different generational characteristics, but rather their birthplaces - which are increasingly technological and digital - associated with different behaviours, values and attitudes inside and outside the school environment. The author goes further and points out that the Z's, who are between the years 1996 and 2009, have a greater aptitude for multitasking and deal with an enormous asynchronous amount of information, being used to a world of mobile applications and tutorial videos that solve your main problems.

Alphas follow almost the same path, being received in a society flooded with technological devices and with countless knick-knacks connected to the internet. Pasquaralli and Schultz (2019, p. 22) point out that the children who are living in public and private spaces at the beginning of this second decade of the 21st century are the ones to be observed. Since they already demonstrate important differences from the children of other generations, regarding especially with their interest in digital culture, and how easy is for them to access numerous screens such as televisions, computers, cell phones, video games, tablets and many others.

It is known that the vast majority of teachers who are in the classrooms of schools and universities belong to generations before the millennials and they can vary between Baby Boomers and Generation X. Such aspects are important to be highlighted since each generational group brings the characteristics of its cohort. For example, Strauss and Howe (1991, p. 36-39) have already pointed out that if on one hand Boomers can be characterized as innovative and daring, they were responsible for the creation of technological instruments such as the personal computer (PC) and the first experiments with the corporate internet, on the other hand, they did not inherit from their ancestors any cultural infrastructure that would allow a rapid advance of other matters such as languages.

The opposite occurred with the X's, since they were already in a society where television was widespread in homes, and other gadgets such as video games and cable television were also becoming popular. However, instead of feeling close to their parents, an inverse path was felt and a large gap between the two generations was felt. The possibility of a harmonious relationship between the two groups within the classrooms did not materialize, and what reflects in great resistance from the youngest to learn from the oldest pedagogical content that had already been taught in the same way for centuries.

This problem were intensified as digital technologies are spreading through society, and they start what Levy (1996) calls the "information age", led by the internet and the cheapness of computing devices. Students in the early 1990`s were not only looking for more information when browsing the internet but also questioning the way the content was being taught in the classroom. After all, why spend six months debating a complicated mathematical operation in the classroom if a 10-minute video on the internet taught them the same formula, only in a more fun and engaging way? An important issue for educators emerged from this: either the content was revised to narrow the generational gap or millions of children and adolescents would simply be discouraged from participating in classes, which could lead to a mass dropout of the classroom.

In different researches that deal with the subject, we can find two different approaches that have in common one suffix, the generations. Both studies on intergenerational and transgenerational relationships were underpinned by the same foundation, which is the relationship between different age groups constitutes the transmission of knowledge between the oldest and the youngest. However, in the intergenerational perspective, which starts from a sociological order, there is a relationship between the different groups that organize their interactions that coincide in the dispute for power and equity. Under the transgenerational aspects, the relationships between the different groups focus on issues of psychic and behavioural transmission, which can be emanated from adults to children and vice versa.

Even though both views can be used within education studies, we are interested in understanding how the relationship between adults and children can be changed within this new educational reality in this pandemic times caused by COVID-19, especially within a technological learning environment where the youngest have greater dominance and affinities than the older ones. For Gallagher (2020, p. 33) the new generations are the “digital natives”, and even if they are living on this planet less time than their grandparents, they are certainly already in more contact with new technologies than the older ones. This means that, although schools are migrating to a more participatory education with the advent of digital technologies in school environments, the gap between generations cannot be easily resolved, since there is still a question of language, interest and even culture that conflicts in this intersection point between different generations.

The word conflict used here is the best explanation to understand what the historical view of generational development is. Strauss and Howe (1991, p. 32) already indicated that the succession of an older group by a younger one occurred within a scenario of friction and conflict, where visions of the world clashed and gave light to a new reality, which would only be changed when the next generation ascended. In other words, the way that one generation imposes itself on the other generates conflicts that try to be resolved in the attempt of the dominated group to ascend to power. This manifestation has been seen historically taking place in politics and economics, but in recent years the same movement within learning environments has become very clear.

At the beginning of the world COVID-19 pandemic crisis, countries such as China and Canada itself suspended all in-class activities between January and March 2020, moving from the face-to-face education system to a remote and, later, hybrid system. This means that teachers and students had to quickly understand what educational tools were available so that academic activities were not entirely suspended. On the one hand, teachers needed to adapt their classes to pedagogical systems that included video lessons, slide development and research activities that fulfilled both the tasks of the day's class and homework. On the other hand, the students had to change their study habits and, instead of looking to watch videos of their favourite content producers on YouTube, they had to attend the teachers' classes now.

Other countries such as India and Brazil had to deal with an increasing level of students dropping out the school environment due the lack of access of computers or internet. According to the most recent UNICEF report released in 2021 ², in all emerging countries were registered more than 23% of middle years and high school students abandoning the school and more than 40% in public school environment doesn`t had any content ministration during the 18 months of pandemic lockdown (from the beginning of 2020 to the middle of 2021). That leads to a full generation that doesn`t understand what they are reading and are being left behind with insufficient content in an unfair competition with other students from developed countries or from private schools that had access to computers and other informational gadgets.

Even though education was always in our history as a way of informal and formal transmission of knowledge between adults and children (Fitzpatrick, 2020, p. 40-41), the method was always adaptive and focused on which way and tool the teacher (in this case, the adult) could use to instruct the student (in other words, the children). But for the first time in history, the technological environment was the native space of the youngest generation and they are not only a few steps in front of the adults but they were more engaged in gathering information that allows them to more advance than never before. The teachers could have more knowledge than the Millennials, but the youngers had more technological tools to try to turn the tide in their favour.

Fitzpatrick (2020, p. 43-44) states that, for the first time within the pedagogical guidelines, it was necessary to understand that technological devices (especially those that accessed the internet) placed many children in the roles of protagonists of knowledge, and granted them much advantage to the detriment of teachers. Students were no longer just a blank board that needed to be filled with the knowledge of teachers, but they should be treated as equals, in terms of their ability to acquire information and access it. However, teachers would still act as guides for the immensity of information that these Millennials were receiving, helping them to filter what could be converted into learning for the school and what should be seen as entertainment outside the school environment.

The first initiative to be taken would be to modernize the classrooms, bringing the fiction of the 1960`s films and cartoons closer to reality. Intelligent classrooms, schools connected to the internet and the possibility for students and teachers to interact in the classroom through educational games were very exciting for many. However, the promises that were presented in these pieces of fiction imagined a society in which such adventures would be implemented in all environments, and the reality, unfortunately, ended up proving to be more exclusive than inclusive.

While Rickens (2016, p.16) affirms that a hyper-interactive education environment should be used as an engagement strategy for the younger generations, other problems arises in this possibility. The first of them, certainly, is the updating of classrooms for such hyper-technological environments that arouse the dazzle of students and teachers. Then, it is important to note that the tool itself cannot lead a class without having a qualified professional who handles it. Even when the author stresses that new generations need educational elements that are closer to their areas of interest, at the other end are teachers who are not able to keep up with such technological developments, and in particular the acceleration that comes from such media.

One of the clearest demonstrations of this new generational crisis is founded in the domain that the youngest has of the technological tools, while the older ones are quickly being left aside. This condition indicates that, according to Kabuto (2015, p.49), there is a greater likelihood that generational approximation strategies will present themselves as a forced attempt by the elders to speak the language of the younger ones, than something simply organic that was gradually incorporated into classrooms.

Kabuto admits that such age diversity scenarios can generate conflicts, but they are still manageable since knowledge transcends (in a transgenerational perspective) and influences both adults and children, especially within the digital environments in which we all find ourselves in the 21st century. In a study conducted in six families, the researcher found a very large support network that consists precisely of an infrastructure composed of community, home and school that transfer knowledge between its members. There is an understanding within this study that showed that in the cases analyzed, children found transdisciplinary learning, but where each of the social instances acted with greater strength within some cognitive capacity.

This condition of support for transgenerational learning had a drastic change in the year 2020, when the pandemic of COVID-19 was triggered in the world, imposing an unprecedented condition of confinement for all those who are living in the information age with their digital devices. A survey conducted by UNICEF at the end of 2020 pointed out that about 70% of children and adolescents who are studying in a hybrid education regime report that they find it more difficult to concentrate and learn in the home environment than in the school environment. The same document showed that more than 93% of children had been away from school for more than six months and that many of them did not feel they were learning the pedagogical content with the same intensity and quality as when they went to school.

In the same round, the children saw dramatic changes in the triad that supported their learning, as schools stopped receiving students, the community found itself locked down inside the residences and the home and family became the central pillar of all other relationships. Parents became teachers, counsellors, guides and controllers of what these Millennials could or could not do with all the time available and easy access to information on the internet. On the same hand, adults still needed to handle their jobs remotely and also supervise the performance of school tasks, a job that was previously dedicated almost exclusively to teachers.

The highly technological environment no longer needed to be in the classroom, but they had to be transfer to the homes of students and teachers, and this condition also exposed a large gap between different social classes, age groups and even knowledge about computers and digital culture. It is possible to find even more acute disparities regarding the handling of technological devices even within the same social classes, which indicates that an even greater phenomenon is occurring in our society, known as sociodromocracy.

The term dromology was first introduced by the philosopher Paul Virilio (1996) and focuses on a critical perception of acceleration as a political, informational and military vector. The author indicates that after the great advance of machinery in our society during the Second World War, the speed with which countries were able to develop technological advances (especially in the military fields) gave them greater control over the territories, and consecutively, over the other nations of the world. . The author uses the Greek term dromos, which stands for speed and agility, and which acts as a metaphor for the constant search for discoveries and technological advances that have been inherited from the military sectors and the suffix logy that is being associated with logical to describe how this acceleration mentality was incorporated in our society.

Currently we can feel this dromological rhythm extending in all sectors of our society, mainly due to the high speed with which information is shared in the already disseminated mobile and fixed technological means. In a survey conducted by information technology experts, it was recognized that there is an accelerated (and therefore dromologic) process of duplicating production and sharing knowledge around the world. At the beginning of the 20th century, humanity was able to double its knowledge of the world in a period of 100 years. By the end of the Second World War, the deadline had already been shortened to 25 years. In 2015, this deadline was accelerated to just three years, and by 2030 it is estimated that humanity will be able to double its knowledge in just 12 days ³. Such data indicate that there is a process of informational acceleration in our society and that they are driven mainly by technological devices that allow us to produce, share and consume different content in the most remote and distant places in the world.

According to James (2007, p.107), the contributions made by Virilio and his theory of sociodromology must be understood as a new vision of our society under the vertex of acceleration, and of how such conditions of life under a dromological society can influence increasingly exclusionary scenarios, where economic power and the ability to understand and adapt will go together. For educational research purposes, this perception must also be seen as a way of understanding the era shared by students and teachers, as well as the enormous challenges that lie ahead.

In one of these challenges, we can find one of the central points of Virilio's theory, the question of inclusion and exclusion to the technologies that enable acceleration. Virilio (1996, p.83) names such phenomena as dromoapt and dromoinapt and describes that such processes occur not only in the possibility of acquiring the physical environment that enables acceleration but also in the technical means to realize gains with such information that was obtained in advance. This condition indicates that there are vectors in our society that are unable to keep up with the fast pace of change and, consequently, are always left behind in this race for the best positions and that these criteria are not only linked to economic power, but to this perverse conduct of closely following the new information that is produced and shared in society.

In other words, the split between those who are qualified to ascend socially and economically is not only in the possibility of being able to acquire the latest generation computers or smartphones but in knowing how to extract all the best features from such devices. Dromoaptitude and its consecutive antagonism can be clearly seen in classrooms during this pandemic period. Several educational projects were installed to provide the technical means so that students and teachers could continue the education process. However, the supply of machines alone cannot replace the need that all agents involved have to understand the use of software, the appropriate language to be used, the dynamics of face-to-face and distance work and, finally, the new educational strategies that can be used within these new interaction platforms.

The feeling that both students and teachers are always starting in the last positions within this technological race is not mistaken, since it understands exactly what Virilio indicates as the vector of constant acceleration. Those who do not try even harder to get into the rhythm and speed of society were inept to follow the other elite runners, falling further and further behind. This condition affects both students and teachers, since both have barely started to understand the tools of educational interaction and are always facing a new initiative or a brand new tool, which gives the impression that the condition is no longer inertia but of constant loss of step on their part.

The generational issue is also present in the discussion on socialdromology. As digital devices are increasingly widespread among younger generations, it is clear that they spend much more time learning to handle such tools than previous generations. For the elderly, it is not enough just to learn how to handle the tool, but also to learn quickly how to develop an attractive product for the younger ones. Within the Millennials themselves, a more accelerated dynamic can be perceived, since Strauss and Howe (1991) indicated a generational cycle between seventeen and twenty-one years, and among the three groups that are in the Millennials' timeline – the Y's, the Z's and the Alphas – are separated by an average of twelve years, imposed by technological and digital advancement.

In 2020 UNICEF report pointed out that in every five students who are in schools in developed countries reported having some difficulty with asynchronous classes, this figure is for one in two students who did not even have any pedagogical content in schools in developing countries. It is clear that in matters related to the acceleration of information, several factors influence the dromoaptitude of a certain group, and such advantages further increase the already distant and uneven social fabric, since countless Millennial representatives were able to accompany the accelerated pace of education in the year 2020, another infinity of others were unable, being prevented from accompanying the other competitors.

But what could be done to assist such students and teachers in the perspective of minimizing generational noise and also equalizing such a gap between different groups that are at different rates?

The main function of education entities and teaching within society is to create inclusion scenarios that can drive better scenarios for all people. Even though the process of favouring those who have financial resources is still a sad reality, they imply what Freire (2002) categorizes as the "pedagogy of exclusion". In the author's observations, socio-educational conditions are profoundly influenced by several factors ranging from the economic access of communities to the political interests in access to education. This means that some educational institutions tend to reproduce the interests of public and private entities, making access to information (or information media) difficult for poorer communities or even for developing countries.

Such notes help us to understand how the sociodromological condition corroborates educational exclusion, and how it quickly becomes a powerful ally in the propagation of disinformation and also in the maintenance of privileges of some more affluent social classes. Still, according to Freire (2002, p.128), such factors that lead to the separation between privileged and disadvantaged students can be combated with pedagogical practices that focus on the instruction of contents that transcend the fundamental learning of the school, such as literacy and also the arithmetic reasoning. The school must act as a micro-cosmos of society, and the teacher must be the one who makes the connections between the contents taught in the classroom and the coexistence with other people in the social environment.

However, to be able to act as an agent of inclusion within a scenario where dromoaptitude can even exclude the professional from education, the teacher must understand the accelerated condition in which we find ourselves, and point out such pitfalls to his students.

First, it is necessary to understand that the discourse that sees the technology being used in the classroom presents a great paradox since it introduces an idea of scientific advancement in education while also subjecting the educational space itself to the dromological order of planned obsolescence of technological instruments. This term originally brought by Baudrillard (2009) includes the purposeful initiative of developers of consumer technologies to launch in a very short space of time other devices that are much more advanced than their predecessors, making them obsolete in an increasingly short space of time. In other words, the technologies found in schools age at a much faster rate with each evolutionary leap in computers and other instruments that are incorporated into schools.

Second, the way such instruments of information and entertainment transcend educational spaces and become commonly used by children and adolescents also becomes an important point of debate. Even if schools use internet access as a representation of an infinite encyclopedia where students can consult information and research data, such action should still be considered as a groove on the surface of what such tools can do for both students and teachers. In a survey of teaching instruments that simulate quizzes, Rosenfeld and Daisy (2019, p.78) indicate that among younger students, the interactive teaching strategy was positive in more than 84% of the surveyed classes, as the games referred to popular television programs or even cartoons that have this interactive language. Among older students, on the other hand, other instruments such as the exemplification of historical or arithmetic facts with the use of popular culture were more effective, since they used the students' affective aspects to create pedagogical bridges.

It can be seen that there is a transgenerational strategy operating in the classrooms, both in the relationship between adults and children and vice versa. In the first case, educational tools that emulate television gameshows allow cultures that already exist in the generations leading up to the Millennials to connect with different age groups and achieve a positive response from the vast majority of those involved. In the other case, the teachers went to study elements of the young people's electronic culture, such as games that are popular with teenagers and can bridge the content of the classroom with the referential culture of that culture.

However, we can also find noises from the technological mediums themselves that hinder a better transgenerational bridge and, that are manifested in the sociodromology paths. The speed with which crops are produced and shared is proportional to their obsolescence, and therefore, their loss of value. If an image contending a popular internet meme is used by a teacher as an educational tool, there is a huge possibility that this same example will already be outdated for the next class in the following year, and some cases, even in the subsequent semester. The speed with which crops are produced and shared is proportional to their obsolescence, and therefore, their loss of value. The same occurs with any educational tool that the same educator has learned to operate, and in a very short period, a new software update has been launched and obliges this professional to spend more money and time to put himself back as a dromoaptitude.

Using the method of socio-pedagogical observation developed by Freire (2002), it is noted that there is a clear gap between the school environment and other fields of society where students and teachers also live. For him, such scenarios exist only to the very logic of society, which seeks to reproduce its exclusive diagramming also within educational environments. The preparation of students occurs due to their ability to fit into an organized society for paid work to be more (socially) valid than voluntary work and all the technological tools that have been rapidly inserted into such environments tend to reproduce such conditions for the maintenance of the status quo, previously defined and validated by the whole society for countless generations.

Here we can find a point of intersection between the theories of education, dromology and social generations, with celebratory and also critical scenarios. At first, it is understandable that there is a (false) sense of inclusion when we think that this is the first time that a tool as revolutionary as the internet has become available for the use of students and teachers within the learning environment. Such a move would allow everyone to evolve together, at a pace that would allow them to keep up with the speed of society and thus keep up with their pace. And finally, there would be cooperation between the different generational groups that, through the equality with which both younger and older people can access information, the differences would be reduced and the similarities revealed.

Unfortunately, none of the positivist ideas seen above have been fully realized, and what was felt within school spaces was an even greater distance between the privileged and an even deeper hole in the social hierarchy. Instead of social inclusion led by electronic devices and their broad power of information dissemination, what was felt was a greater dispersion of valuable content for education, and the multiplication of channels of disinformation and entertainment that create noise in students' learning. Generational barriers have been further delimited, allowing for a transgenerational exchange in the fields of entertainment culture (Tosi, 2019, p.97), but hindering the free transit of educational stimuli. And finally, the dromologic is felt by different social groups in a completely exclusive way, reducing, even more, the small group of privileged and increasing more and more the mass of those unable to keep pace with the current society.

Once again, Freire (2002, p.85) points out that the role of education and the educator is to break the paradigms that are already being commonly used by those who hold power, proposing escape routes and also hope for those that have been historically segregated by everyone. The educational environment should be a field of resistance that stimulates the free critical exercise of thought, and also points out ways that could break such perverse cycles of maintaining social division, being an agent of transformation.

To break the chain of exclusion and segregation that affects the most economically vulnerable, education in the period of the pandemic should act more broadly, also containing financial initiatives for the distribution of electronic devices to students and teachers, in addition to training courses for everyone involved. Unfortunately, the current educational situation exposes the enormous dependence of society on educational environments, and the inequality between developed and in-development countries in dromoaptitude. Even though teachers are doing their best to keep education on the move, there is also a gap between the interests of Millennials in the activities proposed by previous generations, adding yet another obstacle to this already difficult race for the education of all.

Even with so many challenges, it can be said that education continues to be one of the few paths that seek to promote the meeting of different age and ethnic groups, in the perspective of truly transforming the world in a pre-pandemic and post-pandemic world. Although some new challenges promote separation and exclusion, as in the case of sociodomology, educators and students still resist and continue to navigate the seas of digital information with provoked minds and hearts full of desire for change.

Between the years 2020 and 2021, the educational system faced one of its greatest challenges, maintaining its activities during a pandemic that has claimed millions of victims worldwide. With the community spaces closed, teachers and students find themselves in front of their computers and other electronic devices, with the arduous task of continuing the pedagogical content so that the school year is not completely lost.

In some calendars around the world, the pandemic broke out at the beginning of the annual cycle of 2020, while in other countries the end of the school year faced such a challenge. It is undeniable that everyone involved used the internet as a connection tool between learning, assessment and interaction, but some complications have become explicit at this time regarding two different UNICEF reports released in 2020 and 2021.

First, an issue rooted in the age group of students and teachers, and their consecutive coexistence has become even more complex within the online learning scenario. Transgenerationality has proved to be a phenomenon that enables the transfer of knowledge between two different age groups, but still maintains some aspects of conflict that are inherent to the generational condition itself. Here younger and older people had to try a linguistic approach within the internet, and this territory is much more used by Millennials than by previous generations, who are not digital natives. Asynchronously, content and examples were given by teachers, only they arrived at the homes of students who were already excessively within these environments, and like any excess of uninstructed information, studies were left in second place and often in the third place, in front the enormity of "cooler" things to do on the net.

The electronic environment itself presented its compass, which dictates the pace and agility with which information is created, posted, shared and becomes obsolete. Sociodromology finds an official vehicle, and in its bowels, you can see rapid digestion and merciless disposal. Those who manage to stay fast become dromoapt and manage to stand out, while those who are run over by the phenomenon, perish on the margins of society. The acceleration with which electronic devices become obsolete ends up excluding a huge number of students and teachers, who find themselves lacking in their journey for speed, and also end up in an even greater gap with the generations more attuned to the latest technologies.

The data obtained by UNICEF during the year 2020 and furthermore in 2021 shows that the damage caused to world education is enormous, but they are felt most strongly in developing countries, and also in the most economically vulnerable communities in developed countries. This means that even within a pseudo-egalitarian society, which has more financial resources and which could have a more equitable distribution of income, there are groups that are "more equal than others", and this represents new socioeconomic segregation, but that now it is based on technology and information, the currency of exchange of the millennial generation.

In the perspective of breaking that vicious cycle that weakens, despises and excludes those who most need to be included in the educational process, socio-pedagogy understands that the role of the educator is precisely to counter all these conditions that have already been pre-established in society and to point out the path of liberation through knowledge.

In the current scenario, the use of instruments that aim to reduce the distance between generations and include technological instruments that are not quickly dated can already be seen as a way to resist the pace of dromology and its exclusive speed. Although countless students are, at that time, away from classrooms for more than a year, a scenario of resistance and concern for those who are not attending emerges from some educators and tends to show that even if the speed of the machines is frightening, nothing it surpasses the compass of love for others in the search for a more equal, just and inclusive society.