The family environment is linked to affection built through interactions and games.

There is a notion of school daily life as a set of precepts that regulate children's lives.

Children correlate home and school routines as inseparable parts of everyday life.

This research comprises the meanings attributed by 34 children from a school in Brasília to their family and school routine, with theoretical-methodological contributions from the Sociology of Everyday Life, Sociology of Childhood and Everyday Life Studies. From participant observation, drawings and children's spoken narratives, the following categories were produced and analyzed: family daily life, school daily life and intersection between family and school daily life. The results indicate that children's interpretations are conceived inside and outside school and transit between the real and the imaginary world, revealing affections, tensions and idiosyncrasies about their daily routines.

Studying everyday life, whether family or school everyday life, requires reflecting on notions of space and place, as these are contexts through which children's lives predominately pass. For Pais (2003), space is a fundamental category in the analysis of human life, taking into account that it is transformed based on the practices of its actors. Therefore, space is permeated by different forms of interaction and construction of identities, opportunities in which children's cultures are also produced (Pais, 2003). In children's cultures, children often exercise the ability to see and feel space-time, modifying the places where they find themselves into practiced spaces, the result of their intentionalities and their production of assigned meanings (Nunes et al., 2022).

Certeau (1994) discusses the concepts of place and space, distinguishing them. Place is a street, a square, a courtyard. Space, on the other hand, is linked to the uses and appropriations made of built environments, so that they receive their own meaning from the subject who inhabits, passes through, experiences such places. There is a process of symbolizing place, transforming it into spaces.

We found, in the Sociology of Childhood (Corsaro, 2011; Sarmento, 2013) and in the Sociology of Everyday Life (Pais, 2003), powerful ways to reflect on the particular way in which children give feelings and meanings to the contexts of interaction in which they usually find themselves, notably family and school environments. We identified, in Everyday Life Studies (Certeau, 1994), a complementary theory to those mentioned above for analyzing the relationships that children establish with the world.

The main challenge for the Sociology of Everyday Life, according to Pais (2003, p. 31), is “[...] to reveal social life in the texture of the ‘apparent’ everyday routine, like a latent image on a photographic film”. For the author, everyday life is more than routine, it is “[...] what happens in everyday life when nothing seems to be happening” (Pais, 2003, p. 28).

Regarding family daily life, the premise is that the concepts attributed to family over time resulted from political, economic and cultural processes, and are not understood by biological postulates (Müller, 2014). From this angle, it is noteworthy that children build their different representations of the world with references obtained within the family, especially on patriarchal bases (Müller, 2014).

The Sociology of Childhood has configured itself as a field of knowledge that problematizes children's relationships in different contexts, such as within the family and at school. The conception that guides these problematizations advocates a sensitive look at children's productions and their unique forms of communication, valuing their inventive, authorial and symbolic capabilities and their cultural practices, in order to overcome the usual adult-centered view, which conceives these subjects as incapable, subordinate and, therefore, as playing a secondary role in socialization processes (Sarmento, 2013, Rosemberg, 1976).

We align ourselves with these postulates from the Sociology of Childhood, the Sociology of Everyday Life and Everyday Life Studies, understanding the family and school contexts as a locus of learning practices and knowledge, but also as a field of confrontations, which, in children's cultures, to a certain extent, result from relationships established in adults' institutional spaces-times. In this sense, it is imperative to understand that children do not need to be understood solely in the wake of adult cultures, as they have particularities arising from interactions and sharing of peer culture (Corsaro, 2011)¹.

Based on this, this article aims to understand the meanings attributed by children attending a teaching unit in the Brazilian Federal District to their school and family daily lives, based on drawn and discursive productions proper to them.

This research is of a qualitative nature, based on fieldwork carried out at a Center for Comprehensive Care for Children and Adolescents (Centro de Atenção Integral à Criança e ao Adolescente - CAIC) in Sobradinho II, an administrative region of the Federal District.

The following research techniques were used: participant observation systematized in a field diary, production of thematic drawings and conversations with children. In this article, the oral narratives and images produced were organized in the format of episodes taken from reality to highlight the dialogues and images produced by the children.

The study is anchored by theoretical-methodological perspectives that value the perception of subjects and their impressions about the world, carrying out a kind of excavation of everyday life, proper to the Sociology of Everyday Life (Pais, 2003). To do so, we relied on detailed excerpts from everyday life (snapshots), based on the idea of small portraits or excerpts from social life (Pais, 2003). We also took into consideration Sociology of Childhood (Corsaro, 2011; Sarmento, 2013) and Everyday Life Studies (Certeau, 1994), for their recognition of sociocultural productions and children's interpretations in the search for meanings attributed to everyday life from a child's point of view.

The everyday excavation procedures were carried out with 34 children²of the 4^th grade of the school mentioned above, being 19 girls and 15 boys, between 9 and 12 years old³. The choice of the respective group occurred in a preliminary exploratory stage of the research, in which we observed the children's routines in different school times-spaces and identified particularities of the interactions between them.

Considering their social relationships, which emerge from the different spaces experienced by children, such as school, family and religion (Santos et al., 2017), receptiveness on the part of children in this preliminary immersion in the field was decisive in delimiting the study participants.

As a way of preserving the children's identities, we asked them to choose a fictitious name so that they could be identified in the field records. In most cases, the names given were inspired by characters from TV, the internet, artists, athletes, etc. This process, in itself, already presented rich information about children's perceptions about everyday life.

The production of drawings took place based on the generating theme: “My daily life is like this...”. Following Gobbi's (2014) guidelines, after producing the drawings, the children were invited for an individual conversation. As a result, we noticed greater freedom in each person's presentation, a situation that might not occur in a group setting due to possible constraints. Their drawings and spoken accounts about their productions contributed decisively to the maturation of the analytical categories, as they endorsed particularities and, in some situations, similarities of the family and school daily lives represented.

We understand their spoken accounts and drawings as narratives, as articulated records of the threads of children's memories, not restricting ourselves to speech, lines, shapes and colors in isolation. The narratives form a complex network of meanings produced and attributed to their daily lives, which, through the images produced and discussed, gain narrative contours of their stories and perceptions (Gobbi, 2014).

The interpretation of the data intertwined the information obtained in the field with the literature proposed. In this way, it was possible to produce three categories of analysis a posteriori: family daily life (narratives in which everyday life presents the meaning of being what occurs in neighborhoods, homes and children's living spaces); school daily life (narratives that give visibility to experiences in the formal educational institution they attend, relating them to everyday life); and the intersections between family and school daily life (narratives that highlight how the meanings attributed to everyday life are allocated between family and school life).

In the process of examining the data, we perceived that part of the narratives outlined the children's family daily life. We identified a total of fifteen records in this category. In one of them, Lucas (10 years old) highlights:

I drew my house and my street [...]. There are fights, lies, jokes. We play ball... There's a lot of violence [...]. There's a girl there who's annoying, because she plays football really well, but she doesn't want to play. She says we are irritating, because when we show up, the others call her names.

Lucas narrates events that go beyond the home environment and that have conflict in their script, covering interactions with his street colleagues, fights, swearing and lies, using play as the lens of exposure, in which the boy modulates part of his social relationships.

As an example, he cited episodes of football games on his street, in which an annoying girl stands out for her football talent. The fact that she was good at football made the girl transgress the social limits of being a girl, recognized and shared by boys on the street, causing them discomfort that, apparently, generates insults against the girl.

The fact that the annoying girl refuses to play football with Lucas and his friends reveals that, unlike the school environment, where there is a predominance of the adult's will over the children, determining how, where, when and with whom to play, in the family context (in this case represented by the experience on the street in their neighborhood), the expression of children's desire manifests itself more freely, as children have their own criteria for choosing what and with whom to play (Finco, 2004).

We identify, in this production articulated between orality and image, that there is an appropriation by Lucas of the place called street, in which he seems to reflect what, in his understanding, represents his daily life. The street comes to be understood as a space for a type of interaction with peers (Corsaro, 2011), which is not always established in a harmonious way, reflecting, to a certain extent, traces of violent behavior practiced by adults in the neighborhood in which he lives. We can say that there is a kind of interpretative reproduction of the adult world in his way of conceiving everyday life (Corsaro, 2011).

As part of the discussions about the tensions and conflicts that surround children's daily lives, the narratives of Messi (12 years old) are presented:

[...] My daily life is being with my family in my shack, on my street [...]. The good part is that there is football, kite flying and many other things. The bad part is that there are thieves, guys shooting bullets nearby. There is drug trafficking there. It's very violent. One day I was with my father at the store and out of nowhere there were some shots and a guy running there with a gun [...] we hid in our house.

Drawing by Messi (12 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Messi highlights what marks his daily life, in this case urban violence and popular games. Sarmento (2013) states that children are not alien to the societal cultures of the adult world, but they experience them differently, within their culture, structuring their own forms and contents in comparison to those practiced by adults. The record given by the drawing reinforces this understanding by highlighting games (kite) at the crossroads with urban violence, both coexisting and giving new meaning to the place (Certeau, 1994) where Messi lives.

We highlight other narratives that mobilize the processes of playing in the family environment. Paolo (9 years old) highlights that: “About my daily life, I drew pictures of me flying a kite at home. [...] I drew it because that's what happens in my daily life. I play in the lot behind my house, because my grandfather doesn't like to see me on the street”.

Fábio (10 years old), also associating his daily life with playing with a kite, shared with us: “My daily life is putting the kite into the air with my brother and the ‘little kids’ on the street. [...] I only do it with pure string, because my mother won't let me use chilena⁴, because it can cut your neck [...]”.

My daily life is playing at home, [...] I fly kites all the time. [...] I stay at home, just cutting the strings of other kites and staying far away from the bums [...] the good thing about playing at home is that we are protected. There's a lot of drug trafficking on the street and I like to play in peace [...].

The impressions presented by these children reveal parts of a puzzle that are the daily lives that surround their homes. These are fragments of reality that suggest frameworks of social life (Pais, 2003) present in communities, which are marked by common problems on the outskirts of Brazil, including violence. In this sense, the movement of making the most of games is crossed by urban violence, as seen in Mc W. M.'s narrative: “[...] I only do it with pure string, because my mother won't let me use chilena, because it can cut your neck”.

We can see how family daily life, materialized by the direct relationship with playing in the street, is a space for reinventing peer cultures (Corsaro, 2011), which are influenced not only by the tensions existing in the places that children go through/inhabit, but also by the rationality constructed by the family, which helps to shape children's practices and understanding of the consequences of their decisions.

It should also be highlighted that everyday family life is also represented in the children's productions as protection from the external environment, a comfort for problems that occur outside the home. In this direction and incorporating other issues, Dani Martinez (9 years old) emphasized the importance of family as a form of refuge and highlighted the rooms and main characteristics of her home, as can be seen in the following narratives:

I drew my home, my retreat and my family's retreat [...] they are everything to me [...] I feel protected when I'm there [...]. Here is my bedroom, the bathroom at home, my brothers' bedroom and my mother's bedroom, the living room at home, that's what I tried to represent... ah! the kitchen and the stove where my mother makes delicious food... mmm!

Drawing by Dani Martinez (9 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

According to Sarti (2004, p. 17), family “[...] is the filter through which one begins to see and give meaning to the world. This process that begins at birth and extends throughout life, starting from the different positions one occupies in the family.” In this way, the meaning attributed to the notion of home is related to each member of the family, their characteristics and affections. Furthermore, Dani Martinez put forward other aspects: “I drew my house because I wanted to, you know?! It's the place where I live, but I think of everyday life as something bigger [...] like a city, full of cars, bridges, that sort of thing.” The accounts given by Ivete (10 years old), Helena (10 years old) and Emanuele (10 years old) were identified as being in line with Dani's considerations about everyday life as a “city”.

I drew a building, a house that is mine and a store, because I think it is a city [...]. I imagine that everyday life is a lot of houses, streets. The place where we do everything and there is a lot of movement and we live with our family.

I drew a city, with buildings, stores, cars, that's where I live [...]. I live in an apartment block, on the top floor, with my mother and my aunt, and you can see all the action from up there. [...]. I think everyday life is a city because our home is in the middle of the city [...]. There are buildings, there are trees, there are stores, happiness and a lot of people [...].

From a perspective similar to Helena's, Emanuele (9 years old) considered everyday life as: “[...] a city. There are houses, buildings, buses, bushes [...]”, as seen in the following figure:

Drawing by Emanuele (9 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

In addition to describing her drawing, Emanuele explained: “I think the city has a lot of traffic, craziness, people who are late, rushing [...]. Sometimes I think that here isn't even a city, because it's small [...], rather poor, I don't know!”.

The children presented a partial vision of what the city might be, influenced by the fact that they experience such spaces in a fragmented way, with their families being the main institution responsible for the opportunities for knowledge and experiences that generate these impressions. Araújo (2018) problematizes children's relationship with the notion of city, highlighting that this is a construction supported by the reference they have from adult permissions. These permissions, in turn, take into account the responsibility of adults to ensure protection for their children.

From another point of view, highlighting contemplative impressions of nature and the landscapes of family environments, we find the productions of Mohana (9 years old) and Estefany (9 years old). Mohana said:

I drew myself at my house [...]. Behind are the mountains of Sobradinho, daily life for me is this, what I live every day. My house, the landscape [...]. These understandings converge with what Estefany said: I drew myself at my grandfather's house [...], I live close to his house. It's a smallholding [...], when we wake up it's very beautiful [...]. If it were up to me, we would never leave there. There are the animals he raises... chickens, dogs and cats [...].

From a point of view that differs from Mohana and Estefany's impressions, Mariana (10 years old) also narrated her experiences at her grandfather's smallholding. Unlike her colleagues, Mariana did not show much pleasure in living in the scenario presented in her drawing, illustrated in the following figure:

I drew my grandfather's smallholding. There is only this little bird that I've forgotten how it's called and the hammock and all the different types of fruit except two which are horrible. Every time I go to his house, it's very tedious [...]. Then she added: I drew the smallholding, but I hate it there [...].

Drawing by Mariana (10 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

In the interweaving of children's spoken and drawn narratives about their daily lives associated with the family context, we perceive that they are represented based on the notion of urban and/or rural space, valuing positively or negatively the experiences they have there. The meanings attributed to everyday family life highlight different family experiences and contexts and their impact on their individual social representation (Pais, 2003).

The narratives in question highlight specific ways of understanding everyday life based on the places in which people live, highlighting the universe of ways of expressing their thoughts (Santos et al., 2017). The experiences woven into everyday life are being given new meanings and transformed into spaces, so that the scenery (streets, houses, mountains, landscapes and nature) and other subjects that are part of life (mother, grandfather, chickens, dogs and cats) impact the particular ways of living and practicing these spaces (Certeau, 1994).

Concluding this category of analysis, we provide the narratives of Ana Beatriz (9 years old) and Silmara (10 years old), who presented different meanings from other children in relation to what they consider to be everyday life.

I like to stay on top of the tree at my house playing, because from there I can see my whole street. For me, everyday life is staying on top of the tree [...]. If I stay at home, my mother makes me work and I don't like it. I prefer to stay there in peace [...].

Drawing by Ana Beatriz (9 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Everyday life is my daily life. Playing, studying and doing things at home. I wash dishes, clean the house [...]. I drew myself playing with my sister, because that's what I like, the other things I don't like. Playing makes me happy [...].

The structuralist viewpoint of Sociology of Childhood points out that children, in modern times, have stopped contributing to the family budget, and now generate expenses, and this, in a certain way, has interfered with the legitimacy of social life (Qvortrup, 2001). Domestic activities, in this context, can be considered as a by-product of the civilizing procedures to which children have been subjected throughout the history of humanity (Qvortrup, 2001).

Silmara's narrative highlights a process of recognition of daily household tasks in contrast to the role of a child (Sirota, 2001). The differentiation attributed between children and adults has produced hierarchical levels in the family nucleus, as well as positions of authority. Such changes have had repercussions on the designation of roles to be performed by children and their relationship with time.

On the other hand, Müller (2014) highlights that children transform the spaces created by adults for them into their own places. She pointed out that: “There is no doubt that children understand their homes based on the combination of physical aspects and experiences with the people with whom they share them” (Müller, 2014, p. 170-171).

In this category, we perceive that the subjects' understanding of the family environment is linked above all to the affections built through interactions and games, which are not free from tensions and conflicts produced in the daily lives experienced by children, such as violence in the community and doing domestic tasks as part of routines. There is an interpretative reproduction (Corsaro, 2011) of the adult world in the daily life experienced by children.

In this category, we examine spoken and drawn narratives that portray everyday school life. We start with the productions of Mc Lan (11 years old) about his daily life in the teaching unit, the locus of our research:

I drew my homework. I was writing a text about peace. That's why there's a dove. My entire daily life isn't like that here, but it's close to this. I do a lot of homework in class, I don't know how to explain it, but I spend almost the entire day doing homework [...]. I fly kites, I play ball only when I can, because all my time is spent just doing homework.

Drawing by Mc Lan (11 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Mc Lan's narratives point to a conception of school as a formal space of requirements that oppose the act of playing. In a similar way, Jack Chan (10 years old) adds a logic of this space-time as being of preparation and a guarantee of success in the future:

Everyday life is the most important thing. Studying, eating, drinking water [...]. For me, studying is the most important thing, because if I don't study when I grow up, I won't be able to get a job and support myself... I would be nothing.

Drawing by Jack Chan (10 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

The narratives of Mc Lan and Jack Chan refer to a set of regulations and obligations that govern their lives inside and outside of school, understood by Sarmento (2013) as a symbolic administration of childhood. This perspective corroborates Buckingham (2002, p. 19) who states that school is “[...] a social institution that builds and defines effectively what it means to be a child [...]”, as well as administering much of childhood time, modulating children's cultures.

This force that schooling takes on in the perception of children as being the space for social transformations and which, to this end, needs to be permeated by the teaching of texts, concepts, formulas, calculations, etc., to the detriment of the playful experience of corporeality, is based on adult-centered logic, which sees children as a beings that will be and not as beings that are (Sarmento, 2013).

Children are taken as future subjects and not as subjects of the present time. Expectations are placed on them of what they could one day be, from a capitalist perspective, disregarding the typical demands of the social category and the generational type to which they belong: childhood (Sarmento, 2013). The student's role and the child's role are intertwined (Sirota, 2001), whereby children study first and foremost – they fulfill their committed institutional task – and play in the time they have left (Quinteiro, 2009).

We perceive that reading is also an action that translates the understanding of everyday school life. Emily (9 years old) highlights this movement in her narratives, as shown below: “I drew my daily life. Me reading on the bench next to the playground. I love to read! Reading is the best part of my daily life [...]. I loved reading with my friend who went to live somewhere else”.

Drawing by Emily (9 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

In my drawing, I did my daily life, which is reading with my friends at school. I love reading and traveling to another place, thinking about different things that take me away from where I am, you know?! [...] I like being with my friends, because being with them makes everything at school less tedious.

Unlike their colleagues mentioned in the previous narratives, Emily and Dulce Maria did not attribute meaning to their daily school life as obligations, but rather saw school as a space of interactions, tensions and transgression of norms (Finco, 2004). As such, we highlight that, even though children are subject to a hegemonic culture, they dialogue with the world in an active way, in which the school, as a place for the transmission of historically produced adult culture, is transformed into a space practiced through a productive consumption of cultural goods to which children have access, producing their daily lives (Certeau, 1994).

In the narratives of Açucena (10 years old) and Sub-zero (10 years old), we can see the valuing of playful bodily practices as a kind of synonym of everyday life:

I put a boy and a girl playing together with a ball in the drawing. I put little hearts, because they are best friends. For me, everyday life is playing at school. I play with my friends, I talk to the teachers. It's really cool... I don't know [...]. Everyday life would be very boring if we couldn't move, hug, talk, play, smile [...]. (Açucena, 10 years old)

[...] I like to fly a kite. It's really great [...]. I stay there in the room looking at the kites up there [...]. The teacher is talking about a lot of things and I'm dying to get to the playground and play with my friends and talk about kites. The classroom window is big and you can see the kite strings being cut [...], sometimes I can even tell when it's a friend of mine from down the street coming up, by the color of the kite. (Sub-Zero, 10 years old)

Turner (2014) emphasizes that sociology that is concerned with the body needs to pay attention to the affects that are components of social action. Based on this, it can be understood that, when playing, children interact using emotions and feelings that permeate the body, providing the basis for everyday experiences.

The power used in social relations produced in the school context and mediated by the body and playfulness – therefore, by the child's role (Sirota, 2001) – are marks that influence the meanings attributed to the school and its social role. If in previous narratives school was everyday life and children showed their concern about being someone, the narratives above do not indicate concerns about the future, but rather about meeting their demands as children. This action finds convergence in the narratives provided by Coringa (11 years old):

[...] I'm there fed up with life at school, with my kite waiting to go up [...]. I like playing with kites, because I feel free. Here we are trapped, not trapped by crime, trapped by not being able to do what we want [...]. The only way is to stay, right? If I don't stay, my teacher will tell on me to my grandmother [...]. School is a very tedious place [...], the only thing that's good is Physical Education when there's a ball [...].

Drawing by Coringa (11 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Regarding the imaginaries that surround kite playing and that are engendered in children's school routine, we identified that meanings are mobilized that move between the tedious routine of school and the freedom to take flight, providing the pleasure of playing. A curious fact is that the bodily appeal of playing with kites reveals traces of the players' personal history, acquaintances, which, in a way, reverberate in how they see everyday life (Pais, 2003).

Furthermore, the relationship established with playing and the fact that everyday school life distances it from his particular demand, as represented in the drawn and spoken narratives, places Physical Education, the curricular component responsible for sharing this intangible cultural capital of humanity, as the only class that's good, provided that there is a ball.

Muralha (10 years old) is also part of this movement when he draws and narrates:

In my drawing, I put the playground, the open yard, the playing field and the people in my class having [Physical Education] lessons with the teacher. The best part of everyday life is when we play, run, play ball [...].

Drawing by Muralha (10 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

The narratives of Açucena, Sub-zero, Coringa and Muralha denote the tension between school rationality and the role of Physical Education in the curriculum. In the writings of Mello et al. (2014, p. 475), we find an interesting reflection on this relationship:

School is the place of words, or other forms of symbolizing the world, text, systematized knowledge, the mode of existence of which is language. However, Physical Education privileges knowledge of mastery, which is embodied through experiences with socio-corporal practices, such as playing and games. Therefore, children also learn when they express themselves bodily, since movement is related to cultural, affective and social issues.

We draw attention to the fact that the understanding these subjects have of playing is associated almost exclusively with joy and pleasure. However, this point needs to be problematized better with regard to Physical Education classes, as processes of exclusion, power, social, ethnic and gender differences do not cease to exist in the act of playing. Sacristán (2005, p. 14) points out that “[...] childhood partly built the student, and the student partly built childhood”. Therefore, when taking on the role of student at school, children bring with them a series of behaviors and underlying functions arising from the society in which they live and which are marked by prejudices that need to be overcome.

Analyzing in general the children's impressions about their daily school lives, we can understand that the behaviors they perform at school are produced, learned and transformed in peer cultures (Corsaro, 2011) and, to some extent, through interventions of the institution. On the other hand, we can perceive that there is also a notion of school daily life as the set of precepts that regulate children's lives, producing the institutionalization of childhood (Sarmento, 2013). This materialization of everyday school life is based on the student's role, through which a series of future social expectations are placed on children, as well as limits and paths for transgression.

Of the productions analyzed, nine presented their understandings about daily life based on intersections between family and school daily life, covering routine activities, often chronologically, such as sleeping, resting, eating, going to school, studying, helping with domestic chores etc.

Some narratives signal the organization of time and daily/weekly routines as synonymous with their daily lives. Lady Pink (10 years old) tells us: “I drew what happens in my daily life, things I like and don't like [...]. I don't like going to school and being there with those irritating people [...]”.

The spoken and drawn production of Beyoncé (10 years old) is in line with this understanding:

I do things that have to be done at home, I go to school [...]. What I do and what I like to do [...]. I don't like everything either and I hate having to study, but I have to take care of my mind like I take care of my skin [...]. When I get home from school, I watch beautiful things on YouTube [...]. I always use skin cream, I'm vain! I love using my cell phone, playing [...]. I do everything: eat, sleep, study, put makeup on.

These narratives have points in common, including the systematized organization of daily tasks and the tense relationship with the school space. On the other hand, we highlight an interesting aspect about the aesthetic procedures and body care emphasized by Beyoncé. This narrative, specifically, brought to light the discussion of the fabrication of the body in childhood, which encompasses aspects ranging from the shape of the body itself to behaviors, gestures and attitudes. We noticed that the fictitious name chosen by this child already constitutes a clue about her relationship with aesthetics and concern with appearance, considering that Beyoncé is the singer, a woman recognized for her beauty and particular way of dressing, which ends up influencing many who admire her artistic work. Culture acts on children's behavior patterns from birth and, through values and customs, introduces a set of meanings into their social environment (Almeida & Suassuna, 2010).

Based on the ideas of Almeida & Suassuna (2010), we highlight that the social environment – in our specific case, the school and family environment – is crossed by influences arising from the second decade of the 21^st century, in which the role of the media gained new contours. This movement is also seen in the narrative provided by Mabel (10 years old):

In my drawing, I made the Youtube symbol, because I love the internet [...]. My daily life is studying at school, playing with my cell phone at home, that's all. For me, everyday life is what we live, our tedious routine [...]. That's why I love using my cell phone, which my mother managed to give me through a lot of effort [...]. I use it in a hidden way in lessons [...].

Mabel highlights the use of cell phones and the internet as part of and as a kind of escape from school and family life, which she considers tedious. In this context, discussions around the media play an exponential role in understanding so-called mediatized childhood. This model of childhood places children as targets of the consumer industry, offering support for the problematization of ways of being a child through the media, such as their perception and use of time (Buckingham, 2002).

Although there are different studies that provoke teachers about the need to take advantage of smartphones to enhance pedagogical processes (Muller & Fantin, 2022) and, conversely, research that highlights concerns about excessive cell phone use (Amra et al., 2017), we perceive that, in this category of analysis, its mobilization by children takes on the intention of promoting the connection between school and family daily lives.

The narratives of other children, such as those of Everton Ribeiro (10 years old), Sofia (10 years old) and Neymar (9 years old), move in the same direction of valuing the use of technological devices (TV, smartphones, tablets etc.) as a representation of their family and school daily lives. However, they made a point of highlighting their preferences for playing in the home environment and having leisure time with their families.

Other understandings about daily life between family and school emerged in the narratives. The girl who called herself Bob Esponja (10 years old) produced and commented on a drawing as follows:

I drew about a lot of things [...]. Everyday life is like fulfilling obligations, a way of obeying my mother, my teacher at school [...]. I do everything I'm told. I mean... almost everything.

Here, I'm waking up in the morning, then I have breakfast, then I study, watch television, clean the house, go to school, do things, go home and go to sleep. I do almost all of this here because I'm told to do it.

Drawing by Bob Esponja (10 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Regarding this unilateral relationship in which the mother and teacher tell the child what to do, James & James (2008) emphasize that it is part of children's socialization experience to respect the hierarchical order between generations. In fact, it is from this adult social structure and its imperatives that spatial and temporal arrangements are shaped, as well as the planning of children's daily lives (Ferreira, 2004). The notion of routine she drew is crossed by the adult-centered conception of fulfilling tasks. Daily life, in turn, is revealed in the gaps between what one wants and what one does, as argued by Finco (2004, p. 89) when she states that when children, “[...] find space for transgression, they go beyond the limits of what is pre-determined” by the adults in their environment.

It is important to highlight that, in some productions, children portrayed different scenes in the same drawing to express specific aspects within their family and school daily lives. This movement is perceived in the subdivision of the sheet of paper used for the drawing into two or more parts, allowing children to present more than one meaning based on the question asked of them in this research.

The narrative given by Johnny Cage (10 years old) divides his understanding of daily life into three parts, naming them as studying, living and going out with my father, as per Figure 13:

I don't know what everyday life is, but I think that's it. I like studying, otherwise I wouldn't have a better future. Without living, I couldn't study, I couldn't have an education. I think that's it, right?

I like go out with my father, because I feel free when I stay at the window [...]. He lets me help him with his work, unload the truck [...]. My father has been taken to court, so that could cause problems, because he doesn't give things for me.

My mother is everything to me. She teaches me almost everything [...]. Without her, I wouldn't even have a daily life, I think.

Drawing by Johnny Cage (10 years old), on the theme “My daily life is like this...”

Johnny Cage's narratives about everyday life suggest a discussion around the identity processes of contemporary childhood, in which the figure of the child is compartmentalized into “[...] being someone who plays, student, child, infant, minor, consumer” (Müller, 2014, p. 167).

We perceived, in the daily life portrayed by Johnny Cage, that the division of ties within his family reverberates in his understanding of time-space, making him observe his life in a segmented way. This disruption in daily life exposes a fracture in the nuclear family model, which is increasingly common these days.

According to Ariès (1986), the formations of cities were responsible for associating the figure of children with family and school, with their education processes assigned to mothers and female teachers. Johnny Cage confirms this by citing his mother as the person from whom he learns almost everything and school as the institution where one acquires education and a future.

Johnny's idea of everyday time is what Pais (2003) called the paradox of the future present, given that the boy lives in the present attached to what may be to come. He mobilizes expressions such as learning and future, placing himself in a position of a being that will be (Sarmento, 2013) and attributing to the scenes portrayed in the drawing unifying points for what he is becoming. Even though at the beginning of the conversation he said he did not understand what everyday life might be, he revealed elements of his life story, permeated with ruptures, moving between living/dying, freedom/prison and the future/present.

In this category, we noted that children correlate home and school routines as inseparable parts of everyday life – including attributing to adults in both contexts a position of affection and authority, simultaneously. This perception of this group of children takes us back to Corsaro (2011) when he points out that the first basis for the formation of children's cultures occurs in the family, through the adults who care for the child, and then extends in different directions, involving school, other children and teachers who promote interactions.

In this article, it was possible to perceive that, although each category presented different frameworks regarding the children's life histories, they have interfaces that are configured as conjunctions of various daily lives that represent, at the same time, routines and their ruptures, forged in/by the child's body.

The children revealed elements regarding events taking place in their homes and in the neighborhoods in which they live. Aspects of family life and the architecture of their homes (as they are or as they would like them to be) were seen. The characteristics of everyday life associated with large urban centers were also narrated, eliciting an understanding guided by imaginaries regarding cities. Playing was indicated as a means of escaping from domestic chores. Furthermore, interactions between peers, conflicting or not, were identified as a common point, as a fundamental part of the construction of the children's point of view regarding what might be, for them, synonymous with everyday life.

We found accounts that associated school as the main time-space of children's routines, situated as a place to fulfill obligations, indispensable for the quest for a future. Furthermore, narratives were identified that conceive school as a practiced space, an outlet for the imagination, as well as games and cultivation of friendships, opportunities that served as a kind of refuge from the reality experienced inside or outside school itself. Furthermore, their productions brought to light representations of children who move between behaviors learned through institutional interventions and other transgressors, revealing the inventive and authorial dimension of children's cultures.

We also noted the interfaces between family and school daily life, in which children portrayed common situations that characterize these two environments as complementary in the notion of everyday life. A peculiarity that appears in the narratives that related family and school contexts was the influence of media products in the configuration of children's routines. We also highlight the adult-centered perspective of managing children's time, which has forged an idea of a compartmentalized childhood, assigning different functions and roles in both contexts.

It was also inferred that the narratives presented by children from Brasilia are close to everyday reality as well as being fictional scripts, inspired by projections of what they would like to experience. In this situation, everyday life does not become less real, but a representation, in which recurring facts and aspects in their lives that are not well accepted by children are called into question. The understanding of everyday life as a result of the confrontation between fantasy and the rigidness of institutional cultures became evident.

Considering the research developed and the discussions reached, it is also possible to suggest that social interactions are incorporated in the development of children's cultures and, consequently, in the understanding of children's bodies. In this way, uninhabitable limits and gaps between subjects are exposed, favoring identification, interpretation and reconstruction of everyday life.

Almeida, A., & Suassuna, D. (2010). Práticas corporais, sentidos e significado: uma análise dos jogos dos povos indígenas. Movimento, 16(4), 53-71. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/1153/115316963004.pdf

Amra, B., Shahsavari, A., Shayan-Moghadam, R., Mirheli, O., Moradi-Khaniabadi, B., Bazukar, M., Yadollahi-Farsani, A., & Kelishadi, R. (2017). The association of sleep and late-night cell phone use among adolescents. Jornal De Pediatria, 93(6), 560-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jped.2016.12.004.

Buckingham, D. (2002). Crecer en la era de los medios electrónicos: tras la muerte de la infancia. Morata; Fundación Paideia.

Ferreira, M. M. (2004). Do “avesso” do brincar ou... as relações entre pares, as rotinas da cultura infantil e a construção da(s) ordem(ens) social(ais) instituintes(s) das crianças no jardim-de-infância. Em M. J. Sarmento, & A. B. Cerisara (Orgs.). Crianças e miúdos: perspectivas sociopedagógicas da infância e educação (pp. 55-104). Edições ASA.

Finco, D. (2004). Faca sem ponta, galinha sem pé, homem com home e mulher com mulher: relações de gênero nas brincadeiras de meninos e meninas na pré-escola. [Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Estadual de Campinas]. Repositório da Universidade Estadual de Campinas. https://repositorio.unicamp.br/acervo/detalhe/315368.

Gobbi, M. A. (2014). Mundos na ponta do lápis: desenhos de crianças pequenas ou de como estranhar o familiar quando o assunto é criação. Linhas Críticas, 20(41), 147-165. https://doi.org/10.26512/lc.v20i41.4265

Mello, A. S., Santos, W., Klippel, M. V., Rosa, A. P., & Votre, S. J. (2014). Educação Física na educação infantil: produção de saberes no cotidiano escolar. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, 36(2), 467-484. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-32892014000200013

Müller, F. (2014). Perspectivas de crianças acolhidas institucionalmente sobre suas famílias de origem. Linhas Críticas, 20(41), 125-145. https://doi.org/10.26512/lc.v20i41.4263

Muller, J. C., & Fantin, M. (2022). Mediações familiares e escolares entre crianças e tecnologias digitais. Pro-posições, 33(1), e20200085. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-6248-2020-0085

Nunes, N. B., Camargo, M. C. S., & Mello, A. S. (2022). Transvendo a rotina: espaço-tempo e cotidiano na Educação Infantil. Revista De Educação, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.24220/2318-0870v27e2022a5436

Quinteiro, J. (2009). Infância e educação no Brasil. Em A. L. G. Faria et al. (Orgs.). Por uma cultura da infância: metodologia de pesquisa com crianças (pp. 19-47). Autores Associados.

Qvortrup, J. (2001). O trabalho escolar infantil tem valor? A colonização das crianças pelo trabalho escolar. Em Castro, L. R. (Org.). Crianças e jovens na construção da cultura (pp. 129-152). Nau/Faperj.

Rosemberg, F. B. M. (1976). Educação para quem? Ciência e Cultura (SBPC), 28(12), 66-71.

Santos, S. E., dos Anjos, C. I., & Goulart de Faria, A. L. (2017). A criança das pesquisas, a criança nas pesquisas. A criança faz pesquisa? Práxis Educacional, 13(25), 158-175. https://doi.org/10.22481/praxis.v13i25.958

Sarmento, M. J. A (2013). sociologia da infância e a sociedade contemporânea: desafios conceituais e praxeológicos. Em R. T. Ens, & M. C. Garanhani (Orgs.). Sociologia da infância e a formação de professores (pp. 13-46). Champagnat.

Turner, B. S. (2014). Corpo e sociedade: estudos em teoria social. Ideias & Letras.

PhD in Physical Education from the University of Brasília (2019). Adjunct Professor at Department of Physical Education at the Federal University of Maranhão, Bacanga Campus. Deputy leader of the Study Group on Body and Education - IMAGEM/UnB and of the Multidisciplinary Research Center in Physical Education NIMEF/UFNT. Email: mayrhon@gmail.com

PhD in Physical Education from the Postgraduate Program in Physical Education at the Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES) (2019). Adjunct professor of Degree in Physical Education and the Postgraduate Program in Education (PPGE) at the Federal University of Tocantins (UFT). Member of the Institute for Research in Education and Physical Education – PROTEORIA/UFES and Coordinator of the Pedagogical Research Group in Physical Education – GIPEF/UFT. Email: marcielbarcelos@gmail.com

PhD in Physical Education from the Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES). Professor at Department of Theory and Planning at the UFRRJ Institute of Education, teaching in the undergraduate course in Physical Education, in the Postgraduate Program in Education (PPGEduc) and in the Postgraduate Program in Physical Education on a National Network (ProEF) . Deputy leader of the Center for Learning from Children and Their Activities (NAIF) and Leader of the Research Group on Teaching in Physical Education (GPDEF). Email: rodrigodrmartins@ufrrj.br

Contribution to the preparation of the text: author 1 - planning the research processes, producing field records, data analysis, writing the article; author 2 - data analysis, articulation with the theoretical framework, writing the article; author 3 - articulation of the theoretical framework, data analysis, final review of the text writing.

A pesquisa compreende os sentidos atribuídos por 34 crianças de uma escola de Brasília aos seus cotidianos familiar e escolar, com aportes teórico-metodológicos da Sociologia do Cotidiano, da Sociologia da Infância e dos Estudos com o Cotidiano. A partir da observação participante, dos desenhos e das falas das crianças, foram produzidas e analisadas as categorias: cotidiano familiar, cotidiano escolar e interseção entre cotidianos familiar e escolar. Os resultados indicam que as interpretações infantis são concebidas dentro e fora da escola e transitam entre o mundo real e o imaginário, revelando afetos, tensões e idiossincrasias sobre as suas rotinas diárias.

La investigación comprende los significados atribuidos por 34 niños de una escuela de Brasília a su rutina familiar y escolar, con aportes teóricos y metodológicos de la Sociología de la Vida Cotidiana, la Sociología de la Infancia y los Estudios con la Vida Cotidiana. A partir de la observación participante, dibujos y discursos de los niños, se produjeron y analizaron las siguientes categorías: cotidiano familiar, cotidiano escolar e intersección entre cotidiano familiar y escolar. Los resultados indican que las interpretaciones de los niños se conciben dentro y fuera de la escuela y transitan entre el mundo real y el imaginario, revelando afectos, tensiones e idiosincrasias sobre sus rutinas.

Linhas Críticas | Journal edited by the Faculty of Education at the University of Brasília, Brazil e-ISSN: 1981-0431 | ISSN: 1516-4896

Full reference (APA): Farias, M. J. A., Barcelos, M., & Martins, R. L. D. R. (2023). Family and school daily life from the perspective of children. Linhas Críticas, 29, e50572. https://doi.org/10.26512/lc29202350572

Full reference (ABNT): FARIAS, M. J. A.; BARCELOS, M.; MARTINS, R. L. D. R. Family and school daily life from the perspective of children. Linhas Críticas, 29, e50572, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26512/lc29202350572

All information and opinions in this manuscript are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the journal Linhas Críticas, its editors, or the University of Brasília.

The authors hold the copyright of this manuscript, with the first publication rights reserved to the journal Linhas Críticas, which distributes it in open access under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0): https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

1For Corsaro (2011), peer culture is the authorial way in which children interact with each other, experiencing the world that surrounds them, appropriating, expanding and sharing their cultural capital of practices.

2Due to the character limits of this journal, we selected the narratives that we consider to be the most representative, avoiding repetitions.

3Approved by a Research Ethics Committee (Certificate of Submission for Ethical Appraisal: 80440317.0.0000.0030). The children's legal guardians signed the consent form at a meeting. Using accessible language, we held a conversation with the children to explain the study and obtain their assent.

4Chilena is a type of kite string that is very sharp and cuts compared to traditional cotton thread. It is banned in several Brazilian cities.