Construcción del proceso de subjetivación en los jóvenes- estudiantes de bachillerato

Understanding how the process of subjectivation is developing in young people, particularly in those who also play the role of students, and knowing how the educational context influences the construction of said subjectivity is the primary objective of this research. To do this, in-depth interviews were conducted with young people-high school students. Regarding the methodology, one of the configurationist type was used. Thus, a methodological guide is established, but also an ontological one to build knowledge. And an attempt is made to explain the significance that students give to their experiences, not only as a youth group, but as individual people surrounded by other subjectivities that influence and shape them. It is concluded that said subjectivation is a complex process that not only consists in acquiring a wealth of learning, own or other people's experiences; it goes beyond being subjects, products of the society that rules and shapes, part of a constant struggle to deconstruct and build from itself and others, there is a construction of its own as well as a collective one.


Introduction
The stages of evolution that a human being goes through are composed of various elements that, ideally, contribute to promoting personal development. When interacting with people it is important to recognize the cognitive, affective, volitional and physical characteristics that distinguish and differentiate them from others. Based on these features, individuals participate in social spaces, paying both for their construction and for their adaptation. It is about social participation: the adaptation of roles (for the purposes of this text, that of a student) and roles or functions to be fulfilled (Lomelí, 2009). should be noted that these social settings are in turn influenced by economic, generational and cultural factors.
We could think, then, that people are social constructions determined by the experiences lived in each of the spaces in which they are inserted and according to the people and realities with which they interact through dialectical relationships of interdependence between institutions and others.
If we start from this thought, it is worth asking: is the subjectivity of the subject constructed as the product of all the subjects and experiences that precede it and give it shape?
This subjectivity is not only reduced to the acquisition of culture, since this is related to the process of social accumulation of meanings. Subjectivity has to do with the production of meanings from different subjective fields. In these fields, the symbolic accumulation of norms, values, social rules, exchanges, ideologies, emotions, feelings and experiences, among others, is carried out, which often give rise to resistance and changes, and thus reconstruct the past and at the same time build a future.
This prompts us to analyze the symbolization, assimilation, adaptation or resistance that young people make of the dominant culture that surrounds them and constrains them, but does not necessarily belong to them, and to which they add their experiences and those of their peers.
To access this knowledge, in the first instance, an analysis is carried out of the influence that school institutions present in the construction of said subjectivation, since this is an important space for sociocultural production and reproduction. In this, subjectivity develops, rebuilds, expresses and lives. Then the way is opened to the analysis of the process of subjectivation, and in a particular way the construction that is made of this from the perspective of the young-students, a perspective that differs from other young people who find themselves in different contexts and realities.

Methodology
To address this research we resorted to a configurationist methodology, since we were building our object of study through the perspectives of young people, their present and expectations for the future. It is about understanding reality in movement and in constant contradiction, of observing young people not from the role they should play, only as actors in representation, but from the one they live, in an active, questioning and constructive way.
Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021 The qualitative data obtained were applied to an intrinsic, descriptive case study. Thus, relational aspects are underlined and points of contact are analytically identified, all thanks to in-depth interviews with high school students.

The influence of school institutions …
School institutions seek to develop habitus in young people around knowledge, science, rationality, technology and culture. Thus, a hierarchical and prestigious system is structured in which knowledge is recognized as a dominant value. In many of these institutions a social and shared character of learning is promoted less and less and, instead, greater relevance is given to competitiveness policies, the devaluation of the human and the uprooting of man. In many of these classroom contexts there is still a power struggle and a dispute to be "the fittest", cataloged as such through various practices (Bethencourt and Villegas, 2011, p. 153).
One of the important challenges that until now has not been fully achieved is to promote a comprehensive education in young people; situation, that of the absence of comprehensive education, which, among other things, leads education to the results that are currently being developed. To change this, a review of the study plans and programs is required (Gómez, 2017), adapting them to the requirements of those who live them, since it seems that an attempt is being made to ignore the main actors of the school grounds in favor of a techno-industrial enslavement .
Calculations and exact data are privileged, knowledge is homogenized and it is about generating standardization, individuality is dismissed and the human essence is ignored. In short, productive people develop and reason is established as the ordering force, but not rationality or the development of critical thinking. Being different is questioned and sometimes even punished (Bethencourt y Villegas, 2011).
These types of practices generate consumption habits and diverse needs that benefit and promote industrial expansion. In this way, the subjects are made invisible and they are perceived only as parts of a structure or a gear with objectives greater and of greater importance than that which the young students can manifest. In the culture of modernity, the disjointed individual is favored. The components of its essence are disaggregated and, by extension, it becomes a subject more prone to alienation and reproduction. Modernity is Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021 indifferent to the subjective and human needs of the diverse and unfinished person that is constantly being formed (Bethencourt and Villegas, 2011, p. 152).
So, how can educational spaces relate to youth-students? In what way can links be developed between school demands and the demands of those who attend these campuses?
As of the educational reform of 2013, the level of upper secondary education was proposed as mandatory in order to deepen the comprehensive training of students regardless of whether they can continue their higher education or join the labor market (National Plan of Development 2013-2018, May 20, 2013. In today's education, it is important to establish a fundamental change; it is necessary to resort to transversality; that is, to develop the integral capacities and abilities of each citizen in the intellectual, emotional, artistic and sports fields. At the same time, highlighting values through which one's own dignity and that of others are recognized, promoting a change in the student's attitude, orienting them towards coexistence, tolerance and the formation of a personal conscience (Gómez, 2017). Bethencourt and Villegas (2011) cite several authors who highlight "coexistence, a substantial element of homo socialis; in this underlies the belief according to which the understanding of the human being will only be possible when it is thought about him from the anthropological relationship individual-species-society "(p. 154). This trinity is decisive for the subjective construction of the realities experienced by the subjects.

Subjectivity
Although subjectivity begins as a theoretical and epistemological debate of philosophy, from the 1960s onwards it became a central theme in social analysis and began to be seen from different perspectives, since through these subjectivities it can be gestated political, economic, social, cultural and educational changes (Aquino, 2013).
Thinkers such as Karl Marx, Max Weber, and Émile Durkheim, who lay the foundations for our understanding of the social order and identify social relations of production, the division of social labor, and political domination as conditions for the possibility of order, realize that these structures They operate on the backs of the subjects and cannot reproduce without their relative consent and involvement.
Under the vision of Marx, the human being reflects his subjectivity in work and in this way is objectified in a material product; both the means of production and the product of labor are subordinated to capitalist production, which leads the human being to an alienation.
Marx does not describe successful subjectivation processes, either in terms of awareness or de-alienation, but he presents subjectivity as a limit to the production of the system and as the basis of its transformation (Angelcos, 2017).
For Weber, rationalization does not only imply a greater autonomy of subjects with respect to tradition, but also the increasing automation of rational action. Thus, people reconstruct the world in the intimacy of their individual experience, which sheds some light on subjectivity.
Durkheim, for his part, considers that the role of the person within the social division is a sufficient motivational condition to maintain social integration, in the sense of reproducing the cultural tradition that has been transmitted by socialization, since when individuals they act reproduce the role they occupy within the social structure. Therefore, educational institutions allow internalizing social norms within the consciousness of individuals and sanctioning deviant behaviors both formally and informally (Angelcos, 2017).
In short, the concepts of alienation in Marx, loss of meaning and freedom in Weber and anomie in Durkheim refer to that dimension of action that would not be adequately integrated into the reproduction of the social order. This distinction laid the foundations for later thinkers who take a greater approach to the term subjectivity.
Along these lines, the sociologist Alain Touraine argues that there is a critical distancing experienced by individuals according to the roles that society imposes on them from a dominant culture, which leads individuals to seek to regulate their desire beyond what is prescribed by the dominant cultural orientations and gives rise to the possibility of the historical-contingent development of society (Aquino, 2013). (2002) conceives the subject as a product of discourse in two different senses: subjects who personify the particular forms of knowledge that discourse produces and as places for the subject (subjective positions). Hence, all individuals, in a given period, become subjects of a particular discourse and, therefore, the subject becomes an effect of power and the result of a set of techniques, sciences and other types of devices that allow the fabrication of the "disciplinary individual" (Foucault, 2002) From this perspective, subjectivity is the result of the normalization mechanisms in the individual, that is, of the way in which disciplinary devices are articulated among themselves and produce a type of mentality that is congruent with existing cultural conditions.

For his part, Michael Foucault
On the other hand, Felix Guattari (1992) points out that subjectivity is manufactured like energy, electricity or aluminum; hence the production of subjectivity is possibly more important than any other type of production. How is subjectivity produced from this perspective? Starting with the mass media, advertising, polls, statistics, polls, which fabricate opinion on a large scale and create stereotypical attitudes and sclerotic desire narratives. They are systems of direct connection between the great productive machines, those of social control and the psychic instances that define the way of perceiving the world.
There is no subject but subjectivity, or, rather, subjectivities. Indeed, Guattari conceives of subjectivity as multiple, disparate, fragmented, heterogeneous, as if there were as many subjectivities as there were situations and moments; However, subjectivity is, at the same time, one: capitalist subjectivity (Aquino, 2013).
Much of the subjectivity of the subject comes from culture, since actions, opinions, attitudes do not belong to the subject itself, they are mediated by internalized structures, a habitus, that is, a system of dispositions that inclines the actors to act , think, feel and give meaning in a way that is coherent with the structure in which they socialize (Bourdieu, 2007).
For Touraine (1997), defining oneself as a subject implies the ability to reflect on oneself, to recognize oneself in the life that each one controls but that at the same time is imposed on us by birth. To be a creator of meaning and change, of social relations and political institutions, to be an actor in his own life and, in this process, to transform society, many times without realizing it.
Likewise, Araujo and Martuccelli (2010) argue that individuals continue to be socialized through cultural factors, but this socialization operates in a context in which culture has an increasingly ambivalent role and each individual becomes the fruit of a series increasingly contingent and diverse of experiences. The need to recognize the singularity of personal trajectories is imposed. What Araujo and Martuccelli (2010) propose is to analyze the production of individuals -individuation -from something they call tests, that is, historical, socially produced, culturally represented, unevenly distributed challenges that individuals are forced to face in the within a structural process of individuation.
Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021 In heterogeneous times and contexts, these authors have approached subjectivity as an element of control, of reproduction or, at the opposite pole, as an element through which emancipatory processes emanate from the dominant cultures. The truth is that all of them give a relevant importance to this to bring about various changes, either from reproduction or as a path to liberation and evolution.

Subjectivation process
The construction of subjectivation occurs in various fields of interaction. Classroom relationships are also a subjectively human construction in which encounters between self and others will always be desirable and nurturing. The construction of people occurs through a continuous process that is not carried out alone, that is, it is formed jointly by various actors, institutions and culture. This recreates itself in each subject and each subject gives an account of it. This is how collective subjectivities propose the axes from which the subject is constructed from the symbolic, along with personal and collective social meanings (Lomelí, 2009).
The process of subjectivation is characterized in these young-students by the distancing of norms and values, the development of specific tastes and interests, the knowledge and development of their own abilities, reflection and decision-making, which many of the occasions will be far from that imposed by the group of adults around them. This is accompanied and influenced in an important way by the accumulation of experiences, the others, the practices of their peers and their experiences. In this way, identities are developed (Weiss, 2012).
Subjectivity is the specific product of multiple modes of subjectivation and dialogic processes, the construction space of each subject, a construction carried out from the collective, but individually. Thus, it originates from the assimilation of the various experiences, people and institutions that give rise to said subject. And through this, the subject, the generality, specificity, singularity, diversity and its history are shown.
Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021 Taguenca (2009) defines young people as people in search of their own identity. And he clarifies that said identity is built from a heterogeneity not lacking in complexity. With differentiated projects, young people are inserted in different educational institutions that are regulated by the dominant society, that of adults. Along these lines, the teacher proposes a theoretical approach to the transmission of content aimed at developing specific knowledge of a scholarly nature, that is, aimed at disciplining.

Young people and their subjectivity
The process of subjectivation is not the same for young people who attend school as it is for those who do not or abandon said journey. Foucault (1988) mentions: "Power classifies individuals, hierarchizes them, designates them and imposes an identity on them (as a' true 'meaning of themselves) in which they must be recognized and recognized. Thus power transforms individuals into subjects "(p. 231). The subjectivation occurs then as a process of tension in which individuals have a subjection; at the same time, through this same process, they achieve a certain freedom. A creation of oneself is achieved, a subject capable of acting, with his own will, developed in society, but individual, is generated, with a certain freedom to make decisions and know that there are consequences: a subject with agency capacity.

Subjectivity is becoming always open to the process of subjectivation.
Consequently, the training is carried out through the process of subjectivation where the subject is transformed by acquiring and / or changing capacities, ways of feeling, acting, imagining, understanding, learning (Ferry, 1990, p. 52, citado en Anzaldúa, 2009, p. 7).
As you go through adolescence, you build a different self from the one you have been up to that time, with demands, confusions and concerns typical of the youthful stage that you live.
A collective life is developed independent of school life, a subjective life that cannot be developed separately from school life, since it will affect it at different times (Weiss, 2012).
As there is no decisive separation between youth areas and school life in young students, it is important to draw analytical and research bridges between the educational field and that of youth, since it is assumed, from the outset, that school is not a social space, there is the idea that the subjects only live it as students, leaving aside that, as well as being students, they are young people in the process of construction. Both conditions construct their ideals, their relationships and, with it, the process of subjectivation in a different way (Weiss, 2012).
Young students are conceived as recipients of norms, principles, culture, information, among others.
In this regard, Dubet and Martuccelli: They focus in parallel the process of socialization and individualization and affirm that the experience develops in three logics of interaction: the internalization of norms or roles (socialization), the development of a personal subjectivity in the form of tastes and interests that leads individuals to establish a distance with their socialization (subjectivation) and instrumental or strategic performance, based on a calculation of the investment profit in school assignments with a view to future projects and considering their resources and previous school journey (strategy) (Weiss, 2012, p. 136).
These processes are carried out as the student passes through the different academic levels in which he is inserted. Thus, in the first instance, she is socialized based on the norms transmitted intergenerationally and based on her internalization; there is a process of insertion in the cognitive and moral schemes of the individual and its consequent modification. In Piaget's words, a "process of assimilation and accommodation." Subsequently, a conflictive process is experienced, since the actions, thoughts and emotions of the subjects work in a flexible way; Its procedure is not limited only to following outlines, procedures and rules; there is reinterpretation and adaptation. Therefore, the student develops his subjectivity to get to take a strategic position that efficiently brings him closer to his own goals and objectives, through a transformation, reformulation and action with decisions based on his own moral criteria, that is, he makes himself responsible.
In today's societies, school education occupies a central space in the process of socialization and training of young people. From a critical perspective, Bordieu and Passeron (1996) emphasized the reproductive function of socialization and the reproduction of class society by the school. Undoubtedly, high school students have successfully socialized the trade of being a student and what it entails. Young people who attend and remain in the educational system obtain the denomination of students and with it a clearly determined social role, and with a certain value and importance both personally and socially, this regardless of the value of the learning that is acquired. Those who cannot adapt to this situation drop out of this level in the first semesters (Camarena, 2000).

Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021
Adolescents and young people have a separate world from adults, despite sharing the classroom space, and it is in this same space where their own values, rules and hierarchies are developed. In most of these, there is a clear interest in "sociability." Simmel (2002) emphasizes that it is the taste of union with others and the playful aspect of being together.
In parallel to the socialization process, the subjectivation process develops.
By dismissing or ignoring the youth experience in academic spaces, it seems that it is omitted that the school is also a space of youth life, and that the school experience has weight in the construction of the various identities of the subjects both inside and outside the space. It is because of this same subjectivity that when inserting into academic spaces there are no linear or homogeneous trajectories, there are no normal routes to follow, except those established by academic institutions. Despite the fact that socio-political systems erect domains that emit and institutionalize discourses of power and prioritize differences, collective subjectivities provide culture to each being that is born and endow them with a unique and incomparable way of reading reality, learning it and transforming it. from their This process of subjectivation develops during the transit of the subjects through their history and also in the construction of social history through their insertion in various institutions, which are contributing to the construction of identity or authorship of the self.
In this context, they assimilate and integrate rules, norms and guidelines imposed by said institutions of which they are a part, many times by decision and other times by different circumstances. For this reason, students sometimes try to isolate themselves in their own subjectivities and attending classes is lived from "duty". "The classes are boring, but if I don't attend they fail me." "The truth is, I prefer to work and I go to classes a few times, but I hand over the activities." A distinctive feature of young students is precisely that an important part of their time is dedicated to maintaining a relationship with the institutional space, perfectly established and regulated. The school becomes a relevant space in their lives, but not only with cuts or overtones from the academic elements, but also as a space for socialization, where both encounters and disagreements are experienced. The young students live in and for the school.
"Every day I get up, get ready and take classes, have breakfast, and then do homework, research and stuff at school. When I'm done, it's almost time to sleep. " In these classroom spaces, young people not only live adventures, they also reflect, learn from their experiences, get to know themselves better and trace paths and projects, they learn to take charge of their life, which often becomes uncertain and without a path. neither labor nor academic outlined, temporary projects are outlined Due to this subjectivity it is necessary to know the world of the youth life of the students, because it is full of personal, family, cultural, union experiences (along with educational ones). This leads young students to experience multiple transition processes, bathed in the euphoria of this period of life. The times established by young people are not the same as those of adults, much less are they tied with those of the institutions and their needs to meet quality standards. "This is the third time I have tried to finish high school, I have had a lot of problems." "My mother and my sister live at home, but my mother lost her job, now we sell desserts and with that we pay the expenses." Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021

Conclusions
In the subjectivation of young students, different themes and spheres of development intersect, a great diversity of experiences goes through the process, since there are different ways of symbolizing the transit through educational precincts, topics such as living high school, achieving an entrance to the university or work field; see school life as a means to overcome conditions of gender inequality, achieve prestige and be socially recognized or to achieve social and economic mobility; acquire self-esteem and social and personal value.
As for the imaginary, it is a constant, indeterminate creation of figures, forms and images, as well as a social, historical and psychic creation. Our subjective construction will include norms, values, language, tools, methods, thoughts of others that will be aimed at building the individual himself and unrepeatable. It is a constant process of tension between social and individual meanings, between what has already been done and what is being built.
And it is precisely because of this construction that it acquires a special importance to look at subjectivity in educational venues, because it is through this that political, economic, social, cultural and educational changes are generated, not only for young people, but for society in general, either from the reproduction of dominant cultures or from the search for emancipation.
The construction of subjectivity develops through various stages. In the first years of schooling, there is a process of socialization and, with it, the assimilation of norms, rules and ways of acting, but as the student becomes more reflective, he begins to recognize his place in society, culture and in life. Life in general, there is a reinterpretation and adaptation of the context, its objectives and where it intends to go. Many of the occasions the decided path is not the one imposed by the adults.
In the discourse of the young people you can see the internalization of norms and ideas and precepts of the culture of the generations that precede them. Both ideas and precepts come into conflict with the new knowledge, experiences and views that they acquire through interaction in the classroom spaces. As the school is a transmitter of the norms of society and a youth culture also lives in it, there is a process of conflict, assimilation and negotiation that will lead the young person to develop and form their subjectivity.

Vol. 10, Núm. 20 Julio -Diciembre 2021
Here is the importance of carrying out solid construction processes, based on group values and with clear objectives and goals, to encourage the development of a subjectivity that guides social transformation, transformation that leads us to be a society for ourselves.
As a final reflection, and as an answer to the initial question, namely, "Is the subjectivity of the subject constructed as the product of all the subjects and experiences that precede it and give it shape?", We could say that the subjectivity of the The subject is constructed collectively, culturally, socially, economically and politically, since the subject crystallizes a climax of those moments and experiences that build it, however, a universal subjectivity does not develop, because this It also interacts with the particularities of the subjects.Thus, despite the fact that there is a generation of young people exposed to a range of similar socio-historical experiences, their behavior can differ significantly.
That is why school spaces become important, as they continue to be the designated path for most young people and this is where they spend most of their time. Thus, it is possible to pay for the process of subjectivation by creating spaces for reflection and action to develop an agency of the self and, through it, carry out activities of their own, aimed at achieving particular objectives that bring the subject closer to achieving of various goals, through the use of symbolic resources of culture to build an identity and the practices that accompany it.
As a follow-up line, we are left with questions about how this construction of subjectivity changes in young students in a distance educational process, which, currently, is lived not by choice, but by necessity due to the pandemic due to the disease due to 2019 coronavirus (covid-19