PUBLIC HEALTH TEACHING BASED ON LEE SHULMAN'S MODEL OF ACTION AND PEDAGOGICAL REASONING
Teaching; Public Health; Faculty.
Teaching Public Health in higher education constitutes a strategic field for training critical, reflective health professionals capable of responding to the complex demands of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS). However, teaching in this area still faces weaknesses related to pedagogical training, institutional conditions, and curricular integration. In light of this scenario, this research aimed to understand the nature of the faculty working in public health at a public higher education institution in Rio Grande do Norte, as well as to analyze their pedagogical practices, strengths, and challenges, using Lee Shulman's Pedagogical Reasoning and Action Model as a theoretical framework. This is a descriptive qualitative investigation conducted with faculty members affiliated with the Trairi School of Health Sciences (FACISA) through document analysis and semi-structured interviews. The results revealed a predominantly female faculty, with multidisciplinary training and temporary positions, revealing a heterogeneous profile that brings together different perspectives on public health, but also expresses instability and precarious work. Content selection and organization were described as guided by the curriculum's structuring elements and core competencies, but also influenced by the student profile and the professor's domain knowledge. A growing appreciation for active methodologies was noted, associated with student leadership, practical involvement in practical scenarios, and the use of digital technologies. However, traditional practices still persist in certain contexts, denoting connections between innovation and the reproduction of pedagogical models. Among the strengths, collective planning, interdisciplinarity, and the use of diverse resources in the knowledge representation stage stood out, which fosters meaningful learning. Challenges, however, were related to structural and territorial limitations, insufficient workload, low student participation, and the lack of institutional pedagogical support. Faculty reported difficulties in sharing teaching control, work overload, and training gaps in didactics and pedagogy, factors that weaken the consolidation of more critical and reflective practices. The conclusion is that Public Health teaching at the institution under study is intentionally organized and aligns with Shulman's premises, but faces structural, pedagogical, and institutional barriers that compromise its effectiveness. This reinforces the urgent need for investment in teacher training, strengthening working conditions, and encouraging scientific debates to improve teaching skills and enhance the development of professionals capable of transformative work in the field of public health.