We think, in short, that the understanding of this trilogy, which is, norms, teaching formation and representations and appropriations of knowing, as indissociveis elements of the constitution of the school, are being transposed for the analyses and quarrels concerning the education of History. In such a way, it interests to study and to criticize the resumes, as well as is essential to suggest> changes; but it matters, equally, not to ignore the particularitities that conform the formation of the professor of History and, over all, to understand the relation of this professor with the content taught from the appropriation and representation slight knowledge. Of this making, more than what to place the education of History and its professor in the witness stand, so that imbalance accusations of, imposture and other sin committed against the academy are defended against, the moment invites for a reflection that has taken in account the notion to know description as to know pertaining to school that if it not only bases on the deriving productions of the academy, but that if it also constitutes from the imbricao between the values that confer sensible to the collective life and if they express in and for the school and knowing that the citizens produce daily. In our consideraes ends inside of this quarrel we locate in them of form favorable to the duty of the school and mainly, of the education of History in giving its contribution for the formation of people who really come if to become historical agents, citizens, throughout history the citizenship concept was extended, starting to englobar a set of social values who determine the set of duties and rights of a citizen, and not only reproductive of an effective reality, but, transforming of this same reality. Teaching History is exclusively to work with the citizenship in different times and space.