The National Policy of Special Education in The Perspective of Inclusive Education in Jundiaí: An Analysis of The Implementation Process

ABSTRACT:

This paper aims to analyze the implementation process of the National Policy of Special Education in the Perspective of Inclusive Education (known as PNEE-PEI) between 2008 and 2013 in the Teaching Municipal Network of the city of Jundiaí, state of São Paulo, Brazil. Two issues guided the development of this research: how the PNEE-PEI implementation process is articulated in the Municipal Network of Jundiaí and what the consequences of implementing this policy for Special Education in the municipality are. In order to achieve this proposal, this study used the quantitative and qualitative methods of research in an integrated way. The collected data were organized and submitted for analysis and interpretation through the technique of content analysis. The research reveals a representative participation of the third sector in the provision of Special Education in Jundiaí in the years prior to the publication of PNEE-PEI, showing a transfer of state responsibility in the provision and maintenance of this modality. This scenario of domination of the third sector began to change with the implementation of the PNEE-PEI which promoted the construction of a municipal policy of inclusive education, reflected in the expansion of the number of enrollments in the regular network of education.

KEYWORDS:
Public School; Special Education; National Policy of Special Education; Implementation; Jundiaí

RESUMO:

Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar o processo de implementação da Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva (PNEE-PEI) entre os anos de 2008 e 2013 na Rede Municipal de Ensino de Jundiaí, interior de São Paulo. Duas questões direcionaram o desenvolvimento desta pesquisa: como se articula o processo de implementação da PNEE-PEI na Rede Municipal de Jundiaí e quais as consequências da implementação desta política para a Educação Especial no município. Com o intuito de alcançar o que propõe, este estudo empregou de forma integrada os métodos quantitativo e qualitativo de pesquisa. Os dados coletados foram organizados e submetidos à análise e interpretação por meio da técnica de análise de conteúdo. A pesquisa revela uma participação representativa do terceiro setor no atendimento da Educação Especial em Jundiaí nos anos que antecedem a publicação da PNEE-PEI, evidenciando uma transferência da responsabilidade estatal na oferta e na manutenção desta modalidade. Esse cenário de dominação do terceiro setor passa a modificar-se a partir da implementação da PNEE-PEI que impulsionou a construção de uma política municipal de educação inclusiva, refletindo na expansão do número de matrículas na rede regular de ensino.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Escola Pública; Educação Especial; Política Nacional de Educação Especial; Implementação; Jundiaí

1 INTRODUCTION

A wide range of international and national documents and the full extent of the Brazilian political-legal framework, added to the expressiveness of social movements, have guided and supported Special Education policies in the country, based on the perspective of Inclusive Education (Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva, 2008). These legal records are important to ensure possibilities for social changes and social transformations. However, it would be naive to think that a legal document by itself would have the capacity to cause significant changes in the educational scenario without the inclusive principles outlined by this document being applied, in the first place, in schools and teaching systems to promote new reflections so that the announced changes are, in fact, carried out. Equally naive would be to believe that once a policy is published it will materialize as intended, disregarding, however, the existence of political, economic, and social factors that may generate interference in its implementation process.

This perspective that transformations in education are given once they have been instituted in the form of law is a historical feature of Brazilian education. The rationale is that a new education would be enough by creating a condition of legal imposition on educational systems (Ferreira & Ferreira, 2013, p. 34).

Based on this understanding, this study - which is part of a Master’s thesis entitled Uma análise da implementação da Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva no Município de Jundiaí, SP (An analysis of the implementation of the National Policy of Special Education in the Perspective of Inclusive Education in the Municipality of Jundiaí, São Paulo) - intends to present and analyze the PNEE-PEI implementation process in the municipality of Jundiaí, São Paulo, Brazil. The methodological perspective adopted for this analysis consisted of the joint use of quantitative and qualitative research, constituting instruments of documentary analysis in the form of semi-structured interviews with the main policy implementers in Jundiaí, and subjecting the data collected to the technique of content analysis.

2 METHODOLOGICAL PROPOSAL

The research was conducted in two phases. The first one consisted of a bibliographical and documentary survey. This study counts on the theoretical contributions of authors dealing with Special Education and the regulations of the federal sphere that determine and characterize the policy of school inclusion in Brazil. And the second was comprised of field research, data collection and analysis, semi-structured interviews with municipal policy implementers⁴ and the study of official municipality documents. The plan was to establish relationships between the literature review and the interpretation of data observed in the field. Martins (2000, p. 28) states that ‘[...] correlational analysis seeks to identify factors in relation to each other, based on comparisons between the various studies in order to establish analysis parameters’.

The data collected in the documentary research and in the interviews were organized and submitted for analysis and interpretation through the technique of Content Analysis, of which Laurence Bardin (1977) is the main representative and is configured as an interpretative practice attached to systematization and methodological diligence, in order to guarantee greater objectivity for the technique of reading texts.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

For the analysis of the object of study, three categories were considered: 1) the organization of the Special Education modality by the Municipal Department of Education and Sports (called SMEE); 2) the positive consequences of the PNEE-PEI implementation process; and 3) obstacles encountered in the PNEE-PEI implementation process. The results of the analysis are presented and discussed below.

3.1 THE ORGANIZATION OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION MODALITY BY SMEE

In order to understand how this modality was organized in the period between 2008 and 2013, three phases in the development of this organization were considered: diagnosis and decision making (2008-2011), structuring (2011-2012) and adequacy (2013). These phases were identified after analysis of the interviews with the research subjects. In these five years, three management teams were in charge of the Public Policy for Inclusion (called NPPI), therefore, to understand the temporal organization of this sector, the research subjects were identified as follows: Manager 1 (2008-2011), Manager 2a (2011-2012), Manager 2b (2011-2012), Manager 3a (2013) and Manager 3b (2013).

3.1.1 DIAGNOSIS AND DECISION MAKING (2008-2011)

Little can be said about Special Education in Jundiaí in the period before 2008. Manager 1, responsible for the modality in the analyzed period, reports the difficulty she encountered in assuming the responsibility assigned to her due to the absence of documents and records that would guide her future actions. The lack of a document for analysis, a historical guidance, led Manager 1 to declare that ‘[...] it was like [...] it really started from scratch’ (Manager 1, 2013).

[...] I had no documentation, so it was very difficult for me to, to draw up a plan of government as they asked me, without any history, the only history I had was in the folders of the agreements, the agreement is a legal contract, so it says little of what is pedagogical, what is educational [...]. (Manager 1, 2013).

When asked about the period prior to its management, Manager 1 pointed out that, before 2008, issues involving Special Education were dealt with by the Diretoria Técnico Financeira - Financial Technical Board - of the SMEE, which issued payment to specialized institutions. Any work with Special Education, at the time, was limited to internal coordination which was bureaucratic as well as being mainly focused on the insurance establishment, monitoring and payments⁵, there was also no direct contact with municipal schools.

The application of public money and the financial support offered to the private sector not only represent a protection of the State for this segment, but also creates a harmful bond, since the financial subsidy granted to the institutions for the maintenance of its services, deprives the public power the provision of Special Education in the regular network and maintains the provision of this type of education predominantly in specialized schools. To Romero (2006, p. 180):

Not only is the historical duality of the character of special education reinforced with that, but also the parallelism in its forms of supply, as well as the fact that the public power, when recognizing the role of these institutions, attributing to them a public profile, incorporating in public policies for education and, as highlighted, granting financial support and subsidies for the performance of their actions.

Not unlike what had been presented by Romero (2006), in Jundiaí, the maintenance of private spaces by the public power was a way for SMEE to use private initiatives to carry out their responsibilities. Thus, while the institutions were in charge of pedagogical assistance, the Municipality of Jundiaí undertook its efforts to provide the support of these institutions.

It should be noted, however, that this is not an exclusive posture of the municipality of Jundiaí. A study conducted by Botura and Manzoli (2006), when they researched about the history of Special Education in the city of Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo state, Brazil, pointed out that the absence of public policies that guaranteed school attendance to children with disabilities encouraged families to seek other means of access for their children’s education. Institutions, therefore, historically presented themselves as the only specialized care alternative for students not eligible for public education.

Ferreira and Ferreira (2013), after analyzing a study by the Ministry of Education on the situation of Basic Education in Brazil, presented an interesting history regarding the little expressive participation of Special Education enrollments in regular education. The study showed that financially supporting philanthropic institutions, rather than incorporating students considered special in their own networks, could become cheaper for public education. ‘[...] the transfer of staff and funds from the public power to the institutions produced a cost/student lower than that of the student enrolled in regular education, and what the study called "advantageous outsourcing"’⁶ (Ferreira & Ferreira, 2013, p. 28).

This unfavorable configuration, of investment in financial subsidiarity⁷ and transfer of responsibilities to the private sector, began to take another direction when, in 2007, the mayor of Jundiaí made the adhesion of the municipality to the Strategic Planning of the All for Education Movement. From the convergence to this plan, the municipality had to prepare its Articulated Action Plan (called PAR), which, among other goals, listed the introduction of public policies in the area of Special Education as one of its objectives. The need to introduce public policies in this area was also imposed by the publication of PNEE-PEI in 2008, which set goals for the educational systems in order to promote responses to the special educational needs of students.

Thus, 2008, by assuming this commitment to the adoption of public policies for Special Education and also by the publication of PNEE-PEI, the SMEE effectively created a new sector called ‘Inclusive Education’⁸, which had two directions: one focused on learning difficulties, where assistance was already taking place in the municipality’s Learning Support Center (called NAA) - a program designed to serve students with learning difficulties, not associated with any kind of disability - and another completely focused on Special Education, directing the focus of all work to the target public of PNEE-PEI.

At the end of this first phase, the opening of the first Multifunctional Resource Rooms (MRR) were registered, 4 in total and the selection of 7 professionals to work in the sector under the coordination of a manager. The report of students with information on special educational needs that corresponded to the map of the system in the beginning of 2011 pointed out a total of 489 students considered PNEE-PEI target public in the Jundiaí municipal education network. The same report also indicated that of the 489 students, 65 were enrolled in the Specialized Educational Services (SES) (Relatório de alunos com informação de necessidade educacional especial, 2011).

3.1.2 STRUCTURING (2011-2012)

The first action identified in the structuring phase was the establishment of the NPPI in February 2011 by the Board of Basic Education, which reformulated the sector ‘Inclusive Education’. The denomination ‘Nucleus of Public Policies for Inclusion’ is the result of an informal conversation between the Director of Basic Education at the time and Manager 2a, who explained the appearance of the designation:

I wanted the nucleus very much, because I think everything there was nucleus, because the nucleus is the center of the cell, that’s where it all starts, it’s nucleus! So I wanted nucleus, but I did not know what, if it was of stimulation, what would it be? If it was of support, of study ... Then one moment it was said that she [the director of Basic Education] wanted it to be a public policy, that did not break with the political rupture, then the Nucleus of Public Policies to Inclusion or for Inclusion appeared. (Manager 2a, 2013).

The reformulation of the sector, now conceived as a center for producing public policies for structuring the inclusion process of the municipality of Jundiaí, evidenced the need for realignment and expansion of the Inclusive Education policy by the SMEE. This sector became a space for the elaboration of guidelines, orientations and procedures, a center in which strategies would be considered and actions deliberated for all the teaching units of the municipality.

From February to June 2011, the NPPI worked with 8 professionals: 7 teachers under the coordination of the School Manager 2a. During these four months, the NPPI’s concern was to provide a minimal framework for the work that was beginning. Manager 2a emphasized that, although during this period the MRR services were already happening, this was another period of study, research and work organization. It was this study that, based on the analysis of the mapping performed in the previous management, verified the need for expansion of the service, the opening of new MRR and, consequently, hiring more staff.

This phase had the opening of two selective processes (one held in July 2011 and another in November of the same year), which enabled 30 teachers to join, and the NPPI management team was composed of two professionals. With the increase in the number of teachers, 18 new MRR were opened, totaling 22 classrooms, which consequently reflected the number of enrollments - from 65 enrollments in 2011 to 235 in 2012, and who were among 509 students that the network had that year (Núcleo de Políticas Públicas para Inclusão, 2012).

The ‘Inclusive Education’ sector, that was later renamed NPPI, which as we already know was created for the implementation of the PNEE-PEI policy. However, the fact that this nucleus emerged from a service focused on learning difficulties and, above all, from the nomenclature that this sector carried, had a close relationship with the teaching-learning issues and cast a conceptual doubt on what its real focus would be.

According to Manager 2b (2013), the NPPI connection with issues related to learning difficulty was one of the reasons why there were conflicts in the group that constituted the sector, because, for some members, the sector would only be responsible for the treatment of issues related to Special Education, disabilities, global developmental disorders and high skills/ giftedness, ie the target public selected by PNEE-PEI. Among the actors that constituted the NPPI, there was no consensus in relation to its performance.

I think the Nucleus, the initial idea was to implement this law, but I think that, when that name was given, [...] things started to grow a lot, because there was not a Nucleus of Public Policies for children with disabilities, it is for Inclusion! And then you realize that a term has a meaning, it is loaded with meaning. (Manager 2b, 2013).

More commonly associated with the educational inclusion of people with disabilities, the term ‘School Inclusion’, in a broader conception, also encompasses the understanding of the reception of all individuals, without exception, in the regular education system, regardless of their physical, psychological and social conditions. Inclusion, according to Mantoan (1997), is a concept that applies to all who are permanently or temporarily incapacitated for the most diverse reasons, to act and to interact with autonomy and dignity in the environment in which they live. It is a concept that aims to remove the barriers that sustain exclusion in its broadest and most complete sense.

To Ferreira (2005), Inclusive Education does not only concern students with disabilities, but also all children who face barriers, whether they are of access to curriculum or schooling, barriers that lead to school failure and social exclusion. Thus, when establishing a Nucleus for Public Policies for Inclusion, the SMEE assumes a commitment to these minorities, since Inclusive Education is concerned with diversity, the defense of a quality school for all, whether the students have disabilities or not.

It is important to note that, beyond this conceptual issue, there is also a worrying question as to the origin of the funds that would finance this other part supported by the NPPI. As soon as learning difficulty is not included in the target public of PNEE-PEI, whose subsidy is supported by Decree No. 7.611/11 (Decreto nº 7.611, 2011), where would the funds that would keep the costs generated by the NAA (Learning Support Center) come from? This was a question that the managers who were interviewed during the period under analysis could not answer and the extracts of agreements signed between the City Hall of Jundiaí and the Association of Parents and Friends of the Exceptional (called APAE), responsible for NAA attendance at the time, did not bring any specification.

At the end of this management, the document ‘Inclusive Education in the municipality of Jundiaí: 2009 to 2012’ was produced and finalized. When considering these four years of implementation of an inclusive municipal system, the document points out that progress has been made in this complex process, but there are challenges for the new policies, paths and promising actions to be achieved. Without elaborating how these challenges could be overcome, the paper concludes by pointing to them as paths that could be traced in the future to the ‘[...] guarantee of an educational policy without stigmas, discrimination and segregation’ (A educação inclusiva no município de Jundiaí, 2012, p. 40).

3.1.3 ADEQUACY (2013-2013)

To understand this last phase, it is important to consider that the analysis of this period only takes into account the months of January to June of 2013. However, before analyzing this period, it is also important to consider that, in 2013, Jundiaí underwent a change in the administration of the municipality. Governed by the same group of politicians for more than 20 years, in 2013, Jundiaí started being administered by a coalition of the main opposition parties. This change in the municipal administration implied changes in the conduction of the NPPI and in the directions of the policy under analysis. These changes will constitute the object of analysis of this phase, which, precisely for this reason, was called the ‘adequacy’ phase.

Adequacy therefore, concerns the adjustment of PNEE-PEI and NPPI to the ideals and conceptions of Special and Inclusive Education adopted by the new administration. An example of this is the document ‘Inclusive Education in the municipality of Jundiaí: 2009 to 2012’, which was produced in the previous administration, but was not delivered to municipal schools.⁹

I know that a booklet was completed [...] and at the beginning of the year they were going to deliver these booklets to schools, but the secretary asked not to deliver them because it had actions like: implantation of a bilingual school, so...We are not even able to make the school transport for the children to work, bilingual school implementation has to have a law decree, and I have to create the job positions, and deal with the statute, I have to see a specific interpreter for literacy, specific interpreter for youth and adult education, interpreter, right? It is something beyond, it was something like that. There was a SES room, centers only for the deaf, some things that do not agree with the national policy and also do not agree with the guidelines of what the SES is. So we do not follow it. (Manager 3a, 2013).

It was under this justification that the document which dealt with the management of the inclusive educational system in Jundiaí - bringing a scenario of what was done in practice, the realignment and expansion of actions, guidelines, processes and work strategies between the years of 2009 to 2012 - did not find space in this administration. It is worth mentioning that the document not only addresses the goals projected for Inclusive Education in the years to come, but it presents a relevant historical and statistical content for the education of Jundiaí. It should also be pointed out that the goals in which there is disagreement between the past and current administration are all listed in the last page of the document, and they can easily be highlighted, if desired, preserving all previous historical information that describes the institution and the development of the NPPI, the sector that became responsible for a modality of education that had only recently become the focus of SMEE.

All institutional activity requires the production of documents and records to constitute a historical report. This is a factor of great importance because it offers conditions for understanding the social, political and ideological structures of an organization. They are not only fundamental in an academic research, but above all, as in this case, they are also records for understanding an institutional structure.

It is considered that what had already been constructed by another administration could have been reinterpreted, re-elaborated and resignified; it could have received another direction, without necessarily discarding any historical content that brought important elements for understanding the development of Inclusive Education in Jundiaí. And, not only because of a political issue of commitment to the history of the education of the municipality and the disclosure of a work that had been developed over four years, but there is also the damage caused by the destruction of this document, which suggests a waste of public money invested both in its theoretical construction - whose consulting and project management was accompanied by the Carlos Alberto Vanzolini Foundation and assisted by Paradigma Institute¹⁰ -as well as in its graphic design and printing.

As for the expansion of the sector in this phase, the opening of a new selection process was registered. From the publication of the guidelines and until the middle of July 2013, 15 professionals filled job positions. In that period, the network continued to count on the 22 MRR opened in the previous phase; however, the NPPI also incorporated class at home and a hospital at the University Hospital of Jundiaí. Of the 489 target public students of Special Education in ordinary classes, 87% received SES in MRR (Manager 3b, 2013).

Having structured the process of PNEE-PEI implementation in Jundiaí, expanding the team’s formation and organizing the implementation of the MRR, it was the NPPI’s priority during this period to guarantee student learning. According to Manager 3b, the actions of the NPPI during this period were undertaken in this sense, to direct all the work in order to offer the students complete conditions of learning.

The priority is the learning of children with disabilities within the school unit. [...]. I always say that all the work of the NPPI, from the resource rooms is that the child has full conditions of development and everything, of learning and have the opportunity of learning within the regular teaching network. (Manager 3b, 2013).

Ferreira and Ferreira (2013) explain that generating a school development plan that seeks the maximum progress of each student is fundamental to not reduce the school to the function of only ‘socializing’ the student with a disability. The NPPI is considered to have taken an important step by investing its efforts in the schooling of students with disabilities by listing learning as its priority.

3.2 POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES ARISING FROM THE PNEE-PEI IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS¹¹

As we have seen, it was effectively after the adhesion to the PAR and the publication of the PNEE-PEI that the SMEE of Jundiaí was mobilized for the development of a work essentially focused on Inclusive Education. As Manager 1 (2013) reported, because it came ‘with the force of law’, the municipality faced this process with a ‘we have to implement it’ attitude; however, ‘no one knew how, when or why’, as the treatment of these issues had always been delegated to philanthropic institutions.

When inquired about what the introduction of PNEE-PEI in Jundiaí meant, Manager 1 pointed out:

I consider it a breakthrough. I think it was a starting point to get out of the comfort zone and effectively look through the eyes of the school inclusion process. That’s why I say, something that was already guaranteed constitutionally, that could be applied, was not, until another law came along and showed us the way. So it was important to change course and to change that vision. (Manager 1, 2013).

For Manager 1, PNEE-PEI represented a larger law that had even more impact than the Constitution itself, in the sense of generating changes in the structure of Inclusive Education in the municipality of Jundiaí. In the face of this report, one can then question: if the guarantee of access of the student with disability to the regular class is a principle that, as we know, is expressed by numerous laws, decrees, directives and resolutions since the 1990s, why only after PNEE-PEI did this principle become known in Jundiaí? The answer to this question may lie in the fact that these documents, despite proposing the offer of Special Education in the ordinary classes of regular education, was not an obligatory offer.

Ferreira and Glat (2003), in the final report of the study carried out for the World Bank when they outlined the National Panorama of Inclusive Education in Brazil, characterized indicators and raised discussions pointing to the trends of Inclusive School Education experiences in Brazil. The study confronted data relevant to public education, one of which was the challenge of overcoming the act of delegating to the philanthropic institutions attributions that belonged to the public power. This challenge, as already seen, only began to be overcome in Jundiaí in 2010, despite the guiding documents and legal texts that, since the 1990s, had already signaled and brought the principle of guaranteeing access to common classes of regular schools.

Thus, although there was assurance that these students would have access to the regular network, it was not a duty of the public power to include such students in the common classes of regular schools. This commitment of the public power came with the publication of Decree No. 6,094/2007, which provides for the implementation of the Strategic Planning of the All for Education Movement (Decreto nº 6.094, 2007). Therefore, when adhering to the proposal of the Strategic Planning, translated into the commitment that implied assuming the guidelines established in the aforementioned decree, the SMEE was impelled to change the configuration of the Inclusive Education of the municipality. The PNEE-PEI arrived at an opportune moment for this Secretariat that found itself in the mission to structure this modality of education that until then was delegated to the entities and the philanthropic institutions.

3.3 THE OBSTACLES FOUND IN THE PNEE-PEI IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

When considering all that was pointed out by the managers interviewed in the research, the direct participants in the implementation process of the PNEE-PEI, it is observed that the expansion of access was not accompanied by an optimization of budgetary, physical and human resources. In order to meet this new demand, a school restructuring plan was not drawn up, no mobilization activities nor collective actions were observed so that more substantive changes could take place. The introduction of a law by itself is not capable of producing changes in the practice of individuals. Personal concepts are not changed, for example, simply because the government made enrollment of students with disabilities compulsory in regular school.

At least three main negative implications can be observed in the PNEE-PEI implementation process in Jundiaí. According to what was raised with the management teams that were in charge of the NPPI and based on the analysis carried out, it is considered that it was especially the personal, economic and physical factors that directly interfered in the implementation of the municipality’s Inclusive Education policy.

In the personal sphere, in Jundiaí, the resistance to the policy occurred on the part of the principals of some schools when being notified about the implantation of the MRR, and this can be evidenced throughout the analyzed period:

There was a lot of resistance, no one wanted to make room available ... and it was like this: ah, it’s another job, I cannot take it, I have no preparation ... Always those excuses [...]. There were principals who talked about the possibility of not receiving [the resource room], but then I said that I did not have that possibility of not receiving it. (Manager 1, 2013).

I think some principals have always been very resilient [...]. I think we have a lot of actors in the city who are resistant to this policy. Many of them. [...] for example, last year we could open four new rooms and a principal did not want to. Not here, I do not want to, not in my school! (Manager 2b, 2013).

Each day is a box of surprises here [...]. The school has three floors and the principal said there is no physical space. There is room to store sports materials that she cannot remove ... because the school is hers ... But then I wonder, is it worthy to challenge her, put a room there and the child suffers? (Manager 3a, 2013).

The resistance to change of some individuals may jeopardize the process of implementing a policy or program. When individuals adopt the posture of flexibility in the face of the proposed change, the implementation occurs in a conscious and rational way. However, if the members of the organization are held in a rigid posture regarding this change, implementation will be a difficult exercise. According to Ferreira and Ferreira (2013, p. 34), ‘[...] it is most likely that this imposition generates resistance, allowing the creation of a culture of tolerance of the person with disability inside the school without, however, assuming the responsibility for the school development of these students’.

Regarding the economic factors, no documents or reports were found in the NPPI that presented a statement of income and expenses for maintenance and development of Special Education in Jundiaí. However, it is worth considering that the issue of budget, since the nucleus was formally established, has always been very unrelated to the NPPI’s management. Besides the administration of the funds earmarked for Special Education in Jundiaí not being under the management of the NPPI, this nucleus was not consulted on the priorities of the sector for future investments.

Regarding the distribution of resources of the double FUNDEB¹², as provided in article 14 of Decree No. 6.253 (Decreto nº 6.253, 2007b), the lack of information regarding how the distribution of this resource for Inclusive Education worked was highlighted by two managers:

[...] because the right thing is this, since it gets double benefit let’s think this way, it’s for investment in the area itself, but I did not work with this financial resource management, so I cannot indicate how the application of this is done. What we feel is what gets to the school. (Manager 1, 2013).

We have never learned about how much of the FUNDEB we had, we knew it existed, we knew it happened, but we did not know where it was going. No one ever opened up about it with us (Manager 2a, 2013).

The lack of information and, mainly, the infeasibility of financial resources directly to the NPPI to solve immediate demands of the sector brought obstacles to work, making its effective realization difficult. Due to the difficulties of this sector, the solutions found were often limited to isolated initiatives.

I remember teachers posting on Facebook to see where they could buy, see if people helped, so it was the teachers’ initiatives. Some schools bought with the money of the Association of Parents and Teachers, with school money, but FUNDEB was a word that did not reach our ears. (Manager 2a, 2013).

There is an incoherence here: high investment of the Education Department in advisory and agreements with specialized institutions (highlighted at the beginning of this paper) in contrast to the infeasibility of resources to the main sector that managed municipal inclusive education, the NPPI. How can the release of funds for application in external consultancies of such high figures and the lack of resources for emergency situations be explained?

Isolated initiatives were also observed in the composition of MRR. As commonly known, the Secretariat for Continuing Education, Literacy, Diversity and Inclusion (called SECADI) is responsible for providing equipment, furniture and didactic-pedagogical materials and accessibility for the organization of the MRR. With this in mind, it should be emphasized that not all materials, equipment, furniture and resources that make up the MRR were received by the schools that adhered to its implementation program:

Things were coming, but materials from the Federal Government, from the Ministry of Education were always missing. It was missing, it did not come, it had no furniture, it had nothing. The teachers bought a lot with the money from their own pocket, the schools that were more receptive donated a lot, gave material from the Association of Parents and Teachers. (Manager 2a, 2013).

The information raised by Manager 2a can be verified by viewing a list with the items that were not delivered to the schools by the Ministry of Education for the composition of the MRR. This list was sent by the General Coordination of the Accessibility Policy at School (called CGPAE) of the Ministry of Education in September 2011 to the NPPI. The list shows, as already pointed out by Manager 2a, that the MRR of Jundiaí did not receive the items in their entirety. Furniture, for example, was a missing item in 18 of the 19 listed schools, and the pedagogical didactic material, for the most part, is still in the bidding process.

Finally, with respect to physical aspects, it is known that guaranteeing universal access to public spaces is an indispensable condition for the implementation of an inclusive policy. This is even one of the goals set by PNEE-PEI. Hence, a lack of access can disable, exclude or make people with disabilities dependent on others, impeding their full participation and inclusion in political, social, economic and cultural life. For Manzini and Corrêa (2008), since the environment can cause or aggravate the disadvantaged conditions experienced by people with disabilities, accessibility becomes a facilitator in the process of social inclusion.

In Jundiaí, it is unanimous by the managers interviewed that the identification of the physical structure of the schools in Jundiaí is an obstacle to the implementation of the PNEE-PEI, as evidenced by the following excerpts:

You see, many schools, for example, had no access ramps, the oldest buildings that belonged to the State and were ceded to the City Hall, were all staircase buildings, so if I get a student in a wheelchair, how do I manage his/her locomotion? (Manager 1, 2013).

There was a school that had a group of parents who went there to make a ramp, to put a handrail, to adapt it little to be able to receive the child better. We did not have the budget from the Secretariat to be able to make this accessibility, and the secretary at the time always made it very clear that he was not going to adapt the school to receive a child. It was the secretary’s vision, so we had no money, there was no interest in the works, no engineers or any of that. (Manager 2a, 2013).

We ordered a ramp for a school and it was not built. A ramp that the school, with money from the Association of Parents and Teachers, made with $ 400,00. (Manager 2b, 2013).

The school has just been built, the company went on to bankruptcy, there is no way to make the elevator work, because there are missing pieces. Another bidding will have to take place, the school’s theater room was on the second floor. To enter each room, two fingers high of steps, the bathroom door, wooden and I could not open, a door that you have to pull, but the wood is that thick. Then the child has autonomy to go to the bathroom, but he/she cannot enter the bathroom. (Manager 3a, 2013).

To Mazzarino, Falkenbach and Rissi (2011), accessibility for students with disabilities in schools is always a fragile point. According to the authors, schools only begin to worry about inclusion and accessibility when students with disabilities begin to enter the school environment, denouncing a posture of unpreparedness and lack of previous organization, both pedagogically and structurally, an observed fact in the municipal network of Jundiaí and revealed in the speech of Manager 2b when explaining the accessibility policy adopted by the Department of Education: ‘[...] the policy was: we are going to take action whenever there is a child with a disability. So I’m going to make a ramp if you have a child with disability, if there is not I will not do it’ (Manager 2b, 2013).

The voluntary effort of a few school units, observed by some managers, was not enough to eliminate potential barriers. Manager 2a explains that ‘there were no public policies for this to happen’. The absence of public policies or programs of building, rebuilding and adaptation of municipal schools has become an obstacle to the implementation of PNEE-PEI, since accessibility is one of the requirements to be met, in order to ensure that all, without exception, can enjoy their rights with equal opportunities.

5 FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

In the five years of implementation, the paths taken by the PNEE-PEI in Jundiaí revealed that the municipality was still adjusting to the new configurations required by the introduction of this policy. This research identified the need for articulation between the different sectors of the SMEE and NPPI in order to subsidize actions that meet the new demands that arise concurrently with the expansion of the policy. However, despite the challenges, this research has shown that the prospects are favorable. The implementation of PNEE-PEI was one of the fundamental pieces for the organization of Special and Inclusive Education in Jundiaí since the proposal for this type of education in the city under study was visibly altered with the introduction of this policy.

The analysis pointed out that it was the change in NPPI management rather than the change in the managerial framework of the municipality that dictated the pattern in the policy implemented. Each group that was at the forefront of the sector responsible for Inclusive Education in Jundiaí brought its focus of action and left its mark on the path of implementation of inclusive education in the city, presented the designs of the processes and the criteria that guided their actions.

The analysis also identified that the PNEE-PEI modified the proposed structure for the Special Education of the municipality, defined the roles that would be occupied by the SMEE and the specialized institutions and definitively appropriated responsibility in the offer and coordination of the Municipal Special Education. The analysis also reveals that this policy not only represented the apparatus for constructing a municipal policy for inclusive education, but also contributed to the expansion of enrollment of Special Education target public students in the common classes of regular education by offering support for the implementation of MRR.

Thus, although limits and contradictions were present during the PNEE-PEI implementation process in Jundiaí, positive consequences were also observed. What is expected is that, in the coming years, the policy is implemented in its entirety and that the results of these actions may be reflected in the improvement of the quality of teaching and of the students benefited by it, since it is worth noting that it is not enough for a system of education to be satisfied only with an increase in the number of registrations. It is necessary to move towards the true schooling of the student, the construction of a school that can be called inclusive, not because it allows access, but because it is committed to the social education of the individual, promoting the appropriation of school knowledge and personal development.

• 4
  The research project was submitted to the evaluation of the Research Ethics Committee (REC) of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of UNICAMP (Campus Campinas), based on Resolution No. 196/96 CNS/MS, which establishes guidelines and regulatory norms in research involving human beings. The project was approved on September 29, 2013, under Opinion No. 409,698.
• 5
  The authorization to carry out the agreements with care entities is given by Municipal Law No. 6.859, July 19, 2007 (Lei Municipal nº 6.859, 2007).
• 6
  A new analysis conducted by the World Bank, highlighted in the World Report on Disability, indicates, however, a contrary direction. According to the report, it is cheaper to maintain enrollment in the regular school than in institutions: ‘[...] establishing and maintaining schools to educate all children together is cheaper than creating a complex system of different types of schools specialized for different groups of children’ (Secretaria de Estado dos Direitos da Pessoa com Deficiência, 2011, p. 218).
• 7
  Between June 15, 2007 and June 15, 2008, for example, the City Hall of Jundiaí applied an amount of R $ 835,632,48 in agreements with different entities of the municipality (Lei Municipal nº 6.859, 2007).
• 8
  That later would be denominated Nucleus of Public Policies for Inclusion - called NPPI.
• 9
  The document ‘Inclusive Education in the Municipality of Jundiaí: 2009 to 2012’ was completed at the end of December 2012 and, due to the beginning of the recess period, there was no time to deliver it to municipal schools, a task that would be carried out as soon as the 2013 school year started, but the delivery did not occur.
• 10
  In 2012, The City Hall of Jundiaí invested R$ 767,018,31 in a contract signed with the Paradigma Institute to provide technical advisory services and elaboration of a structure for maintenance and improvement of the public policy of inclusive education in the municipality of Jundiaí - Opinion No. 10361-7/2012 (Relatório Geral de Contratos, 2014).
• 11
  In order to investigate the advances promoted by the PNEE-PEI implementation process in Jundiaí, a different dynamic from the analysis performed in the previous category will be followed. To analyze this category, the cut off points of the contents collected in the field subdividing them in each phase of management of the NPPI will not be considered. It is intended here to offer a dynamic discussion, presenting similar points of view of the different actors interviewed during the research according to the topic addressed.
• 12
  Fundo de Manutenção e Desenvolvimento da Educação Básica e de Valorização dos Profissionais da Educação -Fund for the Maintenance and Development of Basic Education and Valorization of Education Professionals

REFERÊNCIAS

• A educação inclusiva no município de Jundiaí: 2009 a 2012 (2012). Jundiaí: Secretaria Municipal de Educação.
• Bardin, L. (1977). Análise de conteúdo Lisboa: Edições 70.
• Botura, G. C. B., & Manzoli, L. P. (2006). A História da Educação Especial na Cidade de Ribeirão Preto: Um Resgate da Memória. Anais do Congresso Luso-Brasileiro de História da Educação, Uberlândia, MG, Brasil, 6.
• Decreto no 6.094, de 24 de abril de 2007 Dispõe sobre a implementação do Plano de Metas Compromisso Todos pela Educação, pela União Federal, em regime de colaboração com Municípios, Distrito Federal e Estados, e a participação das famílias e da comunidade, mediante programas e ações de assistência técnica e financeira, visando a mobilização social pela melhoria da qualidade da educação básica. Recuperado em 24 de Junho de 2018 de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2007/decreto/d6094.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2007/decreto/d6094.htm
• Decreto nº 6.253, de 3 de novembro de 2007 Dispõe sobre o Fundo de Manutenção e Desenvolvimento da Educação Básica e de Valorização dos Profissionais da Educação - FUNDEB, regulamenta a Lei no 11.494, de 20 de junho de 2007, e dá outras providências. Recuperado em 24 de Junho de 2018 de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2007/decreto/d6253.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2007/decreto/d6253.htm
• Decreto nº 7.611, de 17 de novembro de 2011 Dispõe sobre a educação especial, o atendimento educacional especializado e dá outras providências. Recuperado em 24 de Junho de 2018 de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/decreto/d7611.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/decreto/d7611.htm
• Ferreira, J. R., & Ferreira, M. C. C. (2013). Sobre Inclusão, políticas públicas e práticas pedagógicas. In M. C. R. Góes, & A. L. F. Laplane (Orgs.), Políticas e práticas de educação inclusiva (4a ed., pp. 21-44). Campinas: Autores Associados.
• Ferreira, J. R., & Glat, R. (2003). Reformas educacionais pós-LDB: A inclusão do aluno com necessidades especiais no contexto da municipalização. In D. B. S. Souza, & L. C. M. Faria (Orgs.), Desafios da educação municipal (pp. 372-390). Rio de Janeiro: DP&A.
• Ferreira, W. (2005). Educação Inclusiva: Será que sou a favor ou contra uma escola de qualidade para todos? Recuperado em 08 de Março de 2018 de http://portal.mec.gov.br/seesp/arquivos/pdf/revistainclusao1.pdf
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/seesp/arquivos/pdf/revistainclusao1.pdf
• Lei Municipal nº 6.859, de 19 de julho de 2007 Autoriza convênios com as entidades assistenciais que especifica, para atendimento pedagógico aos portadores de deficiência física e mental. Recuperado em 25 de Junho de 2018 de http://sapl.camarajundiai.sp.gov.br/sapl_documentos/norma_juridica/6833_texto_integral.pdf
  » http://sapl.camarajundiai.sp.gov.br/sapl_documentos/norma_juridica/6833_texto_integral.pdf
• Mantoan, M. T. E. (1997). A integração de pessoas com deficiência São Paulo: Memnon.
• Manzini, E. J., & Corrêa, P. M. (2008, outubro). Avaliação da acessibilidade no ensino fundamental usando a tecnologia digital. Anais da Reunião Anual da ANPED, Caxambu, MG, Brasil, 31.
• Martins, G. A. (2000). Manual para elaboração de monografias e dissertações (2a ed.). São Paulo: Atlas.
• Mazzarino, J. M., Falkenbach, A., & Rissi, S. (2011). Acessibilidade e inclusão de uma aluna com deficiência visual na escola e na educação física. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, 33(1), 87-102.
• Núcleo de Políticas Públicas para Inclusão (2012). Levantamento. Jundiaí: Secretaria Municipal de Educação.
• Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva (2008). Recuperado em 03 de Agosto de 2018 de http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=16690-politica-nacional-de-educacao-especial-na-perspectiva-da-educacao-inclusiva-05122014&Itemid=30192
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=16690-politica-nacional-de-educacao-especial-na-perspectiva-da-educacao-inclusiva-05122014&Itemid=30192
• Relatório de alunos com informação de necessidade educacional especial: Data base 25/05/2011 (2011). Jundiaí: Secretaria Municipal de Educação .
• Relatório Geral de Contratos: 2011 (2014). Jundiaí: Secretaria Municipal de Educação. Recuperado em 28 de Maio de 2018 de http://deolhonodinheiropublico.jundiai.sp.gov.br/sitetranspV2/portal.nsf/V03.02/lei131_contratos?OpenDocument
  » http://deolhonodinheiropublico.jundiai.sp.gov.br/sitetranspV2/portal.nsf/V03.02/lei131_contratos?OpenDocument
• Romero, A. P. H. (2006). Análise da política pública brasileira para a educação especial na década de 1990: Configuração do atendimento e atuação do terceiro setor (Dissertação de Mestrado). Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, PR, Brasil.
• Secretaria de Estado dos Direitos da Pessoa com Deficiência (2011). Sumário: Relatório Mundial sobre a Deficiência São Paulo: SEDPcD.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  Jul-Sep 2018

History

• Received
  22 Sept 2017
• Reviewed
  26 Mar 2018
• Accepted
  06 Apr 2018