The Social View of the Intellectual Disability in Rural Schools from the Concepts of Identity And Difference

ABSTRACT:

The aim of this study was to discuss the social view in rural schools about the intellectual disability. Therefore, the research followed a qualitative approach and it adopted as a methodological procedure the Case Study. For data collection, questionnaires were used as well as observations, photographic register and school documents analysis. In this text, the data of the documents analysis and a cut of the questionnaire answered by the teachers of the regular classroom are presented. Thirty-one teachers from three rural schools of a municipality in the hinterland of the state of São Paulo, Brazil, took part in this research. The results show that the kind of disability found in these schools is just intellectual. The data of the questionnaires indicate the perspective of the teachers in considering that other students of the classroom would need differentiated pedagogical service. From the analysis of the enrollments, performed without a medical report, and in view of the teachers’ perception, we can assume that, sometimes, the school environment socially produces the intellectual disability, because it does not consider the heterogeneity of the individuals concerning the learning, and also, inside the academic perspective, it creates barriers that limit the participation of people with disability in this environment. Many times the limitation for a student learning is not endogenous, but it happens due to lack of adequate strategies in the school environment. Thus, no pathology should be given to students due to their difficulties and specificities of learning, because this is to produce socially Intellectual Disability.

KEYWORDS:
Special Education; Intellectual Disability; Attendance in Resource Room; Rural Education; Social Representation

RESUMO:

Este estudo teve como objetivo discutir o olhar social em escolas do campo sobre a deficiência intelectual. Para tanto, a pesquisa realizada seguiu uma abordagem qualitativa e teve como procedimento metodológico o Estudo de Caso. Para coleta dos dados, utilizaram-se questionários, observações, registro fotográfico e análise de documentos escolares. Neste texto, apresentam-se os dados da análise de documentos e um recorte do questionário respondido pelos professores da sala regular. Participaram 31 professores das 3 escolas do campo analisadas. Os resultados apontam que o tipo de deficiência encontrado nas escolas é somente intelectual. Os dados dos questionários indicam a perspectiva de os professores considerar que outros alunos da sala de aula necessitariam de atendimento pedagógico diferenciado. A partir da análise das matrículas, realizadas sem laudo médico e tendo em vista a percepção dos professores, pode-se pressupor que, em algumas vezes, o ambiente escolar produz socialmente a deficiência intelectual, porque não considera a heterogeneidade dos indivíduos no tocante à aprendizagem e, também, dentro da perspectiva acadêmica, cria barreiras que limitam a participação das pessoas com deficiência nesse ambiente. Muitas vezes a limitação para aprendizagem de um aluno não é endógena, mas ocasionada por falta de estratégias adequadas do ambiente escolar. Assim sendo, não se deve determinar uma patologia aos alunos pelas suas dificuldades e especificidades de aprendizagem, porque isso é produzir socialmente a Deficiência Intelectual.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Educação Especial; Deficiência Intelectual; Atendimento em Sala de Recursos; Educação no Campo; Representação Social

1 Introduction

The history of Special Education, up to the recent conception of Inclusive Education, has always been accompanied by the concept of difference. The individual considered different from the standard established by normality was excluded from society. Over the centuries, this concept has changed, thus public policies and actions to recognize the right of these individuals, which is always prior to their condition of difference, have emerged. At the present time, in Brazil, we are experiencing the so-called ‘inclusion’ process, in which individuals with disabilities have achieved, through legislation, the guarantee of equitable educational rights.

The concept of Inclusive Education, endorsed by the fundamental principle of the Salamanca Statement (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ([UNESCO], 1994), proposes a modification in the school model, in which the school must assume the teaching and learning process of all students, including students with disabilities. In the model prior to Inclusive Education, the objective of schools and special classes was to normalize the person with disability, and only by reaching an expected standard of normality is how they could integrate with the common school conviviality.

Inclusive school, with this change, needs to give a promising and adequate response in view of diversity. According to Carneiro (2011, p. 41), the school,

[...] as a social segment that is both individual and collective, shows itself, at least in theory, in the face of the challenge of dismantling established representations of the different and constructing new representations from the recognition and valorization of this other than in individual characteristics is equal in rights and duties.

The purpose of the inclusive school is that it has the competence to develop processes and strategies of teaching and learning capable of offering to students with disabilities academic development conditions within their possibilities that enable them, in an equal way, to access the opportunities in the labor market and in life. In order to achieve that, the educational system must promote changes in terms of access to the curriculum, teaching strategies developed together with special education teachers, physical and organizational adaptations according to the needs of the students with disabilities. In other terms, the school must conceive inclusion in its Pedagogical Master Plan and put into operation the necessary measures to promote a level playing field and not only guarantee enrollment, since this act is not enough to have an Inclusive Education.

The rural education has the same aspect of the inclusive school, which considers access to knowledge for all regardless of origin, social condition, disability, gender, race and the spatial location in which the individual resides. Rural education involves, in accordance with Resolution No. 2 (2008, p. 1), the following populations:

Article 1 - The Rural Education comprises the Basic Education in its stages of Early Childhood Education, Elementary School, Secondary Education and Professional Technical Education of intermediate level integrated with the Secondary Education and it is intended to serve the rural population in their most varied forms of life production - family farmers, extractivists, artisanal fishermen, riverine people, settlers and campesinos of the Agrarian Reform, quilombolas, caiçaras, indigenous people and others.⁴

In these populations, there are also people with disabilities who need to attend schools and have specialized care, also within a proposal of Inclusive Education.

When talking about disability, it is noted that for centuries the medical conception, in which the disabilities are conceptualized as a pathological condition intrinsic to the individual (Connor & Valle, 2014), had exclusive strength. It is also a fact that medicine has brought great contributions in the discovery of many syndromes and subjects related to it, but this aspect alone does not allow society to see it in positive aspects. In this way, it is verified that studies which question the organic cause of the disability are necessary. However, seeing it only through the incapacitated does not at all contribute to the promotion of the people with disability. It is necessary to change the approach on disability, also considering the social interpretation, as Omote (1994, pp. 68-69) points out:

Disability is not something that emerges with the birth of someone or with the illness that someone contracts, but it is produced and maintained by a social group insofar as it interprets and treats as disadvantages certain differences presented by certain people. Thus, deficiencies must, in our view, be seen as arising from the modes of functioning of the social group itself and not only as attributes inherent in people identified as disabled. Disability and non-disability are part of the same framework; they are part of the same standard. People with disabilities, even if they carry some objectively defined and verifiable disability, are not an exception to normality but they are an integral and inseparable part of society.

In order to deconstruct representations and create new ones about the different one that, in our analysis, is the individual with disability, we will elucidate, with the support of Sociology, the concepts of identity and difference to relate them to the view of disability, illustrating how it was socially constructed through a response from society to difference.

Identity exists only from something outside it, that is, another identity that differs from it. Thus it is marked by difference, which involves denial and it is sustained by exclusion, or belongs to one group or another. As Woodward asserts (2012, p. 40):

Identities are manufactured by marking the difference. This marking of difference occurs both through symbolic systems of representation and through forms of social exclusion. Identity is not the opposite of difference: identity depends on difference.

We have, then, that identity and difference are inseparable, one depends on the other. Marking through symbolic systems is a social production. For example, when we cite the physical disability, the wheelchair is a symbol that represents this disability. Or, when we mention the Landless Workers’ Movement (called MST) and people living in the countryside - the red foot is a symbol of their identity that was created by society to mark the difference.

Another author who contributes to this theme is T. T. da Silva (2012), who problematizes the question of identity and difference, pointing out that there is a relationship of dependence between them, considering that identity is what one is, it has reference to itself. And difference is what the other is - in fact, it is a denial of everything that is not part of one’s identity. In the words of the author,

[...] affirmations about difference only make sense if understood in their relation to affirmations about identity. Saying that she is Chinese means that she is not Argentine, she is not Japanese, etc., including the statement that she is not Brazilian, that is, she is not what I am. Claims about difference also depend on a chain, usually hidden, of negative statements about (other identities). Just as identity depends on difference, the difference depends on identity. Identity and difference are therefore inseparable (T. T. da Silva, 2012, p. 75).

This relationship of interdependence is also presented by Veiga-Neto (2011, p. 113): ‘If normal depends on the abnormal for its own satisfaction, tranquility and uniqueness, the abnormal depends on the normal for its own safety and survival’. The normal will define the norm and who will be part of it.

Veiga-Neto (2011), based on Michel Foucault’s contributions, uses the abnormal terms to designate the groups that Modernity creates and excludes. This term often bothers us because it comes filled with other names and negative practices of exclusion. The author states that the concept of abnormal is linked to power relations that the social group establishes, assigning a mark.

The attribution of a mark - now built on fundamentally economic criteria, such as the ability to consume, evaluated by both financial power and the competence/expertise to make the best choices - not properly to a body, but to a whole social fraction so that it may be said that any body of that fraction is normal or abnormal simply because it belongs to such a fraction. This is equivalent to saying that the criterion of entry is no longer the body (in its morphology and behavior); the criterion of entry may also be the social group to which this body is seen as indissolubly connected (Veiga-Neto, 2011, p. 107).

We perceive the power of domination that the group uses by creating the abnormal identities. In this idea, we see how the person with disability is dominated by modern society, leading them to constantly struggle for their rights to participate.

Inclusive classes, according to Veiga-Neto (2011, pp. 110-111), put into action the norm marking the distinction between normal and abnormal:

If it seems more difficult to teach in inclusive classes, classes in which (the so called) normal are mixed with (the so called) abnormal, it is not so much because their (so called) cognitive levels are different, but rather because the very logic of dividing the students in classes - by cognitive levels, skills, gender, age, social class, and so on - was an invented arrangement to precisely put into action the norm, through a growing and persistent movement of, separating the normal from the abnormal, marking the distinction between normality and abnormality.

The cognitive level was created to mark the distinction within the school. We know from various studies about the existence of multiple intelligences, in which each human being possesses a specific skill in a particular area, not necessarily the cognitive one. Gardner (1994) challenged the psychometric tests of IQ (Intelligence Quotient) as the only way to evaluate the intelligence of individuals. According to the author, ‘[...] there is persuasive evidence for the existence of several relatively autonomous human intellectual competences, abbreviated hereafter as human intelligences’ (Gardner, 1994, p. 7). The researcher advocates the existence of multiple intelligences, among them, we can cite verbal-linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinesthetic and inter and intrapersonal. If the school could identify the intellectual inclination of each individual, it could create programs to develop specific skills rather than marking the difference by following the standard in the established norm.

When speaking of difference, Veiga-Neto (2011, p. 117) says that the ‘[...] fact of putting all the abnormal ones in the same level means not paying attention to the cultural peculiarities that are established in each group’. Therefore, we realize that we must pay attention to the differences, we cannot work on the same level without considering the specificities of each human being.

Considering the school institution, the space in which the person with disabilities is inserted, we should not think of a single model, but rather an institution that meets the specificities, contributing to the construction of the identity that positively promotes it within the society. We believe that it is not possible to raise points and questions about the constitution of the person with disability without considering the totality/complexity that is the society. We believe in subsidizing the social focus in this context.

Based on these reflections, we will discuss some data that assume the social view that three rural schools present about the intellectual disability.

2 Method

This study followed a qualitative research approach. The Case Study was used as a methodological procedure and used questionnaires, observations, photographic records and school records analysis as instruments of data collection. The research was carried out in three rural schools of a municipality in the hinterland of the state of São Paulo, Brazil. The research was carried out within the scope of Master’s Degree with the main objective of analyzing the Specialized Educational Service (SES) in Multifunctional Resource Rooms (MRR) in the rural schools. The specific objectives were to describe SES in the school context and to identify the perception of disability of parents and teachers who coexisted with the students attending MRR at these rural schools.

In this text, we present data from the analysis of documents and the questionnaire answered by 31 teachers from the regular classroom of the three rural schools.

3 Results

We conducted a survey of the last five years in the Annual Enrollment Summary and the SES Student List to check the number of students attending the SES and the type of disability in the rural schools. Tables 1, 2 and 3 present the total number of students in the school unit, the number of students with disabilities and the type.

Table 1
Enrollment of students in SES by type of disability in SCHOOL A

Year	Total No. of students	SES students	% SES students	ID	Deafness	VI	FD
2011	138	12	8.70	12	0	0	0
2012	131	14	10.69	14	0	0	0
2013	119	12	10.08	12	0	0	0
2014	123	10	8.13	10	0	0	0
2015	118	8	6.78	8	0	0	0

Source: Annual School Summary and SES Student List.
• Legend: SES - Specialized Educational Service, ID - Intellectual Disability, VI - Visual Impairment, FD - Physical Disability.

Table 2
Enrollment of students in SES by type of disability in SCHOOL B

Year	Total No. of students	SES students	% SES students	ID	Deafness	VI	FD
2011	121	7	5.79	7	0	0	0
2012	116	10	8.62	10	0	0	0
2013	124	9	7.26	9	0	0	0
2014	98	5	5.10	5	0	0	0
2015	94	6	6.38	6	0	0	0

Source: Annual School Summary and SES Student List.
• Legend: SES - Specialized Educational Service, ID - Intellectual Disability, VI - Visual Impairment, FD - Physical Disability.
  OBS: The Childhood Education students were not considered.

Table 3
Enrollment of students in SES by type of disability in SCHOOL C

Year	Total No. of students	SES students	% SES students	ID	Deafness	VI	FD
2011	137	7	5.11	7	0	0	0
2012	141	6	4.26	6	0	0	0
2013	123	7	5.69	6	1	0	0
2014	100	7	7.00	7	0	0	0
2015	125	5	4.00	5	0	0	0

Source: Annual School Summary and SES Student List.
• Legend: SES - Specialized Educational Service, ID - Intellectual Disability, VI - Visual Impairment, FD - Physical Disability.

At the same time, we evaluated the educational perspective of the teachers of the rural schools, asking them if there were students in their classrooms with a need for differentiated pedagogical assistance. In School A, ten teachers indicated that there were. In School B, eight teachers; and in School C, nine had the same answer.

4 Discussions

In relation to the issue posed in this cut off point, we will firstly discuss the number of enrollments and, secondly, the perspective of teachers considering that other students need differentiated pedagogical assistance. Other data on SES characterization were organized and were included in the final research report.⁵

When analyzing the three tables, the existence of registrations only by students with intellectual disability is remarkable. Only School C, in 2013, saw the enrollment of a student with deafness. The oscillation in the number of enrollments is due to the completion of Elementary Education of some students and also to the entrance and transfers to other units. Since none of these cases have a medical diagnosis, we can have many cases of learning disorder, which are registered as disability.

The Technical Note No. 04/2014 MEC/SECADI/DPEE (2014), which provides guidance on the supporting documents for students with disabilities, does not stipulate that a condition of enrollment be based on the existence of a medical report, justifying that the school, through pedagogical strategies, can favor learning. Therefore, the school is responsible for enrollment from the educational perspective.

According to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities [AAIDD] (2010), intellectual disability is characterized by significant limitation in intellectual functioning as well as adaptive behavior in two or more of the following: conceptual, social, and practical skills. Conceptual skills involve language, literacy, writing, concepts of money, time, among others. The social ones refer to the capacity to solve social problems, besides the observance of rules and laws. Practices refer to the actions of self-care, use of money, compliance with routines, safety, independence and autonomy in routine activities. These manifestations occur until the age of 18. This concept is important to understand and define the Intellectual Disability, because, in relation to other disabilities, sensory and physical, it has no obvious features and it is not physically visible.

The existence of medical conception to characterize a disability is undeniable, but our focus is to show that it is socially constructed because the social group labels and places barriers to the development of the individual who has any type of disability, especially when it refers to a cognitive limitation. This is because society values intellect as means of making people competitive in society, and when the individual does not have this ability developed, he/she is seen as different and atypical from the group.

The school creates identities deviating from the norm that it established, when for any learning difficulty it directs the student to Special Education and often enrolls him/her in the specialized service, indicating a disability that does not always exist. Goes’s (2014) research corroborates this assertion when he points out a significant increase in enrollments in Elementary Education I of students with Intellectual Disabilities. He presents the following table:

Table 4
Enrollment of students with intellectual disabilities, by level of education (Brazil)

Year/Level	CE		ES1		ES2		HS		Total
	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%
2007	37.495	14.5	194.358	75.0	24.200	9.5	2.772	1,0	258.825	100
2008	37.449	15.0	188.823	73.0	28.252	11.0	3.474	1,0	257.998	100
2009	40.088	13.0	213.803	72.0	39.994	13.0	4.499	2,0	298.384	100
2010	44.654	12.0	267.712	70.5	59.414	15.5	7.642	2,0	379.422	100
2011	37.829	9.0	295.341	70.5	76.588	18.0	10.355	2,5	420.113	100
2012	33.882	7.0	310.814	68.0	98.530	22.0	14.809	3,0	458.035	100
Annual average	38.566	11.0	245.142	71.0	54.496	16.0	7.259	2,0	345.462	100

Source: Adapted from Goes (2014, p. 93).
• Legend: CE - Childhood Education, ES-1 - Elementary School 1 (1st to 5th grade), ES-2 - Elementary School 2 (6th to 9th grade), HS - High School.

It is noteworthy that, as of 2009, after the implementation of the National Policy on Special Education (Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva, 2008), there was an increase in enrollments of students with disabilities, mainly in Elementary School I. The big question is: Do all these students actually have Intellectual Disability? According to the text that appears in the Policy to enroll students in the SES:

[...] a person with a disability is considered to be one who has long-term physical, mental or sensory impairments that, in interaction with various barriers, may have restricted his/her full and effective participation in school and society. Students with global developmental disorders are those who present qualitative changes in reciprocal social interactions and in communication, a restricted, stereotyped and repetitive repertoire of interests and activities. Students with autism, autism spectrum syndromes, and childhood psychosis are included in this group. Students with high skills/giftedness demonstrate high potential in any of the following isolated or combined areas: intellectual, academic, leadership, psychomotricity and arts, besides presenting great creativity, involvement in learning and performing tasks in areas of interest (Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva, 2008, p. 11).

The first point to be questioned in this excerpt is that it is not clear in relation to Intellectual Disability, as it details only the global developmental disorders and high skills/ giftedness. When it mentions long-term disability of a mental nature, a wide range is opened up if we consider difficulties and learning disorders in vulnerable individuals who have a mental impediment due to social or emotional condition.

The second point of this excerpt is when it cites the interaction with several barriers, which restricts the participation of people with disabilities in school and in society. Often, a student encounters a barrier to learning a particular school content, not because of an endogenous limitation, but rather because the environment is not providing adequate strategies to overcome these barriers. And, given this limitation, this same student, in this circumstance, can receive a label of Intellectual Disability.

The impression we have on this definition of a person with disability brought by the Policy in relation to Intellectual Disability is that it reinforces its social production, leaving a gap in which the school establishes a pathology for children with any difficulty in learning.

When we analyzed the data of the teachers’ perception, we found that the teacher often faces several problems related to learning, not in regard to disability, but to the concept of heterogeneity and school failure.

In the three school units, the teachers indicated that there were students in need of specialized educational service. This demonstrates the heterogeneity that exists in a classroom, each individual learns differently. We should also remember students with learning difficulties and disorders who are not the target population of Special Education and, similarly, need a differentiated teaching strategy. The following are the justifications of some teachers when responding positively to this issue:

‘I currently have a student who shows signs of hyperactivity and lack of concentration and who needs guidance and assistance’. (School C).

‘I have a student who presents a lot of difficulty in relation to reading and writing and with some psychological problem’. (School B).

‘With continued progression, each year we receive more students unprepared to attend the grades they are. We do not often know how to evaluate whether the student is inclusive or not’. (School B).

‘There are students who do not have disabilities, but who, for other reasons, need specialized service’. (School A).

Hyperactivity and difficulty in reading and writing are part of the group of difficulties and learning disorders that do not belong to the target population of Special Education. From the perspective of the teachers, they are not responsible for working with these students, they want to transfer the responsibility to another modality of teaching.

The statement of the teacher of School B, who cites the continued progression and the lack of preparation of the students, shows the serious problem that the Brazilian school system is facing with the school failure, but this does not belong to Special Education.

We perceive that the school, in the educational perspective of teachers, has a standard, a student pattern. Those who do not meet this established standard, through the school system, are sent to Special Education screening and often even participate in the SES working group, receiving the nomenclature of Intellectual Deficiency, which contributes to discredit the potential of this student.

The point that T. T. da Silva (2012) raised on performativity corroborates with this discussion: something that collaborates to form the identity of the individual. Thus, once the student receives the label of Intellectual Disability, this will persist throughout his/her school career and, even if he/she does not have it, he/she will begin to be discredited by teachers regarding learning and development of academic skills.

5 Conclusions

Based on the reflection of the data obtained, we advocate the idea that, within the context of schools, intellectual disability can be a social production, because the school institution, within its academic perspective, creates barriers that limit the participation of people with disabilities in that environment. Regarding the barriers, Picollo and Mendes (2012, p. 60), based on Oliver’s ideas, point out:

[...] as stated by Oliver (1990), founder and most influential theoretician of this model, whatever the nature or cause of disability, the main problems faced by people with disabilities lie in the deactivation of the environment and the multiple insensitive barriers to difference, to mention attitudinal barriers (related to the attitude of people considered normal with regard to the disabled, such as the feeling of charity, pity, estrangement, and so on); economic barriers (poverty, discrimination in the labor market, the impossibility of self-employment, among others); physical barriers (e.g. lack of transportation, buildings, accessible movie theaters and sports squares, adequate schools); political barriers (lack of specific legislation that fights discrimination and institutes inalienable rights such as work, leisure, education, health, housing).

This issue of insensitive barriers to difference is very strong. Attitudinal barriers impede the real and deep knowledge of the individual who has intellectual disability. Classification with this nomenclature often makes the teacher not believe in the development of the individual and try to work with differentiated teaching strategies. This is because the focus of the school is only on students who have a high rate of achievement in the proposed curricular activities, those who are not within this group are often left out and even classified as intellectually disabled.

Woodward (2012) states that everybody is positioned and we also position ourselves according to the social fields in which we are acting. The school as a social field creates expectations of normal, homogenized students, who learn in the same way and at the same pace - this contributes to creating the identity of the person with intellectual disability.

In this line of thinking, disability is no longer seen as something individual, person-centered. It is defined by the audience in a given context, as Omote (1996, p. 130) points out:

The audience, therefore, begins to be formed with an integral and critical part of the phenomenon of disabilities itself. The study that focuses only the individual with disability can hardly be considered a study of the disability; it can be of the pathology of which he/she is a holder. This pathology or its consequences only acquire the sense of disability before a given audience with a set of criteria to judge the adequacy or inadequacy of attributes and behaviors, according to normative expectations strongly established in the community, and to interpret the attributes and behaviors which are not in compliance with such normative expectations.

Still in the social model, we have capitalism as the main impediment to the economic and cultural progress of people with disabilities (Picollo & Mendes, 2012). The ability to be productive is what determines opportunity within society. L. M. S. Silva (2006, p. 121) corroborates this affirmation:

[...] the word disability/deficiency alone is already opposed to efficiency, an important principle for the modern capitalist society whose greatest concern is productivity. And the logic of capital does not admit the supposed disorder of the body or the senses: a body that is out of order, abnormal, makes technical rationality unfeasible, thus evidencing a contradiction given by its conversion to the rationality of domination.

Thus, efficiency in the capitalist society is fundamental, a norm established by this social group. The school also immersed in this society seeks competitiveness, efficiency and income of students, the one who does not fit this pattern is considered disabled and referred to Special Education.

Thinking about the interface with the Rural Education, we have the mark of disability and the mark of rurality as impediments of productivity, a norm that was imposed by the society with a view to a definition of power. T. T. da Silva (2012, p. 81) comments on the creation of identity and power relations:

The affirmation of identity and the enunciation of difference reflect the desire of different, asymmetrically situated social groups to guarantee privileged access to social goods. Identity and difference, then, are in close connection with relations of power. The power to define identity and to mark difference cannot be separated from the broader relations of power. Identity and difference are never innocent.

Special Education before the audience of homogeneity always seeks to show the capacity of individuals with disabilities and to insert them in society. Rural Education seeks equality in rights, advocating that the rural area is not an archaic place without productivity. Thus, the essence of the inclusive model lies in the reversal of the logic of exclusion by difference, in order to establish a new logic that includes difference.

• 4
  Translation note: ‘Quilombola’ - term used to name the descendants of Afro-Brazilian slaves who escaped from slavery. ‘Caiçara’ - traditional inhabitants of the coastal regions of the southeastern and southern Brazil. They are indigenous people descendents.
• 5
  Palma, D. T. (2016). Escolas do Campo e Atendimento Educacional Especializado em Sala de Recursos Multifuncional. (Master’s Thesis), Faculdade de Ciências e Letras, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Unesp, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brazil. Retrieved from https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/136453/palma_dt_me_arafcl.pdf?sequence=3 (Rural Schools and Specialized Educational Assistance in Multifunctional Resource Room)

Referências

• American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. (2010). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports Washington, DC: AAIDD.
• Carneiro, R. U. C. (2011). Identidades e representações na escola inclusiva. In S. A. I. Monteiro, R. Ribeiro, S. S. Lemes, & L. C. Muzzeti (Eds.), Educações na contemporaneidade reflexões e pesquisa (pp. 41-54). São Carlos: Pedro & João Editores.
• Connor, D. J., & Valle, J. W. (2014). Ressignificando a deficiência da abordagem social às práticas inclusivas na escola. Porto Alegre: AMGH.
• Gardner, H. (1994). Estruturas da mente: A teoria das inteligências múltiplas Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas Sul.
• Goes, R. S de. (2014). Escolarização de alunos com deficiência intelectual: As estatísticas educacionais como expressão das políticas de educação especial no Brasil (Doctoral dissertation), Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. Retrieved from https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/10445
  » https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/10445
• Nota Técnica nº 4, de 23 de janeiro de 2014 Retrieved from http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=15898-nott04-secadi-dpee-23012014&category_slug=julho-2014-pdf&Itemid=30192
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=15898-nott04-secadi-dpee-23012014&category_slug=julho-2014-pdf&Itemid=30192
• Omote, S. (1994). Deficiência e não-deficiência: Recortes de um mesmo tecido. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, 1(2), 65-73.
• Omote, S. (1996). Perspectivas para conceituação de deficiências. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, 4(13), 127-135.
• Picollo, G., & Mendes, E. G. (2012). Para além do natural: Contribuições sociológicas a um pensar sobre a deficiência. In E. G. Mendes, & M. A. Almeida (Eds.). A pesquisa sobre inclusão escolar em suas múltiplas dimensões: Teoria, política e formação (pp. 53-89). Marília: ABPEE.
• Política Nacional de Educação Especial na Perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva (2008). Retrieved from 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
• Resolução nº 2, de 28 de abril de 2008 Brasília, 2008b. Retrieved from http://portal.mec.gov.br/arquivos/pdf/resolucao_2.pdf
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/arquivos/pdf/resolucao_2.pdf
• Silva, L. M. S. (2006). A deficiência como expressão da diferença. Educação em Revista, 44, 111-133.
• Silva, T. T. da. (2012). A produção social da identidade e da diferença. In: T. T. da. Silva. (Ed.). Identidade e diferença: A perspectiva dos estudos culturais (pp. 73-102). Petrópolis: Vozes.
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca Statement Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF
  » http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF
• Veiga-Neto, A. (2011). Incluir para excluir. In: J. Larrosa, & C. Skliar (Eds.). Habitantes de Babel: Políticas e poéticas da diferença Belo Horizonte: Autêntica.
• Woodward, K. (2012). Identidade e diferença: Uma introdução teórica e conceitual. In T. T. da Silva (Ed.), S. Hall, & K. Woodward. Identidade e diferença: A perspectiva dos estudos culturais (pp. 7-72). Petrópolis: Vozes.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  Apr-Jun 2018

History

• Received
  02 Feb 2017
• Reviewed
  18 May 2017
• Accepted
  02 Aug 2017