Inclusion of students with special educational needs at the state music conservatory: teachers’ perspective^*

Abstract

The present study was carried out in a State Conservatory of Music of Minas Gerais, in the city of Uberaba-MG, using a qualitative approach. The objective was to identify the challenges experienced by teachers in teaching music to students with special educational needs. Due to a demand presented by the institution regarding the problems experienced by teachers in school inclusion in music teaching, five focus groups were held with teachers, with data recorded in digital media, transcribed and analyzed based on the theme of analysis and content. Thus, we obtained the results classified in seven categories: (1) students with clinical conditions; (2) organization of classrooms; (3) being a teacher of a student with special educational needs; (4) teacher education and training; (5) methodologies of music classes; (6) inclusion - laws versus practice; and (7) support from family and colleagues. It was noticed the need for training and specialization of teachers and the lack of support offered by the state and the institution for the effective practice of inclusion. Then, further studies are suggested on the subject of training professionals about the inclusion of students with special educational needs in music education, in order to expand a cultural discussion about accessibility in these spaces of musical training.

Inclusive education; Conservatory; Teachers; Music

Resumo

O presente estudo foi realizado em um Conservatório Estadual de Música de Minas Gerais, na cidade de Uberaba-MG, utilizando uma abordagem qualitativa. O objetivo foi identificar os desafios vivenciados pelos professores no ensino de música para alunos com necessidades educacionais especiais. Devido a uma demanda apresentada pela instituição acerca das problemáticas vivenciadas pelos professores na inclusão escolar no ensino da música, foram realizados cinco grupos focais com os professores, sendo os dados gravados em mídia digital, transcritos e analisados a partir da temática de análise e conteúdo. Dessa forma, obtivemos os resultados classificados em sete categorias: (1) alunos com condições clínicas; (2) organização das salas de aulas; (3) ser professor de aluno com necessidades educacionais especiais; (4) formação e capacitação dos professores; (5) metodologias das aulas de música; (6) inclusão – leis versus prática; e (7) apoio da família e colegas. Percebeu-se a necessidade de formação e especialização dos professores e a carência de apoios oferecidos pelo estado e pela instituição para a prática efetiva da inclusão. Sugerem-se assim novos estudos acerca da temática de formação dos profissionais acerca da inclusão de alunos com necessidades educacionais especiais na educação musical, de forma que ampliem uma discussão cultural sobre a acessibilidade nesses espaços de formação musical.

Educação inclusiva; Conservatório; Professores; Música

Introduction

The term conservatory originated in the 16th century in Italy, being used to designate charities as a shelter for orphans and the poor. In these institutions, music was used as one of the activities offered, gradually becoming the only activity in the place, starting to characterize these institutions as music conservatories (VIEIRA, 2004). The conservatories became specialized and, in the 18th century, a Paris conservatory became a reference in the teaching of music, with its teaching practice and methodology spreading throughout the world (VIEIRA, 2004)

Music education in Brazil started in the colonial period, influenced by European culture, through music conservatories. The first conservatory of music in the country, the Imperial Conservatory, was created in 1848 (FREIRE, 1994), in Rio de Janeiro, followed by the creation of two other conservatories, one in Bahia and the other in Pará (VIEIRA, 2004).

The social, economic, political and cultural transformations throughout history have made it possible to increase the number of people interested in the artistic field, leading to greater consumption of artistic production. To meet this demand, there was diversification and increase in public cultural institutions, places of exhibition and instances of reproduction and consecration such as museums, galleries, theaters, Fine Arts Schools and conservatories (VENDRAMI, 2010). In the 20th century, new conservatories were created, driven by artistic movements, both in Brazil and on the European continent, which mobilized parts of society in efforts to create entities that promote and encourage culture.

The model of the first European conservatories still influences the teaching of music in conservatories today. This teaching model is characterized by curricula with subjects that predominantly contemplate European music, “in an elitist and compartmentalized view of knowledge”. (BÉHAGUE, 1997 apudESPERIDIÃO, 2002, p. 70).

In this perspective, the curricula of music courses at conservatories prioritize instrumental practice, with knowledge transmission during the learning process being the teacher’s competence. Music conservatories are linked to state public education and involve a significant portion of the population (VENDRAMI, 2010), with actions aimed at the professional training of musicians at technical level, music education and cultural dissemination (MINAS GERAIS, 2005).

It is important to understand that the state conservatories of music of Minas Gerais are part of the state school network (MINAS GERAIS, 2005), followng the logic of regular schools in the state, having the same timetable, an evaluation system and a system for hiring teachers (permanent contract and nominated) as all educational institutions in Minas Gerais.

According to resolution 718 of 2005, in its article 27, the State Conservatories of Music must carry out following:

[...] the enrollment of students at each school term, discrimination based on ethnicity, gender, social status, political conviction, religious belief or special educational needs is prohibited. (MINAS GERAIS, 2005).

Conservatories of Music have received an increasing demand from students with special educational needs (SEN)². Although it is the right of this population to join the conservatories, it is observed that these institutions are not structured and equipped to receive this demand, having difficulties to implement, in practice, accessibility to musical education, which are related to the lack of human resource. and their training, in addition to the lack of financial resources to offer adequate conditions for the teaching of music to all students (BÉHAGUE, 1997 apudESPERIDIÃO, 2002; VENDRAMI, 2010).

In this sense, the term special musical education is adopted, which, according to Fernandes (2000, p. 49), is a specialty of the musical education subarea that:

[...] deals with the learning and teaching of music for people with physical and mental disabilities, pursuing musical development, conceptual and skill progression, memorization, group practice and all the processes involved, including public presentation results, which is fundamental for Musical Education itself [...].

Although the Conservatories are part of the regular education network and receive the enrollment of students with SEN, they do not find support in the practice of inclusive policies for curricular adaptation, training of their teachers, for the provision of specialized support services that can guarantee the educational assistance for students with SEN.

In conservatories, for those musicians who choose the teaching axis, in addition to the common challenges in the area, pedagogical competence is necessary to understand the needs of students, adapt or create teaching strategies that value their skills, promoting inclusive music teaching within the music conservatory, a practice for which this teacher was not trained. In view of the new challenges, these musicians/teachers need new professional qualifications for the practice of teaching (VIEIRA, 2004), especially with regard to the insertion of students with SEN in music schools. As teachers, they play a very important role and must always be in search of new knowledge and methodologies that make it possible to teach music to all (SOARES, 2006) from the perspective of inclusive education.

School inclusion is based on the principle that all students, without exception, must attend regular school classrooms (MANTOAN, 2003). Education is a human and universal right and must be made available to all human beings, with or without SEN. This right will be guaranteed if the education offered aims at the full development of the person and his/her preparation for the exercise of citizenship, and must be offered in an official educational establishment, which should not separate people into groups (FÁVERO, 2008).

For Louro (2015 apudSILVA; ALMEIDA, 2018) inclusive music education is understood as actions that should integrate people with and without disabilities in the same musical educational environment in a conscious and pedagogically directed way, with the intention of learning for all.

School inclusion aims to promote equality and equitable mechanisms for the access of the entire population to goods and services (MANTOAN; PRIETO; ARANTES, 2006), enabling the construction of a new society through transformations in physical environments (internal spaces and equipment, appliances and utensils, furniture and means of transport) and in the mentality of all people (SASSAKI, 2006).

The Law of Guidelines and Bases for National Education (LDB) (BRASIL, 1996) affirms the principle of inclusion and provides that education for students with disabilities, global developmental disorders and high skills or giftedness should be offered preferably in the regular network. According to this law,education systems should offer teaching strategies to promote student learning, such as curricula, methods, techniques, specific educational and organizational resources, specific terminality and specialized teachers. Despite the guarantee of the right to education, this process has not yet materialized, leading to the exclusion of those who do not fit the standards defined by society (BRASIL, 2008).

In the conservatories, this reality is reproduced and materialized through the difficulty of some students not being able to fully insert themselves in the activities due to several factors, among them, type of teacher training and potential differences in learning, due to differences in behavior and learning difficulties arising or not from disabilities and disorders diagnosed.

Another obstacle refers to the training of music teachers, although inclusion is guaranteed by LDB, in music degrees; there is almost no mention of special and inclusive music education in their curriculum. In addition, investments are scarce in education as a whole and, in particular, in the teaching of music, which hinders the implementation of inclusive education practices (LOURO, 2013b).

This limitation is also reflected in publications, which are scarce in the field of inclusive music education. Among the publications found, there is a reduced number of articles involving the teaching of music for students with SEN, which encompassed the teaching of music for students with autistic spectrum (SOARES, 2012), with physical disability (LOURO, 2003) and visual impairment (OLIVEIRA; REILY, 2014; MELO, 2011). In view of the lack of theoretical framework on the topic of inclusion in music education that intends to understand the vision of the music teacher in this process, the relevance of this study is justified, whose objective was to understand the perception of music teachers about the inclusion of students with SEN.

Methodology

This is an exploratory, qualitative study carried out with the Renato Frateschi State Conservatory of Music, located in the city of Uberaba, Minas Gerais. The conservatory has 107 teachers, who teach instrument practice classes (recorder, transverse flute, clarinet, saxophone, trumpet, trombone, piano, organ, accordion, keyboard, guitar, violin, cello, ukulele, Brazilian ten-string guitar, viola, guitar, electric or acoustic double bass, drums, percussion), choral singing, musicalization and musical perception (music theory).

The music education course is divided into an initial cycle, for students from six to ten years, an intermediate cycle, for students from 11 to 15 years, and a complementary cycle, for students over 16 years. The technical course in music is also offered by the conservatory, promoting a three-year high school education. In addition to the mandatory activities, students can perform extra activities such as group practice, rhythmic activity, dance, among others that complement music teaching.

The Conservatory has approximately 2700 students enrolled in different teaching cycles, of which 20% are students with SEN. Enrolled students must take three classes of 50 minutes each, namely: practice of the instrument with the choice of the instrument desired, musicalization/musical perception, which includes musical theory and choral singing.

The research started with the presentation of the study proposal to 107 teachers during a planning meeting, inviting them to participate in the study. Data collection started with the approval of the study by the Research Ethics Committee (CAE 73909417.1.0000.5154). Participants of the study were 52 teachers of instrument practice, choral singing, musical perception (theoretical classes), musicalization, group practice, arts and rhythmic activity.

For data collection, the focus group technique was used, which brings together the research subjects in the same place with the objective of collecting data, through a dialogue and debate, starting from a specific theme (CRUZ NETO; MOREIRA; SUSENA, 2002). The technique makes it possible to express the narratives of individuals in groups, so that they interact on the proposed subject. Thus, the speeches are in debate, since the content will be discussed by the individuals (CRUZ NETO; MOREIRA; SUSENA, 2002).

Due to the large number of teachers invited for the research, three focus groups were carried out. The groups took place on the days and times made available by the conservatory management and were held, lasting two hours, in a private room located at the institution. Each group had an average of 15 participants.

For the realization of the focus groups, the researchers developed a debate script, which included questions related to: inclusion, student diversity; teachers’ difficulties and facilities; class method; what it is like to be a music teacher; how the relationship between teacher and student is; how they understand diversity within the conservatory.

The focus groups were recorded in audio using a digital resource and, later, transcribed in full, for further data analysis. In the analysis process, the data collected were systematized into thematic analysis categories (BARDIN, 2010), which consists of discovering the nuclei of meaning that make up a communication. The thematic analysis process involved three stages: the floating reading, in which the corpus was constituted, as well as the formulation and reformulation of hypotheses or objectives; the exploration of the material, which consists of categorization, that is, the process of reducing the text to meaningful words and expressions; and finally, the treatment of the results obtained and interpretation was carried out.

Results and discussion

Data analysis led to seven categories: (1) students with special educational needs; (2) classroom organization; (3) being a teacher of a student with special educational needs; (4) teacher education and training; (5) methodologies of music classes; (6) inclusion - laws versus practice; and (7) support from family and colleagues.

Students with Special Educational Needs

Teachers brought in their discourse the diversity of students with SEN enrolled at the conservatory. Among these, they identified those with Down syndrome, autism spectrum disorder, visual impairment, physical impairment and hearing impairment. This identification was possible through the knowledge of some teachers about some conditions, or even through information from parents/guardians about the student at the time of enrollment.

Regarding the speech of many teachers, it was highlighted the concern with those students whose special educational need was not informed at the time of enrollment, but who had learning difficulties, related to diminished attention, hyperactive behavior in the classroom, aggressiveness towards teachers and colleagues. Teachers reported that at the time of registration, this information about students is at the discretion of the parents/guardians and that they often do not provide it. The following statements represent this aspect.

[...] there would have to be information, support, because it is not easy, the challenges are great, there are many [...]. (Teachers’ report).

[...] at the time of registration, most are not diagnosed, and sometimes this is the family, but they do not speak, [...] because they are afraid, to deny the vacancy [...]. (Teachers’ report).

Teachers report that ignorance of students’ SENs compromises the teaching-learning process, as it makes it difficult to understand the needs of the student, generating doubts about how to deal with him, considering that inclusion generates changes in the models of schools and consequently, there is a need for the qualification of professionals to maintain the quality of teaching and promote the teaching-learning processes while respecting the students’ diversity (MOREJÓN; DENARI, 2006).

Ignorance process of the students’ diagnoses or conditions can generate two important questions: not counting this student as an inclusion student within the music education processes and the non-organization and curricular adaptation and teacher training for this student in his pedagogical process within education musical. Thinking about basic education, we have:

The School Census/MEC/INEP, carried out annually in all schools of basic education, accompanies, in special education, indicators of access to basic education, enrollment in public schools, inclusion in common classes, provision of specialized educational assistance, accessibility in buildings and the number of municipalities and schools with enrollment of students with special educational needs. (BRASIL, 2008, p. 11).

The systematization of data on special education within Conservatories of Music is not yet organized, but it needs to be considered in the process of political discussion to implement strategies and resources that encompass inclusive music education. The importance of parental transparency is of the utmost importance for ensuring visibility for inclusion in music education.

The second issue pointed out refers to the possibilities for curricular adaptations and also for teacher training. The lack of information about the student’s real conditions impacts the delay in face of the effective inclusion processes, considering that the organization of classes at the conservatory differs from the regular school. In the latter, the student remains for four or more hours, being in various activities throughout the week with the same teacher or a group of teachers who systematically accompanies him. At the conservatory, each teacher meets with students once a week during a class (50 minutes), which can delay the process of identifying that student’s difficulties and needs, impacting the learning process.

The knowledge of the diagnosis does not guarantee the knowledge and acceptance of the student’s demands, but it is scored as one of the important points for the inclusion process, being that “getting to know each student individually, his/her diagnosis, limits and possibilities, becomes essential for inclusive teaching practice [...]. ” (SILVA; ALMEIDA, 2018).

Classroom organization

At the music conservatory, students attend theoretical (musicalization and musical perception) and practical (instrument practice) subjects. Theoretical subjects are attended by students of different age groups, according to the cycle in which the student is studying, and include students from different instrument practices. Theoretical classes, in general, are offered by an average of 35 students. In instrumental practices, classes are reduced, and may occur individually or in groups of four to five students.

In the speech of the conservatory teachers, the concern with the classroom organization was recurrent, mainly related to the theoretical disciplines, considering that the number of students, the diversity of the age group and the complexity of the subject addressed make this task complex, what gets worse when the student presents SEN, as highlighted in the following report.

There is no way for you to work in a class, let’s assume, with 30, 40 students [...] take care of all the students and there is still a person with difficulty, then how do you do it? [...]. (Teachers’ report).

Teachers point out that the high number of students in the theoretical classes generates an exclusion process, as it makes pedagogical monitoring difficult, an individualized approach, compromising inclusion. The LDB does not define the number of students per class, leaving the organization in charge of this organization; however, there are discussions and even bills that intend to define the number of 35 students as the maximum for elementary school classes II and high school; which does not remove the discussion about the quality of processes in rooms with so many students. Melo and Guerra Sobrinho (2015, p. 07) add that:

The current scenario suggests that there is a greater investment in teacher training, in specific equipment and materials for classrooms, as well as the establishment of class sizes in order to guarantee satisfactory Music lessons.

Faced with this reality, teachers brought the need for a classroom support teacher to help those students with SEN. In Brazil, currently, the term mediator is used for this professional. According to Mousinho et al. (2010), this professional emerged with the intention of accompanying children who needed assistance in the classroom context, being guided by the child’s professional therapists.

The main function of the mediator is to be the intermediary between the child and the situations experienced by him, in which he faces difficulties in interpretation and action. Therefore, the mediator can act as an intermediary in social and behavioral issues, in communication and language, in school activities and/or games, and in directed and/or pedagogical activities at school. The mediator also works in different school settings [...]. [...] Adapting the physical structure to organize objects in the surroundings, avoiding major distractors or exposure of those who represent mania is an equally relevant action. (MOUSINHO et al. 2010, p. 95).

The authors also mention that the partnership between support professionals and the school favors the establishment of realistic goals with regard to development, as well as making it possible to assess the child according to their own achievements.

Conservatory teachers understand that this professional is important for the development of their students in the music education process and question the non-compliance with guaranteed premises for basic education in state schools at the state music conservatory. Students who have significant difficulties in the motor, cognitive and communication areas, depending on the complexity, might not be able to learn musicalization or music theory, for example, in a large room and only one teacher, without someone being able to remain attentive and focused on their learning processes.

In practical classes, the number of students per class is lower, with a maximum of four students, and those who have some difficulty have the right to attend these classes individually. This premise makes it easier for the teacher to organize his pedagogical processes individually, but he still lacks theoretical and practical framework for necessary curricular adaptations, a matter to be discussed in the categories of teacher education and training and methodologies of music classes.

Being a teacher of a student with Special Educational Needs

Teachers highlighted feelings of satisfaction in observing the evolution of students with SEN, witnessing learning progress throughout the year. They state that it is gratifying to follow the student’s learning process and identify the skills developed and that culminate in the ability to play the instrument, as highlighted in this speech.

The best thing is at the beginning of the year, when you arrive, you take a student like that, who has no idea of anything, he arrives, not even knowing how to put his hand on the piano; then, at the end of the year you see that he is already managing to do it, you know, he is already starting up, he is already playing something, he already wants to present, so this is very rewarding. (Teachers’ report).

Teachers identify that teaching students with SEN improves their training and contributes to their personal and professional growth. “What would the teacher’s role be if the boy came ready?” (Teachers’ report).

Other feelings were identified in the teachers’ discourse, such as fear and insecurity, due to the lack of knowledge about how to teach this population and an appropriate methodology. These feelings are aggravated, as the teachers report that they did not have specific training to work with these students.

A little bit of fear, we sometimes do not have the knowledge, sometimes we wonder if is our experience is right, is there something missing? (Teachers’ report).

This reality does not differ from that found in regular schools, according to Monteiro and Manzini (2008). Teachers in regular schools also show feelings of fear about students’ behavior as special educational needs and of not knowing how to teach them. According to Melo; Martins (2004 apud MONTEIRO; MANZINI, 2008), these feelings are natural to happen, since there is a lack of knowledge about the disabilities.

Another reflection that fits this place is that proposed by Silva; Almeida (2018) that in order to effectively exist, one must start from the premise that everyone can learn, build knowledge and acquire skills related to music, whether theoretical, practical or instrumental. This leads to the breaking of attitudinal barriers that are based on (pre)concepts.

Louro (2013b) refers that when the teacher has enough information it is possible to break taboos and stereotypes. As a proposition, it points out that the teacher should:

1. 1- Know about basic clinical issues of disabilities and the learning process surrounding disabilities;

2. 2- Have a broad vision of making music and not only focused on instrumental performance or traditional methods of teaching music;

3. 3- Know how to promote methodological, instrumental and musical adaptations;

4. 4- Work as a team (together with neurologist; phonoaudiologist; psychologist, etc.)

5. 5- Have well-defined goals with each student or group. Therefore, think about the following questions:

6. a. Who the class is for (public/student profile, disability he has)

7. b. What the purpose of such activity is, or such content (what is intended to work with each student or the proposed activity)

8. c. How to do it (methodology. How to achieve the goals)

9. 6- Have an adequate posture. ALWAYS believe in the human material in your hands. Respect the students’ time and limits, but do not stop working on the difficulties, nor demand good musical quality. (LOURO, 2013, p. 6).

Teacher education and training

Among the teachers at the conservatory, most have a degree in Music with a qualification in an instrument. They reported that there has been a process of change in the training of music teachers over the years, showing an important difference between the recently graduated educators and the older ones. Such difference is reflected in the way of thinking about music teaching, its teaching methods and, consequently, in the inclusion of students with SEN in the conservatory. It is possible to notice this difference mainly with regard to the understanding of special musical education, despite the exclusion of people with SEN from the conservatory environment.

According to Mantoan (2003), there is a need for curricular changes for teachers’ training, so that they can be trained to meet the demands of all students. Even with all the changes, teachers point out that even in the most recent training there is not enough preparation for teaching in an inclusive way. Louro (2003) points out that in conventional music schools, teachers do not have even a minimum of technical knowledge regarding knowledge of disabilities, in rare cases when they seek training courses by themselves.

However, the pedagogical practice cannot be aimed only at the teacher’s actions. Souza, Batista Neto and Santiago (2012) name as a pedagogical practice the set of actions and relationships of different actors that contribute to the construction of knowledge and to human formation. In this sense, the author understands that this construction is formed by an interrelation between the practices of teachers, students, managers and epistemology.

Thus, they understand the search for training courses as being necessary for teaching music, considering graduation as insufficient for this purpose. They point out the absence of courses offered that cover methodologies, types of students and disabilities, with few reporting they have taken any course and that it has helped in classroom practice. A successful example was a course on visual impairment that a teacher attended, who highlighted the learning on how to deal with visually impaired students, understanding the needs and pace of each one.

The search for courses was referred to as encouraged by the presence of a student with a disability in the classroom, as this encourages teachers to seek new skills, highlighting inclusion as an important process, since they would not have sought it in case there was no demand. According to Morejón; Denari (2006), this search is due to educational changes, in which educators need to continue specializing, so that their classes cover the variety of students.

Another important point highlighted was that the inclusion of students in the classroom, as a proposal for inclusion, coupled with the lack of training and the necessary qualification of teachers and the unpreparedness to teach classes that covered all students, is actually, an exclusion process. Teachers yearn for more concrete ways that really facilitate this teaching and even with their own search for materials, knowledge is still lacking. As demonstrated in the statements:

[...] you know you have to work with him in a way that I do not even know how to. (Teachers’ report).

[...] all of a sudden we fall short, we could be doing a lot more, it gives that feeling of being, it seems, not getting there. (Teachers’ report).

As illustrated by Mittler (2000 apudMANTOAN, 2003), teachers feel incompetent to teach classes to students with difficulties and disabilities, when compared to trained teachers. Mateiro (2003, p. 35), states that:

Knowing how to teach is confronted with intellectual superficiality, since the teacher is considered a technician capable of applying the acquired knowledge, but with insufficient educational knowledge to face the real learning situations that arise in the daily classroom routine.

The exchange of experience among teachers has also been shown to be efficient for the inclusion process. At the conservatory, it takes place through meetings, mainly by instrument areas, to discuss what is being worked on and what can be improved. The positive points highlighted are the conversations between professionals and the surroundings to be able to carry out work together, enriching teaching and learning. This is also reported in the teacher modules.

These experience exchanges take place outside of meetings as a means of talking about the content taught in class, interacting with other teachers inviting them to participate in each other’s classes, as well as following the content taught to the student in theoretical and practice classes, assisting in learning. However, not all teachers experienced this process before the focus group meeting: “Because it is the first time since I am here, that I have a dialogue with my colleagues”. (Teachers’ report).

Methodologies of music classes

Concerning the methodologies used in music classes, it is noticed in the speeches of the teachers a change in the teaching processes nowadays, since they report the need not to be focused on what they learned, in that traditional and mechanical teaching, but to create an approach to the student. According to Mantoan (2003), current methodological teaching processes exclude the affective, subjective and creative dimension, giving more importance to the formalisms, mechanisms, reductionisms that prevent inclusion from being carried out effectively.

Such changes provide teachers with an opportunity to experience different situations and forms of teaching that solve students’ difficulties and generate positive results. Thus, they provide greater learning and experience gain for educators to apply to future students. Louro (2003, p. 52) points out that:

[...] conventional music schools, in addition to requiring, in general, a certain performance to the instrument as a prerequisite for admission - even in technical courses - or great theoretical knowledge, do not have sufficient resources or teachers with the minimum of knowledge in the disabiltity area [...].

In music classes, in which there is a student with SEN, teachers report that they make no distinction in the evaluation processes, applying the same test. However, they refer that in many moments they do not only teach music, sometimes they end up going through other contents of the regular school. One teacher, for example, mentioned the case of a student for whom he taught mathematics.

This practice appears frequently in the processes of inclusive music education, especially when the student is alone with the teacher. Santos (2008) identified musical education actions with people with special educational needs that, in fact, had a more therapeutic than pedagogical nature. This mixture and weakness in the design of actions that have a very different aspect weaken the practice. For Louro (2013a, p. 05):

[...] in music education, the student is required daily training to acquire musical knowledge and instrumental skill, as well as, it is necessary that the student has the instrument chosen at home for his study. Thus, in music education even though it is geared towards people with disabilities, musical learning is the central objective and in music therapy, the goal is through music to achieve a satisfactory result linked to health.

The music school is not the place for improving motor, cognitive, perceptual functions, but a learning space, which can favor all of this in a secondary aspect. This confusion of meanings makes it difficult for the classroom teacher to practice. There are, on the one hand, traditional pedagogical practices that do not work with many students, much less those with SEN, and on the other, the ignorance of new and different methodologies that can be more welcoming to the teaching-learning process of all without distinction.

This was noticed in the teachers’ statements. They identified the need to use alternative methodologies to teach all students, since they need to reach a point, defined as playing well. Thus, educators require having more than one way of teaching, so that all students understand and reach that point. These discussions corroborate the speech of Santos (1995 apudMANTOAN, 2003) who portrays that the academic community needs to create new methodologies for knowledge production. Musical education for students with disabilities, according to Louro (2006, p. 28 apudCIL; GONÇALVES, 2018, p. 328), “does not distinguish the subject who is educated, but the resources and the ways in which knowledge is transmitted”.

Just like I have 20 students here, if I use this same path for everyone, many would not arrive, so I have to have several paths, several ways for him to reach this point. (Teachers’ report).

This relates to the characteristics and skills of each student, since each one learns in a different way and time. Therefore, it was exposed the need for the teacher to perceive and use varied methodologies for teaching, not requiring the same form from the students. In this sense, some teachers also report having a specific methodology for the first day of class. This consists of questions in the form of an interview about the reason for attending the conservatory, what are their interests, what they would like to learn, what they think and know about the school and questions about family members, in order to get to know the students, as they will live together with them for a long time. According to the teachers, this more general understanding facilitates the teacher-student relationship.

Another important example raised was the Alegria de Viver project, cited as a project aimed at the elderly, but in which students who have some learning difficulties or disabilities can be enrolled. It contains choral singing and instrument classes as a curriculum; however, without having musical perception classes. The contents are not the same as for regular classes, they do not have common rules, such as the system of tests and grades, subject to approval.

However, the actions seem to have a punctual aspect and the teachers feel frustrated with the lack of learning by some students. Therefore, adaptations need to be made to favor the learning of students with SEN, facilitating the processes and promoting their full participation in the classroom (SILVA; ALMEIDA, 2018). The challenges are great, but they are necessary and have been a concern presented by the participating teachers.

Inclusion - laws versus practice

For teachers, the State requests inclusion within the conservatory, in accordance with the law, but does not provide the means to achieve it. According to law No. 13,146, July 6, 2015, chapter IV - the right to education:

Art. 27. Education is the right of persons with disabilities, ensuring an inclusive educational system at all levels and lifelong learning, in order to achieve the maximum possible development of their talents and physical, sensory, intellectual and social skills, according to their characteristics, interests and learning needs. (BRASIL, 2015, n. p).

According to the LDB, a support teacher is provided by law in the classrooms, when necessary, and educational assistance can be provided in schools, classes or specialized services when it is not possible to attend regular school (BRASIL, 1996).

Art. 58. Special education means, for the purposes of this Law, the type of school education, preferably offered in the regular school system, for students with special needs. (BRASIL, 1996, n. p)

However, the aspects provided for in the laws do not provide for the conservatory, which does not have the support that regular schools are entitled to. Thus, there is a lack of support from the State, since it des not offer lectures, courses and training on inclusion and how it should be worked on. Teachers are adamant in saying:

No one from the superintendency ever arrived, trained in the right subject, to give a lecture to people. (Teachers’ report).

The state asked to include, but did not explain how. (Teachers’ report).

According to Matos and Mendes (2015), it is the duty of the State to provide all material means and appropriate political actions so that high quality education is achieved. In addition, it must invest in training teachers for adequate teaching, in addition to providing more trained professionals and reconsidering new educational methodologies.

Teachers also point out that they need support with the materials, instruments, necessary for classes, in view of the poor state of conservation of those present at the conservatory. In addition, they point out the lack of sufficient equipment for home loans to students, so that students can train what they have learned in the classroom, given that many do not have the resources to purchase the equipment.

In this way, teachers expose that these processes influence the quality of teaching, given that educators are not prepared and seek other forms of support to facilitate the students’ process of inclusion and learning.

Silva; Almeida (2018) made the same considerations in their study, pointing out that for teachers, one of the biggest challenges was dealing with the precariousness of the school system and comparing the legislation on inclusion and the findings in schools. The authors observed precariousness in the facilities in the schools surveyed, not architectural adaptations that guaranteed accessibility, lack of adequate and sufficient material and instruments. In contrast, the National Guidelines for Special Education in Basic Education (BRASIL, 2001) provide that education systems must guarantee accessibility to students with SEN, eliminating architectural barriers related to facilities, equipment and furniture.

Another point made was the need for students with learning difficulties to have access to the school in a different way; however, teachers do not describe what this format would be like. For Mantoan (2003, p. 67):

Individualized/differentiated teaching for students who have intellectual deficits and learning problems is a solution that does not correspond to inclusive principles, as we cannot differentiate a student by disability. In the inclusive view, differentiated education continues to segregate and discriminate students inside and outside the classroom.

The current gains in relation to the inclusion process are still punctuated, as the student today have access not only to specialized schools, such as the Association of Parents and Friends of the Exceptional Children - APAE, for example, but having earned rights to attend regular school.

Based on the literature findings, Silveira, Enumo and Rosa (2012) state that inclusion is generating good results, but it still needs changes regarding the training of teachers and overcoming difficulties such as the lack of material resources, environmental and school adaptations, in addition to compliance with laws. Teachers report that satisfactory inclusion processes do not occur within the conservatory. Actions without support or preparation, in their view, are closer to exclusion.

Support from family and colleagues

The necessary support for inclusion that students with learning difficulties or disabilities have within the Conservatory is not only linked to the teacher, it also involves colleagues and their own families. Regarding peer support, teachers report that it occurs within the classroom through incentives, patience at their own time, not looking differently, cooperation and physical aid in helping to direct peers through the school as on the stairs, classroom and bathrooms, especially in the case of children with intellectual disabilities and students with visual impairments.

However, the reports also speak of the absence of this support from colleagues, with cases of bullying appearing with students with difficulties, through verbalizations about the intellect and nicknames that cause embarrassment. These actions are subject to intervention by conservatory teachers.

As for family support, it was possible to verify, through the teachers’ reports, a lack of help at home with regard to studies at home, medication control. However, support comes from those responsible for the purchase of the instrument.

In addition, they report realizing that many families do not accept their children’s disabilities and exclusion happens at home and even knowledge and acceptance about the students’ difficulties, since they create expectations about the student that do not match the real situation. Teachers reported a case of a student amputated in an upper limb without the use of assistive technologies and those responsible wanted him to become a pianist.

In addition, Fiorini and Manzini (2014) argue that some families become an obstacle to the effectiveness of the school inclusion process, as they do not accept the child’s disability and, therefore, do not accept that their children participate in activities as they are. suggested.

A study review by Silva; Carvalho (2017) realized that the parents’ attitude is one of the factors that makes school inclusion difficult or impossible, with parental beliefs being one of the determinants for the implementation of the school inclusion program. At the conservatory, there have already been events in which the parents of students filed lawsuits, due to the lack of understanding about the deficiencies of other students and the non-acceptance of the inclusion of students with disabilities with their children. This behavior, also reported by Mantoan (2003), refers to:

[...] a movement of parents of students without disabilities, who do not admit inclusion, because they think that schools will lower and/or further deteriorate the quality of education if they have to receive these new students. (MANTOAN, 2003, p. 21).

From this, teachers verified the need to seek contact for guidance to parents and guardians, since there is an absence of family participation (SILVEIRA; ENUMO; ROSA, 2012). There is also a lack of knowledge from third parties, as a fact described by teachers regarding a report recorded at the conservatory with deaf students requesting that the choir should do it in Libras; however, it is an action that does not match the reality of the school .

Conclusion

According to scientific findings, inclusion brings new concepts about segregation and integration, since it proposes the insertion of all students, without differentiation, considering the capacities and limitations. With regard to special music education, there are current discussions, but still insufficient to enable more robust changes in the access of people with SEN to music education. There were rare findings that dialogued with the music teacher about how the experience of inclusion is more broadly, in their daily practice.

For this, it is important to actively listen to these actors in the process of teaching music and involved in the process of inclusion and cultural accessibility. Little has been discussed about the inclusion process within formal musical education institutions and, mainly, in the conservatorial model.

Through this research, it was possible to conclude that there are facilities and difficulties experienced by teachers in teaching music to students with learning difficulties. The change in the view of the student as a facilitator was portrayed, in addition to the need to create methodologies conducive to classes that can reach all students. It was also portrayed how inclusion in the classrooms provided teachers with learning and gaining experiences.

Another important point reported was the support offered by the family and colleagues, and the welcoming of students in the classroom and the partnership between family and school are shown to facilitate the inclusion process. However, as difficulties, teachers point out that in the institution this support has been shown to be insufficient, with cases of bullying and lack of encouragement from the family in music education.

Likewise, it was identified the need for state support to promote training and professionalization offer to educators, in order to assist in teaching processes to students with SEN. Further studies are suggested from the perspective of music teachers, so as to understand the intrinsic inclusion processes of this universe and that address not only pedagogical practices, but broaden a cultural discussion about accessibility in these spaces of musical formation.

Referências

• BARDIN, Lawrence. Análise de conteúdo Lisboa: Ed 70, 2010.
• BRASIL. Lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996 Lei de diretrizes e bases da educação nacional, Brasilia, DF: [S. l.], 1996. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/L9394.htm Acesso em: 19 jul. 2018.
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/L9394.htm
• BRASIL. Lei nº 13.146, de 6 de Julho de 2015 Lei Brasileira de Inclusão da Pessoa com Deficiência (Estatuto da Pessoa com Deficiência), Brasília, DF: [S. l.], 2015. Disponível em: http://www.punf.uff.br/inclusao/images/leis/lei_13146.pdf Acesso em: 19 jul. 2018.
  » http://www.punf.uff.br/inclusao/images/leis/lei_13146.pdf
• BRASIL. Conselho Nacional de Educação. Resolução n. 2, de 11 de setembro de 2001. Institui Diretrizes Nacionais para a Educação Especial na Educação Básica. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, DF, set. 2001.
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Política nacional de educação especial na perspectiva da educação inclusiva Brasília, DF: Secretaria de Educação Especial, 2008. Disponível em: http://portal.mec.gov.br/arquivos/pdf/politicaeducespecial.pdf Acesso em: 19 jul. 2018.
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/arquivos/pdf/politicaeducespecial.pdf
• CIL, Luciano Ribeiro; GONÇALVES, Taísa Grasiela Gomes Liduenha. Educação musical e educação especial na produção científica de dissertações e teses. Revista Música Hodie, Goiânia, v. 18, n. 2, p. 327-342, 2018.
• CRUZ NETO, Otávio; MOREIRA, Marcelo Rasga; SUCENA, Luiz Fernando Mazzei. Grupos focais e pesquisa social qualitativa: o debate orientado como técnica de investigação. In: ENCONTRO DA ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE ESTUDOS POPULACIONAIS, 8., 2002, Ouro Preto, Anais... Ouro Preto: Unicamp, 2002. Disponível em: http://www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br/docs/anais/pdf/2002/Com_JUV_PO27_Neto_texto.pdf Acesso em: 18 ago. 2017.
  » http://www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br/docs/anais/pdf/2002/Com_JUV_PO27_Neto_texto.pdf
• ESPERIDIÃO, Neide. Educação profissional: reflexões sobre o currículo e a prática pedagógica dos conservatórios. Revista da Abem, Porto Alegre, v. 10, n. 7, p. 69-74, set. 2002.
• FÁVERO, Eugênia Augusta Gonzaga. Alunos com deficiência e seu direito a educação: trata-se de uma educação especial? In: MANTOAN, Maria Teresa Eglér (org.). O desafio das diferenças nas escolas Petrópolis: Vozes, 2008. p. 16-27.
• FERNANDES, José Nune. Pesquisa em educação musical: situação no campo das dissertações e teses dos cursos de pós-graduação stricto sensu em Educação. Revista da Abem, Porto Alegre, v. 5, n. 15, p. 45-57, 2000.
• FIORINI, Maria Luiza Salzani; MANZINI, Eduardo José. Inclusão de alunos com deficiência na aula de educação física: identificando dificuldades, ações e conteúdos para prover a formação do professor. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 20, n. 3, p.387-404, 2014.
• FREIRE, Vanda Lima Bellard. Educação musical no Brasil: tradição e inovação – o Bacharelado. In: ENCONTRO ANUAL DA ABEM, 3., 1994, Salvador. Anais... Salvador: ABEM, 1994. p. 145-159.
• LOURO, Viviane dos Santos. As adaptações a favor da inclusão do portador de deficiência física na educação musical: um estudo de caso. 2003. Dissertação (Mestrado em Música) – Instituto de Artes, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, São Paulo, 2003.
• LOURO, Viviane dos Santos. Educação musical e deficiência: quebrando os preconceitos. Web site da autora [S. l.: s. n.], 2013b. Disponível em: http://files.projeto-bandas.webnode.com/200002729-344a03547d/educacao_musical_e_deficiencia_quebrando_os_preconceitos.pdf Acesso em: 20 ago. 2019.
  » http://files.projeto-bandas.webnode.com/200002729-344a03547d/educacao_musical_e_deficiencia_quebrando_os_preconceitos.pdf
• LOURO, Viviane dos Santos. Educação musical e musicoterapia frente a pessoa com deficiência [S. l.: s. n.], 2013a. Disponível em: https://musicaeinclusao.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/musicoterapia_e_-educacao_-musical.pdf Acesso em: 25 ago. 2019.
  » https://musicaeinclusao.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/musicoterapia_e_-educacao_-musical.pdf
• MANTOAN, Maria Teresa Eglér. Inclusão escolar: o que é? Por que? Como fazer? São Paulo: Moderna, 2003.
• MANTOAN, Maria Teresa Eglér; PRIETO, Rosângela Gavioli; ARANTES, Valéria Amorim. Inclusão escolar: pontos e contrapontos. São Paulo: Summus, 2006.
• MATEIRO, Teresa de Assunção Novo. O comprometimento reflexivo na formação docente. Revista da Abem, Porto Alegre, n. 8, p. 33-38, mar. 2003.
• MATOS, Selma Norberto; MENDES, Enicéia Gonçalves Mendes. Demandas de Professores Decorrentes da Inclusão Escolar. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 21, n. 1, p. 9-22, jan./mar. 2015.
• MELO, Isaac Samir Cortez de. Um estudante cego no curso de licenciatura em música da UFRN: questões de acessibilidade curricular e física. 2011. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação) – Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2011.
• MELO, Rodrigo Alves de; GUERRA SOBRINHO, Lemuel Dourado. Educação musical e inclusão de indivíduos com deficiência visual: realidades e perspectivas. In: CONGRESSO NACIONAL DE EDUCAÇÃO, 2., 2015, Campina Grande. Anais... Campina Grande: Centro Multidisciplinar de Estudos e Pesquisas, 2015. Disponível em: https://www.editorarealize.com.br/artigo/visualizar/15901 Acesso em: 23 fev. 2019.
  » https://www.editorarealize.com.br/artigo/visualizar/15901
• MINAS GERAIS. Secretaria de Estado de Educação de Minas Gerais. Resolução n.o 718, de 18 de Novembro de 2005 Belo Horizonte: SEE, 2005. Disponível em: http://www2.educacao.mg.gov.br/images/documentos/%7B3A0945D0-C293-4E29-BCD0-F6F792689EEE%7D_RESSEEMG_7182005_Conservat%C3%83%C2%B3rios.pdf Acesso em: 18 nov. 2005.
  » http://www2.educacao.mg.gov.br/images/documentos/%7B3A0945D0-C293-4E29-BCD0-F6F792689EEE%7D_RESSEEMG_7182005_Conservat%C3%83%C2%B3rios.pdf
• MONTEIRO, Ana Paula Húngaro; MANZINI Eduardo José. Mudanças nas concepções do professor do ensino fundamental em relação à inclusão após a entrada de alunos com deficiência em sua classe. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 14, n. 1, p. 35-52 , jan./abr. 2008.
• MOREJÓN, Kizzy; DENARI, Fátima Elisabeth. O panorama da inclusão escolar em Santa Maria/RS: resultados preliminares. In: COSTA, Maria da Piedade Resende; DENARI, Fátima Elisabeth (org.). Educação especial: diversidade de olhares. São Carlos: Pedro e João, 2006. p. 75-82.
• MOUSINHO, Renata et al. Mediação escolar e inclusão: revisão, dicas e reflexões. Revista de Psicopedagogia, São Paulo, v. 27, n. 82, p. 92-108, 2010
• OLIVEIRA, Leonardo Augusto Cardoso de; REILY, Lucia Helena. Relatos de Músicos Cegos: Subsídios para o Ensino de Música para Alunos com Deficiência Visual. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 20, n. 3, p. 405-420, jul./set. 2014.
• SANTOS, Cláudia Eboli. A educação musical especial: aspectos históricos, legais e metodológicos. 2008. Dissertação (Mestrado em Música) – Centro de Letras e Artes, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro. 2008.
• SASSAKI, Romeu Kazumi. Inclusão: construindo uma sociedade para todos. 7. ed. Rio de Janeiro: WVA, 2006.
• SILVA, Crislany Viana da; ALMEIDA, Cristiane Maria Galdino de. Educação musical e inclusão: um estudo sobre as práticas de professores de música no ensino fundamental. Revista Educação, Artes e Inclusão, Florianópolis, v. 14, n. 4, p. 78-100, 2018.
• SILVA, Naiane Cristina; CARVALHO, Beatriz Girão Enes. Compreendendo o processo de inclusão escolar no Brasil na perspectiva dos professores: uma revisão integrativa. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 23, n. 2, p.293-308, abr./jun., 2017.
• SILVEIRA, Kelly Ambrósio; ENUMO, Sônia Regina Fiorim; ROSA, Edinete Maria. Concepções de professores sobre inclusão escolar e interações em ambiente inclusivo: uma revisão da literatura. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, Marília, v. 18, n. 1, p. 695-708, out./dez. 2012.
• SOARES, Lisbeth. Programa de apoio pedagógico e inclusão: um estudo de caso. Revista da Abem, Florianópolis, v. 20, n. 27, p. 55-64, jan./jun. 2012.
• SOARES, Lisbeth. Formação e prática docente musical no processo de educação inclusiva de pessoas com necessidades especiais 2006. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação Especial) – Centro de Educação e Ciências Humanas, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, 2006.
• SOUZA, João Francisco de; BATISTA NETO, José; SANTIAGO, Eliete (org.). Prática pedagógica e formação de professores 2. ed. Recife: UFPE, 2012.
• VENDRAMI, Georgeana Lanzini. Conservatório de Música de Ponta Grossa: (re) produção cultural e distinção social (1971-1995). 2010. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação) – Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, 2010.
• VIEIRA, Lia Braga. A escolarização do ensino de música. Pro-Posições, Campinas, v. 15, n. 4, p. 141-150, maio/ago. 2004.

• *
  English version by Norma Ferreira da Cunha.
• 2
  - The use of the term students with special educational needs in this work was chosen, in view of being a term used in official documents, such as Brazil (1996; 2001). The term person or student with disabilities also appears recurrently in the studies used; however, the authors fear that its use here may associate the profile of the students referred to in this study, the existence of a closed diagnosis, a fact that does not occur with all students from the location searched. Another point of reflection is that the existence of the disability itself is not predictive of differentiated learning processes. So, the term is used to designate students who have disabilities, other developmental disorders or none of the cases and who have different needs for learning.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  18 Dec 2020
• Date of issue
  2020

History

• Received
  08 Oct 2018
• Reviewed
  27 Feb 2019
• Accepted
  08 Oct 2019