Acessibilidade curricular: refletindo sobre conceitos e o trabalho pedagógico

Abstract

This work systematizes the research developed within the scope of the Master’s Degree in Education at UFSM. The aim of this study is to analyze how the academic production has been built on the theme of school curriculum access for the target audience of Special Education. Regarding to the methodology, it consists through the qualitative approach, characterizing itself as a bibliographical research. As of problematizations about Curriculum and Special Education, a search was performed in the Catalog of Theses and Dissertations of Coordination of Personal Improvement of Higher Level (CAPES) and in the library of the website of National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Education (ANPED) in the period from 2008 to 2017 with the descriptors: "curricular adequacy"; "curricular adaptation"; "curricular flexibility"; "reasonable adaptations" and "curricular accessibility". It was also used as an analysis material the guiding documents of the educational field. The theoretical framework is structured with the contributions of authors such as: Gimeno Sacristán (2000), Silva (2010); Correia (2016); Haas and Baptista (2014; 2015), Meirieu (1998; 2000) and Garcia (2007). The analytical process was developed based on the content analysis proposed by Bardin (2011), being presented the official documents analysis and, in the sequence, the academic productions. Some highlights of the research results were: evidence of recurrent change in concepts related to curriculum and Special Education in public policies; a concern of the official documents regarding the construction of parallel curriculum for students with disabilities; and that curricular adaptations and flexibilizations carry weaknesses in the pedagogical construction, and, in general, are configured as actions of curricular differentiation for students with disabilities. It is assumed that the constant changes in terms related to the scholar curriculum and Special Education in public policies do not reveal advances in the investment in school pedagogical practices. In this regard, it is necessary to broaden the perspective, realizing the different ways of learning and articulating the work developed in Specialized Educational Service (AEE) and in regular teaching.