Introduction¹

The requirements of the contemporary world are presented in the reality of the school in a very significant manner and have plurality as its essence. In a multifaceted and urgent society, the discussion about difference is increasingly a point of agenda and falls on issues related to different social groups, among which we highlight the disabled.

It is in this context that the different languages gain a place in the Special Education Service (SES) and reinforce the pluralistic educational perspective. In the midst of playful experiences, the rich experience of storytelling has been growing within Special Education. It is relevant pedagogical work and requires an expansion of studies and research, especially for its inclusive educational power and social sensitivity. In this diverse territory, we highlight Special Education in the context of Inclusive Education and the importance of actions developed in the SES in promoting the inclusion of people with disabilities in regular schools.

This essay, the result of a master’s research carried out in the graduate program in Education and Contemporaneity of UNEB, inserted in the discussions of the Research Group on Reading and Storytelling GPELCH, aims to present a discussion on Storytelling in the SES, possibilities, and contributions in the contemporary school context, from the perspective of Special and Inclusive Education. Therefore, we seek to perform an analysis of the foundations of special education and SES in the scope of inclusive education, from the contributions contained in legal frameworks and authors such as ^{Mazzotta (2011}), ^{Mantoan (2015}), ^{Diniz (2009}), among others. Then, we will discuss about Storytelling and its particularities, and, also, its connection with special and inclusive education. To continue our reflection, we will address the question of storytelling in special and inclusive education in contemporary times, in the context of specialised educational care. Finally, the inconclusive considerations concerning the discussion presented in this document will be presented.

Special education and specialized educational service in the context of inclusive education

Studies on Special and Inclusive Education have grown in recent years and highlight the challenges and barriers that are still faced to promote an education that meets all subjects, recognizing the differences in school, especially regarding learning time. According to Figueredo (2010, p. 43), this is likely a consequence of the pro-inclusion movement that is gradually taking place in our educational scenario. For example, some educational institutions have realized that differences are part of social dynamics.

Historically, the predominance of medical vision has focused on promoting only the integration of people with disabilities in the social, economic, and political spheres. According to ^{Campbell (2009}, p. 133),

In the past, meeting the special educational needs of people with disabilities underscored only their limitations and the resources needed to repair, segregated spaces that would supposedly ensure adequate care and the opportunity to learn. The focus was more on pathologies than on the education itself or the necessary resources that led to learning, and the goal was rehabilitation.

There is a trajectory of exclusion and inequalities that generated struggles and search for emancipation and rights denied to people with disabilities. Currently, although the inclusion of these people is a right guaranteed by law, it still translates as a challenge today, since the medical view focusing on the injury of the body still prevails today and, according to Silva (2015, p. 71) although the Brazilian educational policy proposes and recommends school inclusion, students with disabilities continue to be categorized even in regular classes. ^{Moura (2015}, p.12) warns us that

Defending inclusive proposals committed to “a human treatment” requires the understanding of the current regression of individuals and their attachment to the technique, replacing the understandings about the difference/ disability from another angle, now not only by suppression via disposal, but by planned or prior deletion.

Throughout history, the concept of disability has presented various accounts. The religious view that considered disability as divine blessing or misfortune was contested by the narrative of the biomedical model that related the causes of bodies with impediments linked to factors related to genetics, degenerative diseases, in traffic accidents or aging. With the growing discussions about social rights, the social model recognizes that the values, attitudes, and practices that discriminate the body are what produce the barriers faced by these subjects and are issues that must be analyzed in political terms and not biomedical (^{DINIZ, BARBOSA and SANTOS, 2009}, p. 66).

We can emphasize that institutions, as far as accessibility aspects are concerned, are generally not ready to take in students with disabilities, revealing a disguised pattern of exclusion. In a survey conducted in Brazilian cities, Silva (2015, p.71), states that

despite the significant changes of educational agents in relation to inclusive education as an educational policy in Brazil, the reality presented in the schools surveyed is still an obstacle that is imposed as a disguised form of exclusion: schools without adaptations in the architectural structure, ignoring the necessary accessibility; lack of adapted materials and or teaching resources; poor monitoring of specialized support centers or absence of multifunctional resource rooms; Meritocratic pedagogical conceptions that promotes the ‘best’, linking the belief that ‘inclusion students’ delay collective learning processes in class.

As a space for knowledge construction, the school must be the facilitator of learning, seeking resources and strategies capable of establishing an environment conducive to the acquisition of skills and necessary competencies, because inclusion implies a change in educational perspective, since it does not only reach students with disabilities and those who have difficulty learning, but all the others, so that they can achieve success in the general educational stream (^{MANTOAN, 2015}, p.28).

In this context, some documents are configured as important legal milestones to establish the guidelines for special and inclusive education in our country, such as the Law of Directives and Bases (LDB), Law 9394/96, art. 58, which establishes special education as “the type of school education, preferably offered in the regular education network, for students with special needs, being also ensured the right of access to materials, technological resources as well as qualified teachers to work in this modality (BRASIL, 2020, p. 40). According to the Federal Constitution of 1988, in article 205 (BRASIL, 1988, p.123),

education, a right of all and duty of the State and of the family, will be promoted and encouraged with the collaboration of society, aiming at the full development of the person, his preparation for the exercise of citizenship, and his qualification for work.

Thus, the right to which this document refers to, also encompasses people with disabilities, ensuring these individuals access to regular classrooms and other services that ensure access to learning that meets their specificities.

As far as the educational area is concerned, the inclusion of students with disabilities has brought with it a demand that used to be outside the school walls, because what used to be distant from educational issues has slowly given way to a concern with the learning of these students, driven by the context that advocates the right of all to education in recent years.

Although the Brazilian legislation assures the “Education for all”, such wish is still a utopia, as it faces obstacles and challenges due to the several barriers in the political, economic, and social context. Many are the barriers faced by people with disabilities regarding accessibility, whether architectural, attitudinal, methodological, instrumental, programmatic, digital, communicative, or natural. It is evident that

It is necessary to propose measures aimed at ensuring the rights achieved, improving the quality of education, investing in a broad training of educators, removing barriers, providing material and human resources in a movement to transform reality to reverse the exclusion of children, young people, and adults with and without disabilities in the education system (^{CAMPBELL, 2009}, p. 12)

The Law 13.146/2015, which establishes the Brazilian law for the inclusion of people with disabilities (Statute of the Person with Disability), considers a person with disability to be whom has a long-term physical, mental or sensory impairment, which in interaction with various barriers, may have their full and effective participation in school and society restricted. In this document, Special Education is established as an educational modality aimed at attending people with disabilities, mainly in the regular school system.

According to the Special Education Policy, from the perspective of Inclusive Education (2007, p. 9), Special Education becomes part of the pedagogical proposal of regular schools, promoting the meeting of the special educational needs of students with disabilities, global developmental disorders, and high abilities/ super ability. Thus, Special Education acts in coordination with regular schooling, guiding to meet the special educational needs of these students.

The Constitution understands that special education services are those that complement, but do not replace, what is taught in the classroom to all students with and without disabilities, ensuring the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular schools. It also determines that this service must be available at all levels of education (from basic to higher education), aimed at eliminating barriers that people with disabilities have in relating to the external environment (^{CAMPBELL, 2009}, p. 137).

Athwart the National Education Council, through Resolution CNE/CEB nº 4/2009, which establishes the Operational Guidelines for Specialized Education Service in Basic Education, states that:

Art. 5, The AEE is carried out, as a priority, in the multi-functional resource rooms of the school itself or in another regular school, in the opposite shift of the schooling, not being a substitute to the regular classes, and may be carried out in a specialized educational service center of a specialized public institution or of a non-profit community, confessional, or philanthropic institution, in agreement with the education secretary or equivalent body of the states, the Federal District, or the municipalities.

Specialized Educational Service is a service of Special Education that identifies, develops, and organizes pedagogical and accessibility resources that eliminate barriers for the full participation of students, considering their specific needs. In this context, the SES teacher is the person responsible for planning and managing the necessary interventions that mitigate the barriers and, thus, provide disabled students with full participation in regular education, within their specificities. According to Article 3 of Decree 7611 of November 2011, the SES has the following main objectives:

Thus, in this service, students develop skills different from the curricular contents of the regular classroom. Such skills are necessary to achieve the goal of overcoming barriers to full participation, considering their specific needs.

According to ^{Leite; Borelli and Martins (2013}, p. 82), it is observed “a gap in the consolidation of curricular educational proposals that subsidize teaching alternatives and procedures capable of promoting the academic advancement of students with disabilities” (sic). For this to happen, there is an urgent need to offer resources and pedagogical strategies that contribute to the implementation of the principles of public policies that regulate special education. In the research “Prejudice of the Excluded” in inclusive education, Silva (2015, p. 71) states that

Despite the significant changes of educational agents in relation to inclusive education as an educational policy in Brazil, the reality presented in the schools surveyed still constitutes an obstacle that imposes itself as a disguised form of exclusion: schools without adaptations in the architectural structure, ignoring the necessary accessibility; absence of adapted materials and or teaching resources; precarious follow-up of specialized support centers or absence of multifunctional resource rooms; meritocratic pedagogical conceptions that promotes the ‘best’, binding the belief that ‘inclusion students’ slow down the collective learning processes in class.

As a space for knowledge construction, the school should be the facilitator of learning, seeking resources and strategies capable of establishing an environment conducive to the acquisition of skills and competencies needed, hence the position of Montoan becomes relevant, once it argues that “inclusion implies a change in educational perspective, as it does not only reach students with disabilities and those who have difficulty learning, but all the others, in order to achieve success in the general educational chain” (^{MANTOAN, 2015}, p. 28).

In this context, there are several attempts to better serve these people, going beyond the predominance of a merely legalistic character of complying with the law of access to school spaces or welfare. However, the quality, as well as the guarantee of the rights to learn of these individuals fall short, due to several factors, both external to the school and internal and this occurs, notably when these subjects, as students, come out of anonymity and enter the school spaces, expanding the current debates on Special and Inclusive education.

With the access of popular classes, excluded and marginalized groups, questions arise about the paths to follow so that knowledge is transmitted and there is recognition of the heterogeneity of this space, because education is a non-negotiable right and it is not enough for individuals to have access to it, real conditions for permanence are necessary. Thus, we start from the premise that everyone can learn and that people do not learn in the same way, at the same time, as it is usually understood, based on a modern ideal, based on Enlightenment values, within a thought criticized by ^{Santos, Apoema, and Arapiraca (2018}, p. 108) that “It [the school] is constituted as the place of guard and transmission of knowledge considered essential to humanity, recognized, fundamentally, by the elites and therefore, by the dominant cultures.

Corroborating with the criticism of the authors, we argue that the school needs to become not only a space of production for the future, of the labor that produces, that qualifies to offer the capitalist dictates, conditions to support their ideas and desires. In this sense, it is convenient to break with the idea that it is a locus of demarcation of what is normal and acceptable, an ideal of homogeneity and standardization.

The offer of an education that caters to people with disabilities goes through the sieve of promoting the rights of the marginalized and disadvantaged. However, it encounters obstacles on its way when facing stigmatization and segregation, sometimes with a welfare character, historically marked by the service or attention to individuals with disabilities focused on a therapeutic, welfare character, as stated by ^{Mazzotta (2011}, p. 18). Special and inclusive education needs to focus on social justice and not on compensation or welfare.

When we deal with the inclusion of people with disabilities in school, we must consider the differences, but also the learning possibilities of these subjects. This fact is in line with the conception of disability defended here. Disability is not an impediment. The denial of the abilities and potentialities of individuals by subtracting their right to powerful relationships with the sharing of knowledge through appropriate mediations are constituted as barriers. Contrary to this idea, we agree with ^{Costa (2006}, p. 5) when he defends that

The education of the student with educational needs would thus presuppose the passage from a therapeutic pedagogy, which focuses on the deficits of the students, to a creatively positive pedagogy, whose vision is prospective, that is, a pedagogy that aims at the development of the student, that invests in his possibilities.

Thus, it is valid to ratify the need to consolidate the inclusive school, a place where differences are valued, and everyone receives attention for their specific needs. Everyone can learn together, regardless of their differences and specificities. In this sense, the concept presented by ^{Campbell (2009}, p. 141) is the closest to the ideas defended in this text:

Inclusive Education is the recognition of the need to move towards a school that includes all students, celebrates difference, responds to individual needs, and supports learning, underpinned by the assumption that students can learn and be part of school and community life.

Although the struggles for the promotion of education for all are expressive, there is still the predominance of the pathological view focused on people with disabilities, that is, it is categorized according to the disability presented and ignores the diversity and potentialities of the subjects. Thus, the risk of falling into a determination of the other’s capacity is imminent and worrisome, as it has in school education its legitimization tool. Another pertinent issue consists in the place where these individuals speak, who often have their demands presented by other subjects, which produces ambiguities and conflicts between what is necessary and to whom such claims are destined.

Storytelling and education

Storytelling is already part of the lives of all human beings. Since the beginning, the oral tradition of storytelling was used for different purposes, such as transmitting teachings, socializing other stories, defending the roots of a people, among other objectives. As Sisto (2012, p. 83) argues, “Man is practically born telling stories. He is part of a history that precedes him and that will certainly succeed him. Life is organized as a story, it has a common thread, a timeline and evolutionary line”.

We grow up listening to and telling stories. It is part of our trajectory, of our constitution as social subjects, even if they are stories mediated by television, radio, or paper technologies and, more recently, by devices connected to the Internet. In this path, sometimes by the door or by the fire, sometimes through invented machinery, this ancestral path marks human tradition and goes beyond the walls of the formal school, even in our Eurocentric society.

^{Busatto (2013}, p. 85), tells us that before writing, the knowledge of humanity was transmitted through orality, a practice that dates to ancient societies of oral culture, cultures that ignored writing. The fact is that part of the culture is of ancestral origin, so storytelling is a daily practice. Human beings constantly share stories, daily life events, which are narrated and perpetuated by successive generations. Thus, this practice reaches the educational spaces loaded with orality, but intertwined with writing. In any case, telling and listening to stories enters other places and broadens its scope, reaching educational spaces such as classrooms, hospital, and therapeutic environments. However, in our society ruled by the liquidity of information, in a frenetic rhythm of consumption,

The individual becomes a match for his or her work power and ability to perform tasks. An environment develops in which competition and isolation predominate, and in which the information acquired is not to be shared, since achievements are necessarily personal. The reproduction of marketable techniques, ideologies and desires takes the place of the production of actions aimed at meeting broader social interests. What is typical of the machine is emphasized in man: reproduction and, not paradoxically, his impulses as a producer are suppressed (^{MATIAS, 2010}, p. 75)

Apparently, in a society of urgencies, storytelling seems to lose its value, due to the difficulty that individuals have, to give up their attention to listen to somebody else. However, even in this scenario of unbridled production, storytelling acquires attention and looks from various audiences that understand the powerful dimensions of this practice that go beyond entertaining or introducing a school content.

Storytelling, through oral narrative, is present and resists in contemporary times. However, we must consider that the places and the form of storytelling have changed, reaching diversified spaces, through technological resources and with great comprehensiveness. As ^{Costa (2015}, p. 38) states,

Tradition is present in these references to the past, to what has already been said, to “who told me was...”. But the contemporary is so alive and interferes in such a way in the process of creation and vitality of the text that it cannot be ignored. The art of storytelling is contemporary and alive. The forms change, but man still cherishes in his daily life a good story. That is where he recognizes himself.

Such configuration requires changes and new perspectives that reshape the position of the storyteller. Tradition intersects with contemporaneity and adds elements that interfere in the constitution of the storyteller subject. ^{Santos (2018}, p. 114) presents who is the contemporary storyteller as follows:

The contemporary storyteller is the one who, having no relation with tradition, constitutes his repertoire and his practice, through contemporary devices or instrumentalities, such as training workshops and books, in integration with other artistic languages, such as theater and literature itself.

According to the definition above, the contemporary storyteller, in our society, seeks, through different supports, to constitute himself as such, through dinstint supports, especially in what refers to teachers who are, as well, storytellers, who take stories to their classrooms. In the educational context, the importance of storytelling is relevant due to the benefits that this action provides, for, according to Abramovich (1997, p. 17), “it means to arouse the imagination to have its curiosity answered regarding so many questions, and to find other ideas to solve questions - as the characters did? - is to stimulate to draw, to music, to theatricality, to play... After all, everything can be born from a text”.

This form of teaching and art, besides still happening in many communities and situations with people gathered around campfires to hear the stories, has also gained new contours, even in Eurocentric societies like ours, which also makes use of the most varied technological possibilities that present themselves.

Regardless of how it is presented, the art of storytelling instigates creativity, orality, imagination, and stimulates appreciation for reading in its broadest and most current sense, through its playful aspects. According to Busatto (2006, p. 58), we can think of the imaginary as a vast field of possibilities, which provides, among many things, the understanding and acceptance of different levels of perception of reality, opening itself to a participatory system, plural, sensitive, and susceptible to other logics.

As ^{Busatto (2013}, p. 25) points out, storytelling, or oral storytelling, allows the subject that tells and the subject that listens to a contact with other dimensions of their being and the reality that surrounds them. More than just entertainment, it is an action that open doors to creativity by allowing the reconstruction of stories and their personal re-signification. Thus, it may enable access to knowledge in a more fruitful way to the set of students with typical and atypical disabilities.

The author also highlights the benefits of this practice, when she states that listening to stories triggers something that was forgotten by the urgency of modernity, because it is no longer experienced, and from which it was separated, perhaps unknowingly, and cast into the mists of time with blindfolds on, concerned only with being-in-action, and never out-of-action, triggering other ways of seeing (^{BUSATTO, 2013}, p. 79).

The choice of the story to be told must go through a proper selection, which meets who will be directed and the aesthetic/pedagogical objectives. Sisto (2012, p. 91) warns us about the need to choose a story appropriate to the interests of listeners, related to what they are living or would like to live. In this sense, we ratify the importance of the choice and preparation of the story to be told, having in mind the intended audience. For the story to reach the subjects, it may be necessary to have unique resources and strategies that promote accessibility, which is the right of all subjects. Finally, storytelling encompasses many more aspects that must be considered, among them its literary, artistic, and aesthetic character that makes it unique and significant. According to Ferreira and Oliveira (2020, p. 70),

Storytelling can be conceived as art, because it carries meanings by proposing a dialogue between the different dimensions of being. Such understanding brings us to the diversity of purposes involved in the spreading of the story, which goes through the psychological, intellectual, and spiritual formation of the human being.

According to Freitas (2016, p. 70), this pedagogical-artistic practice can come to meet the affective, emotional needs and the unique characteristics of each subject and possibilities for each person to develop their learning. For subjects with disabilities, this becomes an ally to inclusion once it equates everyone to the same tune of history. Thus, the path of transformation of the school, which was traditionally set up to serve a few and became a place of exclusion, gains an inclusive terrain, in which everyone has the right to learn through the playfulness that runs through subjects with and without disabilities. This is a contemporary and necessary demand.

Against this perspective, the ingress of storytelling in school territory presented many difficulties. According to ^{Santos, Apoema, and Arapiraca (2018}, p. 112), without necessarily clear pedagogical functions, many of these moments are dedicated to distracting children or just quieting them, because the story, in this case, is seen essentially in its playful, entertainment function.

A school that bases its foundations on practices that focus on standardized contents and assumes a homogeneous vision is in conflict and in need of reorganization in face of the current changes. In this context, storytelling presents itself as a possibility to provide a collective space for dialogue, construction, and sensitive listening. In a society increasingly based on the speed of written and spoken information, it is necessary to consider the need for moments of listening and creation based on the imaginary. According to Busatto, nowadays the classrooms have been opened to storytellers who are increasingly in demand. According to the author, “perhaps this is an attempt to recover the subjective look at life, threatened by the pragmatism of contemporaneity, and the possibility of opening space for the creative imagination” (^{BUSATTO, 2013}, p. 37).

Storytelling and specialized educational service

The school, from a perspective of Special and Inclusive Education, is constituted as a formal space for building knowledge and promoting learning for everyone. As a space for knowledge construction, the school must be the learning mediator, seeking resources and strategies capable of establishing an environment conducive to the acquisition of skills and competencies needed by the individual to deal with everyday tasks.

It is worth mentioning that the inclusion proposal, having as heritage the integration model supported by the normal/abnormal concepts, in which the student goes to school just to socialize with the others without having a concern with the learning of the atypical subjects, does not accomplish the educational proposals for Inclusion. This reality is still predominant in our country. As Miranda (2011, p. 96) points out

The implementation of inclusive education is still quite deficient in Brazil. In addition, it has often been mistakenly confused with school integration, a previous proposal that preached the prior preparation of students for entry into mainstream education, so that students with special needs would be able to keep up with their “non-special” peers.

According to the proposal of inclusion in the school environment, it is undeniable that there is a need for pedagogical actions that are characterized as inclusive, considering that everyone has the right to education and that everyone can learn regardless of their disabilities. In this way, inclusion implies a change in educational perspective, as it affects not only students with disabilities and those who have difficulty learning, but all people involved in the learning space and who seek success in the general educational chain (^{MANTOAN, 2015}, p. 28).

Thus, as part of the special and inclusive education policy, the SES, with its daily performance in multifunctional resource rooms, is an important instrument for the inclusion of people with disabilities in the school space. The activities developed in this environment attend specifically to each subject and, thus, provide the necessary subsidies for the elimination of barriers that prevent their full participation in the school context.

In the SES, students develop skills that help them acquire the curricular contents of the regular classroom. Such skills are necessary for them to achieve the goal of overcoming barriers to their full participation, considering their specific needs. In this sense, it is important to note that to provide these services, the proposed pedagogical actions need to be structured according to the needs of each individual.

Essentially the actions of the SES are developed so that skills and competencies are worked in this space through various methodologies and resources. Among the various activities developed in the SES, we can bring as an example the use of games that promote skills such as knitting, folding, tying, cutting, activities that emphasize the sequence of ideas and logical sequence, based on images, listening to stories, and speaking. The offer of diversified activities that promote the expansion of vocabulary, symbolic development, problem solving, imitation and symbolic play, and the association of ideas. Furthermore, establishing relations between oral and written language, the use of varied forms of communication are some aspects that must be considered in the activities with students with intellectual disabilities to contribute to their autonomy and learning, respecting their particularities.

Within these actions, storytelling presents itself as a very rich practice, providing several benefits, notably for the development of language, as it promotes the development of skills necessary for the autonomy of the subjects, such as: imagination, socialization, and the constitution of personality. Moreover, for being an action that includes people with and without disabilities, it constitutes an important interaction space among students. When we give students the opportunity to listen to stories, we can take advantage of the several contributions that emanate from it, among other aspects, for the development of speech, interaction among subjects, besides involving the social and affective aspects, extremely relevant aspects for learning, especially for people with disabilities.

Thus, Storytelling presents itself as a powerful proposal in the specialized educational service, by offering possibilities of work also with people with disabilities, presenting various forms and different ways so that communication is established, and interpersonal relationships are made possible. Even in the face of increasing technological resources and accessibility, storytelling can establish a path to awaken relevant aspects regarding special education, being an ally to teaching, considering the powerful contributions it provides.

But one must consider that, when it comes to an oral practice, the storyteller may face some communication barriers that need to be considered. People with disabilities have specificities that need to be considered in the process to ensure that they are offered the right of accessibility. In general, the storyteller must prepare the story, take care of the performance, and provide a favorable environment for storytelling, considering to whom the story will be told. His body, voice, look, pauses, and resources guarantee a promising scenario that reaches everyone, regardless of their physical condition.

For adults, who already have a trajectory of varied interactions, dealing with certain events and understanding situations that affect us is often a difficult task. For children and people with disabilities, for example, who don’t have life experiences, this understanding and knowledge of self requires more effort and the development of complex emotional skills. We argue that this is where the greatest contribution of storytelling in the specialized educational service lies, for the stories expand the repertoire of emotional experiences when dealing with expressive aspects for the construction of knowledge and development of skills, competencies, and emotional and attitudinal issues. As Sunderland (2005, p. 31) argues

The use of the therapeutic story also shows how to enlist the help of imagination to deal with feelings that are too difficult. In general, imagination has more to say about feelings than cognition. In times of emotional stress, mental rumination tends to stir up the same responses, anxieties, and inner critical voices.

The author argues that stories are therapeutic for being able to expand the repertoire of feelings and sensations through the experience that storytellers and listeners exchange during storytelling. In the specialized educational service environment, this performative-therapeutic action allows several benefits for the construction of abilities of people with disabilities, as it may enable through its characteristics, the interaction between subjects, communication, play, and stimulation of psychomotor, cognitive, emotional, and physical aspects.

Inconclusive considerations

Storytelling is a literary, aesthetic, performative, therapeutic, and pedagogical experience that is not limited to listening and speaking and that crosses the human being. It is then convenient to think of it as a broad possibility, decentered from the action synthesized in listening to the storyteller. It is an action that transcends the cognize and can access unknown spaces. From the perspective of inclusive education, in which the school must be accessible to all, storytelling fulfills the role of accessing all subjects, as the same story touches different people in different ways, reaching different signs.

In the SES space, storytelling is an activity that offers a variety of possibilities, which benefits the pedagogical practice from the perspective of inclusive education since it can encompass different objectives and resources to meet everyone’s needs. Thus, the participation of students in storytelling moments allows the development of essential skills for the construction of abilities, with a wide and varied scope.

As part of this process, the specialized educational service can contribute to the production of resources and strategies to be used in storytelling practices, considering the specificities and functionality of each student.

In a literate culture, in which productivity is highly valued, how can people with disabilities achieve a place in this collective considering equity and inclusion? In this multifaceted society full of urgencies, accessibility and individual rights of the subjects are the agenda of several movements that seek to find in the difference the equals and thus add their voices to echo their claims and their place to speak.

Thinking about the practices and actions aimed at assisting people with disabilities fosters important reflections that lead to higher quality of educational actions provided in the multipurpose resource rooms. However, the struggle for a quality education for all goes through political issues that should not be ignored in a scenario where the naturalized individualism stands out and there is still the appropriation of agendas and social demands to gain benefits in society, which highlights the need for dialogue and collective construction of proposals for the school that are urgent and necessary.

Inclusive education opens the possibilities of evidence and claims the rights that are pertinent to all individuals. In this sense, the critical stance towards the inclusion proposals is salutary, the encouragement of practices that awaken the learning of typical and atypical subjects corroborates for the breaking of obstacles that segregate and exclude those who are different.

In addition to all that has been discussed above, we cannot lose sight of the fact that, in the process of constitution of the subject in the social context, storytelling contributes to the construction of the subject’s cultural and social identity, whether or not they are disabled, since through stories we learn more about ourselves, we learn about interacting with other people, and we learn about our ancestry, in this journey provided by stories of timelessness and cultural displacement.

Complexity in human relationships will always exist, it is part of being human, because we always make the opposite movements of aggregating and segregating. However, it is necessary to discover the key to enter that place, being part of a whole without leaving individuality. Regarding this, ^{Santos, Apoema, and Arapiraca (2018}, p. 299) clarify about storytelling in a broader sense, without excluding its political and cultural essence, defending that oral narrative, besides its aesthetic, entertainment character, also has political dimensions and, from them, the immense web of possibilities that it can weave in the classroom, feeding, even, the popular culture itself, as, throughout the centuries, written texts have fed oral texts and vice-versa, in interchangeable movements, allowing experimentation, but within a given clarity in the course, fulfilling what is the hope of the school and of the tales: the transformation of reality.

When we bring ST into the multi-functional resource room environment, we are providing an opportunity for the expansion of skills, by stimulating reflection, imagination, critical thinking, questioning, speaking, and communication, in addition to providing interaction, since the stories touch people indiscriminately, regardless of their specificities, but respecting their differences.

From the discussions presented, we can ratify the importance of studies to be carried out on the binomial SES and Storytelling, so that they can raise paths and possibilities to be adopted and improved in SES, to increasingly promote the inclusion of students with disabilities. There is a long way to go, so that this pedagogical/performative/therapeutic action can increasingly enter the spaces of the multipurpose resource rooms and be the focus of studies and research, which will promote discussions in greater proportion and academic productions on the subject.