4.1 The modulation of the conduct for the constitution of subjects capable of investing in the development of their individual competences

With regard to the development of skills and competences through the promotion of learning conditions for people with disabilities, it is verified that the State has been developing actions to guarantee educational spaces that foster and promote the enhancement of individual capacities. These strategies, either alone or in a network, will be put into operation with the objective of guaranteeing to each one of the subjects placed under the State performance spectrum their permanent inclusion in the market game (^{Lopes, Lockmann, & Hattge, 2013}). In the context of a society regulated by the need for participation of all, the State has reiterated the need for: Enhancement of educational systems, aiming at guaranteeing conditions of access, permanence, participation and learning, by offering services and accessibility resources that eliminate barriers and promote full inclusion; Adoption of individualized and collective measures in environments that maximize the academic and social development of students with disabilities, favoring access, permanence, participation and learning in educational institutions. (^{Law no. 13,146, 2015}, article 28).

The practices that have been organized and developed by the State demarcate the pertinence of the promotion of an inclusive educational system aimed at achieving the academic and social development of students with disabilities. The investment in the actions promoted in the school space is directed to the guarantee of personal development, because to enter the economic game of neoliberalism, we need learning so that there is an investment in our lives and we can multiply our human capital (^{Sikilero, 2016}).

In a rationality in which the need for a permanent investment in people’s own abilities prevails, it is inferred that the good apprentice is the one who knows his/her strengths and weaknesses, and is aware of his/her remaining educational needs (^{Simons & Masschelein, 2015}). It is in this logic that the modulation of the conduct operates for the constitution of singular subjects and that the learning must be potentialized, in such a way that it is considered necessary: make learning the center of schools, ensuring the time it takes for all to learn; to reprove repetition; make room for cooperation, dialogue, solidarity, creativity and critical thinking to be practiced by their teachers, managers, staff and students, as these are minimal skills for the exercise of true citizenship; valuing and continuously training the teacher, so that he/she can update him/herself and teach with quality (^{Ropoli, Mantoan, Santos, & Machado, 2010}).

In this process, the school, in articulation with other sectors and in order to involve the entire school community, is the institution responsible for promoting and developing learning conditions for all subjects, regardless of the singularities of each one. The articulation, in the school inclusion policy, takes significant contours in modulating the conduct of people with disabilities, since it is considered a possibility to establish the governance of the life of children and young people, so that they have the opportunity to learn and to remain active and participate in society (^{Sikilero, 2016}).

In the promotion of actions that enable the development of people with disabilities in their capacities, the State provides articulated service network, with intersectoral action, at different levels of complexity, in order to meet the specific needs of the person with disability (^{Law no. 13,146, 2015}, article 15, point IV). In the practices developed in the school environment, it is recommended that inclusion policy promotes interaction among classmates, collaborative learning, solidarity among students and among students and teacher (^{Resolution no. 4, 2010}).

From the Salamanca Statement from 1994, in the development of actions that provide a gradual process of inclusion of people with disabilities, the school occupies a central position. The school space is configured as one that must educate all students, facing the situation of school exclusion of children with disabilities, those living on the streets or working, gifted, socially disadvantaged and those with linguistic, ethnic or cultural policies (^{National Policy on Special Education in the Perspective of Inclusive Education [PNEEPEI], 2008})⁵.

In order to manage the conduct of people with disabilities so that they can participate in the logic of a society organized by neoliberal economic rationality, providing access, participation and learning for all is central to the practices developed in the SES. It should be pointed out that the general rule of a neoliberal state is the rule of non-exclusion. To ^{Foucault (2008a, p. 277)}, “the whole society must be permeated by this economic game, and that the essential role of the state is to define the economic rules of the game and make sure they are in fact applied”. In order to do so, “it is up to society and to the rules of the game imposed by the state to ensure that no one is excluded from this game” (^{Foucault, 2008a}, p. 278). Access, participation and learning are principles that mobilize practices that lead the conduct of the population within a neoliberal rationality.

We understand that the articulation, both between different sectors that are beyond educational issues, and between the proposal of work of the common classroom and the one of the Specialized Educational Service, confers regimes of truth in the development of the potentialities of the subjects. By seeking to maximize the positive elements of each and minimizing the risks that may intervene in learning, technologies are organized to produce the behaviors that this logic requires. This perspective uses education as a productive and privileged space for investments in human capital to be made effective.

As a possibility of investing in the development and expansion of the potential of the student with disability, standardization and control technologies are the processes inherent in individual development. For this, as a vital strategy in the perspective of a control society, it is preponderant that the Case study planning, elaboration of a specialized educational service plan, organization of resources and services of accessibility and availability and pedagogical usability of assistive technology resources are evaluated (^{Law no. 13,146, 2015}, article 28, point VII).

In the unfolding of practices that aim at the school inclusion of people with disabilities, the planning and its effective implementation are carried out in partnership between the management of the school, the common classroom teacher and the SES specialist teacher. In the SES’s approach, the objective is to complement and/or supplement the training of students with a view to their autonomy and independence in and out of school. Thus, the teacher who works in the SES, in multifunctional resource rooms, unlike the Special Education training - offered until the mid-1990s to work with students categorized in a certain disability group - must now have an initial training that enables him/her for the exercise of teaching complemented with a later training in SES, and must know and understand the forms of learning of the subjects that compose the public of Special Education.

In the bias of the school inclusion policy, actions of political and ethical conduct are forms of being that align with the current social model, in which behaviors and conduct are inclined to principles of autonomy, participation and development of individual skills as learners. The responsibility of the public authority in this regard is to adopt supportive measures that favor the development of linguistic, cultural, vocational and professional aspects, taking into account the talent, creativity, skills and interests of students with disabilities (^{Law no. 13,146, 2015}, Article 28, point IX). In modulating the conduct of the person with disability through investments for the development of individual competences, we are inclining towards processes of pluralization of the constitution of the learner. Thus, specific strategies (FM - Modulated Frequency, Audiodescription, Sign Language, Assistive Technologies), which aim to strengthen the conditions of participation in the unique needs of people with disabilities, are the technologies used to promote autonomy, participation with a view to the effectiveness of learning and individual development. Based on this approach, in the following section, we direct our analysis to investments in accessibility with the aim of forming participative behaviors.

4.2 Accessibility as a strategy to minimize the social risk of exclusion and to constitute participatory, autonomous, flexible and lifelong learning subjects

In order to guarantee accessibility, it is foreseen, in the policy of inclusion of people with disabilities, a pedagogical action that meets the specifics of each student: Education systems should organize the conditions of access to spaces, pedagogical resources and communication that favor the promotion of learning and the appreciation of differences, in order to meet the educational needs of all students. Accessibility must be ensured through the elimination of architectural, urban, building barriers - including facilities, equipment and furniture - and in school transport, as well as barriers to communication and information (^{PNEEPEI, 2008}).

In this context, among the actions implemented by the State to promote learning in order to meet the needs of all students, are those that recommend to implement a national program for the restructuring and acquisition of equipment aimed at the expansion and improvement of the physical network of public schools that work in the education of young people and adults integrated into professional education, guaranteeing accessibility to the person with disability (^{Law no. 13,005, June 25, 2014}).

The policy of school inclusion has produced practices that aim to respect the singularity and the individual competences of individuals with disabilities - as well as the competences of all the others - to the constitution of apprenticeships. Nowadays, respect for individuality has supported actions for the development of an apprentice conduct, which must be flexible and permanently active, and work collaboratively for the future in a decentralized world. In this sense, school inclusion in the context of the learning society has established the need for investments in the permanent formation of all and unfolded in a network that encompasses a series of knowledges to consolidate and legitimize investment in lifelong learning. Therefore, in modulating behaviors, the contemporary subject is the one that, in a permanent movement for his/her development, accumulates learning outcomes in the individual’s learning path (^{Simons & Masschelein, 2015}).

In a discursive regime that articulates inclusive education and the need for lifelong education, investments in the order of accessibility interfere in the constitution of governable subjects within a neoliberal rationality. In this rationality, the State, in its centrality, is thought of as responsible for the social construction of new needs and greater competences (^{Veiga-Neto, 2000}). In view of this political configuration, the subjective constitution of people with disabilities, based on a logic that calls for permanent participation, has modulated their conduct so that each one can participate and share the common spaces of learning in a productive way.

Driving the conduct of people with disabilities in a neoliberal governmentality is based on two fundamental rules: the first is to remain permanently active, and the second is to ensure that everyone is included, even if at different levels of participation (^{Lopes, 2009}). According to Lopes, for these rules to become constitutive of contemporary lifestyles, it is relevant that everyone be educated to enter the game, to remain in it, and to desire such permanence (^{Lopes, 2009}). In the analysis concerning the policy of school inclusion, we observed that the modulation of participatory and autonomous behaviors has been mainly due to accessibility.

In this logic, the State strengthens itself by operating as a social mediator that articulates and creates strategies capable of managing the life of each individual and the collective of the population (^{Lopes & Fabris, 2013}) As a mediator, the development of practices that aim at improving the life of the population, on the part of the State, is aligned with the need for mobilization of all. Thus, in one of the ways of developing articulated actions to promote accessibility, the State calls for active participation of the entire school community, considering the point of view and appreciation of the family, students, management team, SES and common room teachers (Documento Orientador: Programa escola acessível⁶, 2013).

In the development of practices aimed at modulating the conduct of people with disabilities for participation and learning, the actions foreseen in the Accessible School Program have been designed as an effective measure to eliminate barriers and promote autonomy for the target population of special education (Documento Orientador: Programa escola acessível, 2013). Regarding actions for the government of the life of people with disabilities to become autonomous and participative, we point out, from Foucault, that governing subjects do not demand that they be forced “to do what the governor wants; it is always a versatile equilibrium, with complementarity and conflicts between techniques which assure the coercion and processes through which the self is constructed or modified by himself” (^{Foucault, 2011}, p. 156). Thus, in the governance of conduct by the bias of a balance point, participation is a condition for the autonomy of the subject. In other words, in modulating the behavior of people with disabilities, participation is one of the basic conditions for the promotion of autonomy, and this process, within the analysis of the policy of school inclusion, is developed from accessibility.

Therefore, in the disposition of discursive regimes that inscribe the inclusion of people with disabilities in neoliberal governmentality, relations between inclusion and neoliberalism make, among other things, to know more and more individuals, to position them in the game and to increase their participation and productivity through circulation possible (^{Machado, 2016}). According to ^{Rech (2015)}, this participation and productivity, provided for by the logic of the movement of people with disabilities, contributes greatly to the inclusion of a movement that is in flux, that is, which aims at the continuity and permanence of the subjects. It should be understood, then, that the quest for skills is what helps us to think of inclusion as a flow-skill strategy, since within a flow that needs to be continuous we also need to develop skills to become more and more efficient subjects (^{Rech, 2015}).

As a result, modulation of subjects’ conduct has been organized from an emphasis on the development of individual competencies. This is not to say that knowledge of content, or the development of discipline-knowledge, neither become more present, nor it has lost its relevance and meaning. However, modulating conduct requires investment in the abilities and individual talents. In political anatomy of the body, it is estimated that personal talents and abilities must be potentialized so that participation, development and learning become gradual and effective.

Thinking about the organization of learning space and time advocates the displacement of a temporality that is organized from the logic of the modern school, in which everyone learns certain content at certain levels by modulating conduct that invest in personalization of the talents. In this sense, each student is considered different, has his/her specificities, his/her learning time and his/her learning conditions. This is aligned to the mold of a control society in which individual experience requires mechanisms and strategies that go beyond the logic of the average student taken as the standard of learning normality. In this society, control becomes internalized by the subject as a vital element for development itself.

One of the strategies mobilized by the discursive order that foresees an inclusive common school focused on the differences of the students is instituted by the necessity to carry out an educational process attentive to the participation and the progress of all, always considering the individual conditions and the competences of each subject. In this organization, it is understood that the Specialized Educational Assistance Professional (SES) is the one that will have strategies to complement and/or supplement the student’s development and learning, based on resources, methodologies and practices that enhance the participation of all with autonomy and independence. It is the specific interventions that condition specific forms of participation and move the field of Special Education to the supportive position.

With this displacement of the field of Special Education, it is conceived that its action takes place in an articulated way with the common teaching, orienting to the attendance to the special educational needs of these students (^{PNEEPEI, 2008}). On the one hand, the Specialized Educational Service is configured in a temporality and spatiality aimed at managing the risk of non-learning, non-participation and the inability of autonomy regarding the curricular organization of the common school. With ^{Decree No. 7,611, of November 17, 2011}, the Specialized Educational Service starts to integrate the pedagogical proposal of the school, involve the participation of the family to ensure full access and participation of students, meet the specific needs of the target population of special education (^{Decree no. 7,611, 2011}, Article 2). On the other hand, the configuration of environments that foster the development of each student’s potential contributes to the fact that the marks of disability, lack, and disability are minimized. In governing the conduct of people with disabilities, investing in environments that maximize individual capacities, minimizing the effects of lack, becomes a process that regulates one’s living conditions. For this, in a normalization process, the most deviant abnormalities are approximated to the established standard, and thus the risk of school failure is managed in a calculated way.