Introduction

Throughout the twentieth century, Special Education in Brazil was organized by philanthropic private institutions, which, in partnership with government spheres, promoted an education marked by the segregation of persons with disabilities. In the 1970s, this paradigm began to be questioned and there is the insertion of the model of integration and normalization of these people. At the end of the twentieth century, from the 1990s, the discourse of inclusion began to be disseminated in Brazil, and in 2008 the National Policy of Special Education From the Perspective of Inclusive Education (PNEEPEI) was introduced, which has already completed 10 years of existence. Considering this historical process, the objective of this article was to analyze the impacts of this policy on the state of Ceará and the city of Fortaleza.

Starting from the references of dialectical historical materialism, we consider capitalist society, organized into antagonistic classes, in which the state / political society establishes an interrelation with civil society, for the creation, dissemination and maintenance of state power ( ^{GRAMSCI, 2001} ). Therefore, in the analysis of public policy, this interrelation between political society and civil society must be considered⁴ ( ^{RAFANTE, 2016} ). In this sense, we sought to understand the correlations of forces present in Brazilian society, which interfere in the elaboration and implementation of PNEEPEI.

In light of these references, bibliographical and documentary research along with microdata analysis of the School Census (2010-2017) were conducted, considering the enrollment of the Target Public Students of Special Education (PAEE) in Regular Education, Special Education, Youth and Adult Education and Vocational Education⁵ , according to the categories present in the school census⁶ ; in relation to Specialized Educational Treatment (AEE): number of enrolled PAEE students, teachers and schools that have this treatment, non-exclusive and exclusive⁷ . Results were presented in tables prepared using SPSS software for statistical data treatment. The analysis considered growth, fall and irregularities in each data set.

First, we present the development of Special Education in Brazil, Ceará and Fortaleza, identifying the correlations of forces present. Afterwards, we proceed to the exposure and evaluation of the School Census microdata (2010-2017), followed by the final considerations.

National Policy on Special Education from the perspective of Inclusive Education at the national level

The development of education for people with disabilities in Brazil was marked by the institutionalization paradigm, based on the medical-psychological model that, through medical examinations and psychological tests, applied to children, made the diagnoses to classify and direct them. to specialized institutions ( ^{MACHADO, 1980} ). Sociedade Pestalozzi and Associations of Parents and Friends of the Exceptional (APAE in Portuguese) stood out, establishing an approchement with the governmental spheres, guaranteeing public resources for private institutions, influencing the elaboration of public policies directed to Special Education ( ^{RAFANTE, 2015} ). According to Garcia (2004 apud ^{GARCIA; MICHELS, 2011} ) and ^{Kassar (2011} , p. 67), these institutions are even confused “with the public service itself, in the eyes of the population, for the gratuity of some services”.

In the context of the Military Civil Dictatorship in Brazil (1964-1985), the country’s alignment with the development of international capitalism, remaining in the peripheral position of international geopolitics, led to reforms in the educational field, guided by the agreements of the Ministry of Education. with the Agency for International Development (USAID). Under the aegis of the Theory of Human Capital, education was seen as the path to economic development, since individuals were considered as the gears of capitalism, making their development necessary for the consequent advance of the system. Therefore, the expansion and universalization of education were placed as priorities, which included people with disabilities.

In the First Sectorial Plan for Education and Culture 72/74, Special Education was highlighted by Priority Project No. 35, which was drafted with the participation of representatives of Brazilian civil society, linked to the specialized institutions that, since the 1960s, demanded the establishment of a national body to address issues related to the area. Also participating were two US experts, sponsored by USAID⁸ , and a member of the United Nations (UN)⁹ . In this scenario, the goal of educating people with disabilities was to make them useful to society, which required their integration into the regular school system, in common or special classes ( ^{RAFANTE, 2015} ).

This was the insertion, in Brazil, of the paradigm of integration and normalization of children with disabilities, in which education should be offered to them in the regular school system, under the principles of mainstreaming, a movement originating in Denmark, which provides for progressive integration of children based on individual evaluations involving the regular and specialized system. This movement sought to ensure that children could “lead as normal life as possible, benefiting from the service offerings and opportunities that exist in the society in which they live” ( ^{PEREIRA, 1980} , p. 02).

^{Kassar (2011)} and ^{Rafante (2015)} showed that the integration paradigm had a close relationship with the Human Capital Theory, by guiding the organization of education of people with disabilities in economic aspects, since the offer of their education in the regular school system it was less costly to the state and, moreover, by making the individual useful to society, it would contribute to its development.

In Brazil, this paradigm met resistance from specialized institutions, which organized themselves and influenced the direction of public policies for the area, resulting in the Federal Constitution of 1988, which determined that the education of people with disabilities would be carried out “[...] preferably in the regular school system.” ( ^{BRASIL, 1988} , p. 01), which kept the possibility of attending in specialized institutions. Globally, multilateral organizations, such as the UN and the World Bank, advocated the fundamental role of education in developing “human capital”, promoting economic development and fighting poverty. In this context, the paradigm of inclusive education begins to be placed, aiming at “building capacities so that the subject has freedom to enter the market, build their life and collaborate with the economic life of the nation.” ( ^{SOUZA; PLETSCH, 2017} , p. 834). As in the 1970s, studies by multilateral organizations indicated that the education of the PAEE in the regular network would be less expensive ( ^{SOUZA; PLETSCH, 2017} ).

In the wake of the dissemination of these principles in 1990, the World Conference on Education for All was held in Jomtien, Thailand, which drafted the World Declaration on Education for All, to which Brazil was a signatory, committing itself to universalize the right to education, including people with disabilities. Especially regarding this student profile, the “World Conference on Special Needs Educational: Access and Quality” was held in Spain in 1994, leading to the elaboration of the Salamanca Statement, which recorded a position against education in specialized institutions, marking the consolidation of the perspective of inclusive education.

According to ^{Kassar (2011)} , from these actions worldwide, in Brazil, the discourse of “inclusion” of people with disabilities begins to spread, replacing “integration”. It is in this context that the National Education Guidelines and Framework Law, which culminated in the Law 9394 of December 20, 1996, which, in Article 58, defines Special Education as: “[...] teaching modality for students with special needs, preferably in the regular school system, for students with special needs.” ( ^{BRASIL, 1996} , p. 01). Kassar also pointed out that, despite the international indications, in Brazil, the “complementarity of actions” remained, in which private institutions remained active, a perspective that began to change from the 2000s, when the government of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2006; 2007-2010) began to determine the enrollment of children with disabilities in ordinary schools, with the indication of specialized educational care, “primarily in the form of multifunctional resource rooms.” ( ^{KASSAR, 2011} , p. 72).

Resolution CNE / CEB 2/2001 established the National Guidelines for special education in basic education, in which Special Education was constituted as a pedagogical proposal, which should provide special educational resources and services to support, complement, supplement and even replace the common educational services. Despite allowing the substitution of the common education, the advancement was in the indication that “this support could be characterized as the performance of a specialized teacher [...] along with the conducting teacher of the classes with students with disabilities.” ( ^{GARCIA; MICHELS, 2011} , p. 109).

In 2008, the National Policy for Special Education was launched from the perspective of Inclusive Education (PNEEPEI), which confirmed Special Education as a teaching modality that goes through all levels, stages and other modalities; it offers its own services and resources and guides teachers and students. ( ^{BRASIL, 2008} ). There is the abandonment of the idea of Special Education as a pedagogical proposal, to focus on the availability of services and resources. ( ^{GARCIA; MICHELS, 2011} ), and should perform the AEE in the multifunctional resource rooms.

The Decree 6,571/2008, which provided for the AEE, removed from the Special Education the functions of support and substitution, and should complement and supplement the common school ( ^{GARCIA; MICHELS, 2011} ). It also determined that the Union’s technical and financial support would be directed to public education systems, which excluded funding for private specialized education institutions. However, the locus of schooling for students with disabilities remained a matter of dispute, leading to the replacement of that Decree in 2011 by Decree 7611, which expanded Union support to private institutions ( ^{BRASIL, 2011} ), mantaining the perspective of complementing and supplementing common education.

By Decree 7611/11, AEE identifies, develops and organizes pedagogical and accessibility resources in order to eliminate obstacles for the complete student participation, considering their specific needs, and should be organized in all stages and modalities of basic education, constituting compulsory provision of education systems and performed in the opposite of the ordinary class shift, in the school space or in a specialized center. In the school environment, AEE should be carried out primarily in the multifunctional resource rooms, which are “[...] environments with equipment, furniture, and didactic and pedagogical materials [...].” ( ^{BRASIL, 2011} , p. 01).

PNEEPEI was strengthened by Law No. 13.146/2015, which establishes the Brazilian Law for the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities (Statute of the Disabled), with the objective of “[...] ensuring and promoting, under equal terms, the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms by persons with disabilities, aiming at their social inclusion and citizenship. ”( ^{BRASIL, 2015} , p. 01).

Regarding the definition of the target audience for Special Education, ^{Garcia and Michels (2011} , p. 108) report that Resolution CNE / CEB 2/2001 used the terminology “students with special needs”, referring to students who had difficulty learning, whether or not related to organic issues, which broadened the profile beyond “the characteristics of Special Education in Brazil”. In 2008, PNEEPEI considered the target audience of Special Education students with disabilities, global developmental disorders, high skills and giftedness ( ^{BRASIL, 2008} ). According to ^{Garcia and Michels (2011)} , this definition takes up the terms of the 1990s, when the integration paradigm was in force.

Until 2013, in the Education Guidelines and Bases Law (Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação – LDB in Portuguese) (Law 9394/96), the terminology to refer to students targeting Special Education was “learners with special educational needs” (Brazil, 1996). Law No. 12,796/2013, modified the LDB, which now refers to this population as “learners with disabilities, global developmental disorders and high skills / giftedness”. ( ^{BRASIL, 2013} , p. 01). Although these terms have roots in the medical psychological model, the Brazilian Inclusion Law (Law No. 13.146/2015) states that the assessment of disability should be biopsychosocial, performed by a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary team, considering: “the impediments in functions and structures of the body; socioenvironmental, psychological and personal factors; the limitation in the performance of activities; the restriction of participation.” ( ^{BRASIL, 2015} , p. 01).

In 2014, Technical Note No. 4 suspended the obligation to present the medical report to guarantee access to the AEE. However, Pletsch’s studies; Paiva (2018) evidenced the permanence of regular schools partnerships with specialized institutions that provide a medical service, “highlighting the striking presence in the school culture of the medical model of disability, to the detriment of the social and rights model.” ( ^{PLETSCH; PAIVA, 2018} , p. 1046). Therefore, with ten years of PNEEPEI, there is a striking presence of these institutions, influencing the elaboration and implementation of public policies.

The following is the course of the organization of education for people with disabilities in Ceará and Fortaleza, considering this national trajectory.

National Policy of Special Education in the perspective of Inclusive Education in Ceará and Fortaleza

The first experiences in caring for people with disabilities in Ceará were isolated actions and in welfare character. In the 1930s, in the scenario of the industrial and urban development process, civil society began to organize itself to serve people with disabilities. ( ^{OLIVEIRA, 2008} ).

In 1965, APAE was founded, with which some municipalities formed cooperative partnerships to offer education to children and adults with mental disabilities, developed in segregated places ( ^{CARDOSO, 2011} ). In this context, special classes were created in state schools, which constituted a landmark of Ceará’s public education, because it tried to insert a significant number of students with disabilities, but the principle of separation between “normal” and “abnormal” caused estrangement in families, who did not allow their children to share space with the disabled. ( ^{OLIVEIRA, 2008} ).

In the late 1980s, the State Constitution (1989), in line with the Federal Constitution (1988), provides for specialized educational assistance to persons with disabilities, preferably in the regular school system. During this period, meeting the demand for Special Education was constituted through the action of public and private institutions.

Based on PNEEPEI, the State Education Council, by means of Estate Education Coucil Resolution No. 456/2016, establishes:

[...] the standards for special education and Specialized Educational Assistance (AEE) of students with disabilities, Global Development Delay and high skills / giftedness, within the education system of the State of Ceará. (CEARÁ, 2016, p. 01).

Article 1 defines that the Special Education is a modality transversal to the other modalities and integral part of the regular education, and must be foreseen in the Pedagogical Project of the school. The provision of Special Education is a constitutional duty of the state and municipality, through public and private schools, beginning in early childhood education.

The AEE should be assisted by the education systems and its function is to identify, elaborate and organize pedagogical and accessibility resources that reduce obstacles to the effective participation of students with disabilities, and may occur outside the school space, that is, in an itinerant way in the hospital and home care environment, in order to provide school education.

It is verified that Resolution No. 456/2016 has officialized PNEEPEI in the state of Ceará. Prior to this Resolution, the state government issued Ordinance 0998/2013, concerning the regulation of procedures for the Permanent Basic Assessment System of the State of Ceará (Sistema Permanente de Avaliação Básica do Estado do Ceará - SPAECE in Portuguese) and for the Escola Nota Dez Award, stating that, in these two cases, some student profiles would not be accounted for in the participation calculation, among them, students with disabilities duly evidenced by an opinion issued “exclusively by a medical professional” (CEARÁ, 2013, p. 01). It is a strategy to receive PAEE students without interfering with the evaluation results of regular schools, confirming the permanence of the medical model and the belief that these students do not learn.

With regard to the municipality of Fortaleza, in the 1990s, the Municipal Secretariat of Education created the Pedagogical Support Rooms, with the purpose of serving students with learning disabilities and / or disabilities and providing access to regular education. ( ^{MAGALHÃES; OLIVEIRA, 2007} ). In 2003, the city joined the Inclusive Education Program: Right to Diversity (Programa Educação Inclusiva: Direito à Diversidade), which has the function of promoting the creation of inclusive education systems, with the municipality as its central focus. ( ^{MAGALHÃES; OLIVEIRA, 2007} ).

In 2013, Resolution No. 010 of the Municipal Education Council of Fortaleza, in line with PNEEPEI, was approved, which set the “[...] norms for special education from the perspective of inclusive education and for specialized educational assistance [...]” (FORTALEZA, 2013, p. 01). AEE should be carried out primarily in multifunctional resource rooms. In municipal, public and private schools, the AEE can be carried out in Specialized Educational Assistance Centers, public or private, through agreements.

In the state of Ceará and Fortaleza, it seeks to guarantee, at least in legislation, PAEE students, an education from the perspective of inclusion, but in both spheres, this legislation maintains the possibility of private institutions of specialized education. From the analysis of the School Census data (2010-2017), presented below, we seek to verify the results of the implementation of PNEEPEI and the impacts of the performance of private institutions.

Analysis of school census data (2010-2017)

According to the National Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP, 2018), the School Census is the main instrument for basic education information and the most important Brazilian educational statistical survey in this area. The Census is conducted in collaboration with state and municipal education secretariats, with the participation of all public and private schools in Brazil.

It is necessary to emphasize that the enrollment data may differ from those presented in the statistical synopsis prepared by INEP each year, due to the use of specific filters, which remove the number of enrollments in complementary care classes, specialized educational care (AEE). and the enrollment in duplicate.

In the state of Ceará, between 2010 and 2017, total enrollments, without distinguishing PAEE students, decreased gradually year after year, constituting a 12.85% drop from 2010 to 2017, while the number of enrollments of PAEE students grew 123.31% in the same period. In 2010, the enrollment of these students totaled 0.92% of the state’s enrollment, while at the end of the period, in 2017, this percentage increased to 2.17%.

In the analysis of disability enrollment, there is an irregularity with a tendency towards growth in blindness and HI; irregularity with quantitative maintenance in deafness and deafblindness; drop in enrollment of students with low vision by 53%; increased enrollment of students with PD by 42.4% and with ID by 306%.

Regarding this significant growth in enrollment of students with ID, it is noteworthy that this profile constituted a majority among the deficiencies in the whole period analyzed, corresponding to 38.01% of them in 2010 and 69.13% in 2017. Enrollment of students with GDD and high skills / giftedness, it is noticed irregularity in the analyzed period, with a tendency to increase that, when compared to 2010 and 2017, was 123.10%.

Regarding the Municipality of Fortaleza, in the periods between 2010 and 2017, there was also a decrease in the number of total enrollments by 13.31%. PAEE student enrollment increased by 212.6%. In 2010, the number of students enrolled with special needs was 0.46% of the total enrollment. In 2017, this number corresponded to 1.67% of enrollments. With regard to student enrollment and special needs, there is an irregularity that tends to increase enrollment in the categories blindness, low vision, and hearing impariment; irregularity with quantitative maintenance of enrollment in deafblindness; 179.66% increase in enrollment of students with deafness, 24.38% in enrollment of students with PD and 266.37% of enrollment of students with ID.

Noteworthy is the considerable increase of 728.19% in enrollment of students with GDD and high skills / giftedness. Following the trend of the state of Ceará in Fortaleza, there was a significant growth in enrollment and students with ID enrolled were also the majority throughout the period, and in 2010 it represented 51.40% of children with disabilities and, in 2017, it corresponded to 60.24% of this population.

In a study about the inclusion of students with ID in regular education, in Ceará, Rafante, Oliveira, Silva (2018) expressed concern about the increase of students identified with this disability, which results in the stigma that the student does not learn and may limit their educational background and, consequently, lead to a process of exclusion of these students.

Seeking to understand why schools continue to report students with ID, ^{Pletsch and Paiva (2018)} analyzed the evaluation processes of these students in seven municipalities of the state of Rio de Janeiro and found the permanence of the medical model and the performance of decontextual evaluations, with an end in themselves and not as a process. Citing other studies ( ^{PLETSCH; OLIVEIRA, 2015} ; ^{FERREIRA, 1989} ), the authors drew attention to the problem of considering poor school performance as ID, therefore, this deficiency is related to school failure.

^{Manzini (2018)} also highlighted the difficulty, present in the development in Special Education in Brazil, of separating students with special needs from those that are the result of this “social construction of disability, that is, students stigmatized and labeled by the disability of the education system to provide teaching for these students.” ( ^{MANZINI, 2018} , p. 814).

Considering these studies, it is inferred that the identification of students with ID may include many who have learning disabilities, not ID. Misconception corroborated by the special education policy of the 1990s, which included this profile of students as PAEE in that context. Specifically, in the state of Ceará and Fortaleza, it should be considered Ordinance 0998/2013, which states that students with disabilities, with medical report, are not accounted for in the external evaluation (SPAECE), which may be contributing to the classification. of students with learning disabilities among those with ID. In addition to this analysis, students with GDD, high skills / giftedness, who also had a significant increase in enrollment. It is urgent to analyze the evaluation procedures for the classification of PAEE students, in order to ensure that the interpretation and implementation of PNEEPEI does not generate misunderstandings and exclusion, as the School Census microdata points to this problem.

Through this table, which includes enrollment of PAEE students by type of education in the state of Ceará, there is a considerable decline of 80.7% of enrollments in the Special Education modality, while in Regular Education, there was an increase of 123.31%. This data indicates that 2017 have registered 26,137 more enrollments than 2010 in the same modality, a much higher amount than the registered in the drop in enrollment in Special Education, which shows that more students are being considered the target audience of this type of education. In vocational education, regularity was maintained between 2015 and 2017 and Youth and Adult Education registered a 34.72% increase in enrollment of students targeting special education.

In this table, which includes enrollment of PAEE students by type of education in the municipality of Fortaleza, there is a decline of 67.93% of enrollments in the Special Education modality, in contrast to the increase of 212.63% of enrollment of these students in Regular Education, which represented, in 2017, 5671 more enrolled students compared to 2010. Regarding the vocational modality, the regularity was maintained and, in Youth and Adult Education, there was an increase of 183.51% in the student enrollment target audience for special education.

Regarding the enrollment in the AEE, it can be observed that, from 2010 to 2017, in the State of Ceará, there was an increase of 335.33% in the enrollment of PAEE students in this service. In the breakdown by categories, there are irregularities in the enrollment of students with GDD and high skills / giftedness in the periods from 2010 to 2014, and from 2015, there was a gradual increase in enrollment, reaching a growth of 172.44% by 2017; There was also an irregularity that tended to increase in enrollment with blindness. irregularity in enrollment of students with deafblindness disabilities; 174.91% increase in enrollment of students with low vision, 45.77% in enrollment of students with deafness, 115.50% of enrollment of students with HI, 260.59% in enrollment of children with PD and a significant increase of 498.39% in enrollment of students with ID. It can be noted, with the exception of enrollment of students with deafblindness disabilities, that there has been a considerable increase in all other types of enrollment in the AEE.

In the municipality of Fortaleza, it is possible to verify that, from 2010 to 2017, there was an increase of 466.58% in the number of enrollment of PAEE students in AEE. There is an irregularity with a tendency towards growth in enrollment of students with blindness; irregularities, alternating trends for growth and fall in low vision, deafness and deafblindness; 276.08% increase in enrollment of students with HI, 165.98% enrollment of students with PD, 593.01% enrollment of students with ID and 1,132% enrollment of students with GDD and high skills / giftedness in the AEE.

In Ceará, from 2010 to 2017, the number of PAEE students enrolled in the regular school system increased by 123.31%, and enrollments in the AEE increased by 335.33% in the same period, serving more than 50% of students with disability in the regular school system in 2017, which is double the enrollment compared to 2010, which was only 25.79%.

In Table 8 , between 2010 and 2017, the number of PAEE students enrolled in the regular school system in Fortaleza grew by 212.6% and enrollments in the AEE also had a very significant increase, from 466.58% in that same period, serving 58% of students with disabilities in the regular school system in 2017, which represents a considerable growth in enrollment of this service compared to 32% of these students enrolled in 2010.

In the state of Ceará, the number of teachers teaching in AEE increased by 284.30% in the period from 2010 to 2017, which is significant, but did not follow the increase in the number of students enrolled in AEE in the same period, which was 335.33%.

In Fortaleza, the same movement is observed in the state of Ceará, since the number of teachers teaching in the AEE increased 181.41%, from 2010 to 2017, which is significant, but also did not follow the increase in the number of student enrollment in the AEE in the same period, which was 466.58%.

In the period under review (2010-2017), in Ceará, it is observed that the number of schools decreased by 16.47% and schools offering non-exclusive AEE increased by 434.93% and exclusive had a growth of 611.11% and, considering these two possibilities of offering the AEE, there was a 339.87% increase in the number of schools in the state with AEE, revealing a gradual growth in AEE.

However, it is important to highlight that, despite this growth, in 2017, the number of schools with non-exclusive AEE in relation to the overall total of schools is 17.06%, plus 0.67% with exclusive service, totaling 17.75 % of schools with AEE, which still represents a very significant shortage of schools with this service, given that the increase in the number of PAEE students enrolled in AEE in the state of Ceará was 335.33% ( Table 5 ) and only 50% of them had access to this type of care in 2017 ( Table 7 ).

In Fortaleza, from 2010 to 2017, there is regularity in the number of schools, and the non-exclusive ones that have AEE increased by 189.55% and the exclusive ones had a growth of 400% and, considering these two possibilities of offering the AEE, there was a 195.65% increase in the number of schools with AEE, revealing a gradual growth in specialized attendance. Similar to what was observed in the state of Ceará, despite this growth, in 2017, the number of schools with non-exclusive AEE in relation to the general total of schools in Fortaleza was 15.03%, plus 0.77% with exclusive service, totaling 15.81% of schools with AEE, highlighting the need to increase the number of schools with this service, given that the increase in the number of PAEE students enrolled in the AEE in Fortaleza was 466.58% ( Table 6 ) and only 58% of them had access to this type of care in 2017 ( Table 8 ).

Final considerations

The development of Special Education in Brazil is marked by the psychological medical paradigm, which founded a segregated education in the parallel education system offered by private institutions. From the 1970s onwards, this model began to be questioned, under the aegis of the Human Capital Theory, of the country’s alignment with world capitalism and the argument that the education of people with disabilities in specialized institutions was more costly and should be offered in the regular school system, from the perspective of integration and standardization.

Since the 1990s, the inclusive education discourse has been present in Brazilian education, culminating in PNEEPEI, in 2008, which began to be implemented in Brazilian states and municipalities, such as Ceará and Fortaleza. In this inclusive paradigm, the Special Education was not established as a pedagogical proposal, of insertion with the common classroom, but materialized with the offer of services, materialized in the AEE and in the multifunctional resource rooms. It is understood that, despite being re-signified, a parallel system of education of PAEE students is maintained, as a result of the correlation of forces between public policies for education in the regular school system and private institutions, which defend specialized education. The result of this clash is evidenced in current legislation, which guarantees public resources for these institutions, which, while remaining active, contribute to perpetuate the medical model in school culture, making it difficult to achieve school inclusion.

The School Census microdata also explains this contradiction, since, on one hand, in Ceará and Fortaleza, there is an expansion of enrollment in the regular school system, a decrease in enrollment in exclusive schools, an increase in students with access to the AEE, schools that provide this service and teachers working in this modality, there is also the expansion of the number of specialized schools.

Both Ceará and Fortaleza had a drop in the number of total enrollments in regular education (12.85% and 13.31% respectively), and the enrollment of PAEE students, in this type of education, had a growth of 123.31% in the state ( Table 1 ), which represented 26,137 more enrollments than there were in 2010 ( Table 3 ), and in Fortaleza, the increase was 212.6%, from 2010 to 2017 ( Table 2 ), or that is, 5671 more students enrolled in this type of education ( Table 4 ). The percentage of students identified as PAEE compared to the total enrollment increased from 0.92% to 2.17% in Ceará and from 0.46% to 1.67% in Fortaleza from 2010 to 2017 ( Table 1 ).

Tables 3 and 4 show that, between 2010-2017, in Special Education, there was a decline of 80.7% in enrollment in the state of Ceará and 67.93% in Fortaleza. By contrasting the enrollment of PAEE students in regular education with the drop in enrollment in the Special Education modality, there is a much larger number of students than those who left the specialized modality, allowing to infer that more students are being classified as PAEE and The growth was more significant for students with GDD, high skills / giftedness (123.10% in Ceará and 718.1% in Fortaleza) and ID (306% in Ceará and 266.37% in Fortaleza). In addition, throughout the analyzed period, the students with ID were the majority, which puts the alert to the need for reflection on the assessment and diagnosis processes of the PAEE students.

Tables 5 and 6 showed that there was a 335.33% increase in enrollment in the AEE in Ceará and 466.58% in Fortaleza. In Ceará, in all categories of PAEE students, despite some irregularities, there was an increase in enrollment in the AEE; In Fortaleza, this scenario was repeated, except for deafness. The most significant increase was in the enrollment of students with ID, with 498.39% in Ceará and 593.01% in Fortaleza.

Notwithstanding this significant increase, Tables 7 and 8 show that not all pupils enrolled in mainstream education are enrolled in the AEE: in Ceará, in 2010, only 25.79% of PAEE students in mainstream education were enrolled. in AEE, reaching 50.29% in 2017; in Fortaleza, 32% of these regular students were in AEE in 2010, closing with 58% in 2017.

In relation to the teachers working at the AEE, tables 9 and 10 indicated that there was a significant increase: in Ceará, the increase was 284.30% and, in Fortaleza, it was 181.41%, but it did not follow the increase in the student enrollment numbers in the same period, which was 335.33% and 466.58% respectively.

Analyzes of tables 5 to 10 allow us to infer that the implementation of PNEEPEI has achieved advances in the provision of services and resources, but the infrastructure developed does not keep up with the increase in enrollment of these students in regular education. This deficiency becomes more evident when analyzing allusive data for schools with AEE ( Tables 11 and 12) . It is important to highlight that, from 2010 to 2017, the number of schools fell 16.47% in Ceará, keeping the number of schools in Fortaleza. During this period, there was an increase in schools with AEE: non-exclusive, in Ceará, by 434.93%, and in Fortaleza, by 189.55%; exclusives in Ceará, at 611.11%, and in Fortaleza, at 400%. Even with the increase of schools with non-exclusive AEE, there is a growth of schools with special classes (exclusive), which can be considered contradictory in relation to the propositions present in the mentioned Policy. Considering these two possibilities of supply of the AEE, the growth observed in Ceará and Fortaleza was 339.87% and 195.65%, respectively. Despite this growth, it is noted that, in relation to the total of existing schools in Ceará and Fortaleza, those with AEE represent 17.75% in the state and 15.81% in the municipality.

Finally, it can be concluded that, despite the contradictions pointed out, which need to be better understood and overcome, there were advances in guaranteeing the right to education of PAEE students in Ceará and Fortaleza, but they were not enough to contemplate all these students, thus, marking the need for continuity of PNEEPEI, since microdata indicated a gradual development, which needs to be maintained until it meets all PAEE students. The right to education must be guaranteed in the regular school, definitely overcoming the parallel, segregated and welfare system.