Introduction³

The perspective of inclusive education is a guideline for education systems in Brazil, provided for in the National Policy on Special Education from the Perspective of Inclusive Education (^{PNEE-PEI, 2008}), in force from January 2008. Other legal provisions - such as Law No. 9,394, of December 20, 1996 (^{Law No. 9,394, 1996}), called the Brazilian National Education Guidelines and Framework Law (LDBEN), and Law No. 13,146, of July 6, 2015 (^{Law No. 13,146, 2015}), known as the Brazilian Inclusion Law (LBI) - ensure, through resolutions, opinions and decrees, that all schools in municipal, state or community/private education networks promote inclusive education, guaranteeing enrollment and continuous participation in school. This guarantee also provides for the provision of Specialized Educational Support (AEE) for students with disabilities, pervasive developmental disorders or high abilities/giftedness.

In general, schools have created internal policies and implemented pedagogical strategies to address specificities and promote education that effectively encompasses everyone. However, experiences in previous research show that there are different realities regarding the implementation of inclusive educational policies by institutions.

Another relevant factor were the challenges that the pandemic posed to us, with the adaptations and flexibility that schools needed to implement, after a period of total closure of these institutions. In the second half of March 2020, schools were surprised by the sudden closure, when COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus (popularly called the new Coronavirus), identified for the first time in December 2019, in Wuhan, China. With the rapid spread of this virus, schools closed indefinitely, and contacts began to be carried out remotely.

In the education networks of Rio Grande do Sul, after a period of organization that mainly involved the areas of health and education, teachers began to hold classes directly from their homes, using alternative means, such as video classes, digital platforms, applications such as WhatsApp and other social networks for sending materials. In some situations, activities were also delivered physically, particularly due to connectivity problems. At first, such a scenario seemed to be temporary; however, it continued beyond the school year. During this period, there were many challenges and anxieties on the part of school management, teachers, families and students to adapt to this new format.

In this context, the National Education Council (CNE) guided curricular integration and the practice of educational actions at a national level, highlighting three eminent opinions:

- CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 5, of April 28, 2020, which dealt with the ‘reorganization of the School Calendar and the possibility of calculating non-face-to-face activities for the purpose of complying with the minimum annual workload, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic' (^{CNE/CP Advisory Opinion no. 5, 2020}a);

- CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 9, of June 8, 2020, which resumed this theme, with the re-examination of CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 5/2020 (^{CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 9, 2020}b);

-CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 11, of July 7, 2020, which defined ‘Educational Guidelines for Carrying Out In-Person and Non-Face-to-Face Classes and Pedagogical Activities in the Context of the Pandemic’ (^{CNE/CP Advisory Opinion No. 11, 2020}c).

In Advisory Opinion No. 5 (2020a), in a Clarification Note, dated March 18, 2020, the CNE indicated that education systems (provided for in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of the LDBEN) should consider the application of legal provisions in conjunction with the standards established for the organization of school activities and the execution of their calendars and programs. According to legislation, calendar management and the form of organization are the responsibility of systems and networks or educational institutions.

Considering the current legal and normative provisions, the CNE reiterated that the competence to deal with school calendars lies with the institution or education network, within the scope of its autonomy, respecting national legislation and standards and the education system to which it is linked, notably item III of article 12 of the LDB (^{CNE/CP Advisory Opinion no. 5, 2020}a).

Another point about the pandemic context was the worsening of inequalities due to the economic situation and the increase in violence within the family due to social isolation (^{Bordiano, Liberal, Lovisi, & Abelha, 2021}). In this scenario, the victims began to live with their attackers on a daily basis, making the vulnerable situation of children, adolescents and women within their own homes - a place in which they should be safer - evident. The COVID-19 pandemic “[...] finds the Brazilian population in a situation of extreme vulnerability, with high unemployment rates and deep cuts in social policies” (^{Werneck & Carvalho, 2020}, p. 1).

Institutions needed to reinvent themselves at a time of insufficient scientific knowledge about the virus: they made attempts and created non-face-to-face pedagogical protocols to build strategies, aiming not only at complying with the calendar, but at learning. At the same time, it was necessary to comply with health protocols. These were complex decisions, some involving compliance with guidelines, but others were the responsibility of school communities, under the responsibility of the school management team.

The strategies listed by each school institution were not sufficiently based on certainties, since they were living in an unprecedent reality. One year after the World Health Organization declared the state of a pandemic, schools gradually resumed their activities in a hybrid system during 2021. However, many doubts and concerns still remained in terms of safety protocols in the environment. school - and even more doubts regarding specialized educational services aimed at students with disabilities or pervasive developmental disorders.

School inclusion is a perspective and practice that is directly related to management practices, since one of the roles of managers is to promote articulation between different dimensions of the field of school management (financial, pedagogical, ethical, interactive, conceptual and human). /social), especially considering reinventions in pandemic times.

Among the researchers who address inclusion management, some stand out who, although from a different perspective than that assumed in the present study, we consider pertinent to bring into the discussion, as they guide the management practices of most school institutions. Regarding the relationship between educational policy and school management, ^{Lück (2009}, p. 20) emphasizes:

Considering that school management is a shared process, it is also necessary to consider the development of leadership into co-leadership or shared leadership, through which there is sharing with other professionals and even students, the space for decision-making and the opportunity to reciprocal interinfluence of all members of the school community.

From this perspective, management has a role of great responsibility in enabling the implementation of inclusive educational policies and, in addition, promoting the collective construction of inclusive concepts, removing any type of existing barrier. School management is one of the management processes of a school organization, embodied in decision-making about guidelines and coordination of work.

In this sense, the level of participation given to the collective defines the management style. Due to this bias, the management adopted by most public educational institutions is said to be democratic, that is, it seeks to achieve goals and fulfill responsibilities decided in a collective and cooperative manner, aiming to fulfill legal prerogatives and qualify the teaching and learning process. .

To think about school management and inclusive education, ^{Carvalho (2010}) highlights the importance of school reorganization in a set of management actions, curriculum and didactic-pedagogical resources in synergy with the school community and public policies. The school will be an inclusive space if its physical dimensions, such as classrooms, administrative facilities, external areas and other physical aspects involving its architecture and engineering, allow physical accessibility with the greatest possible autonomy, especially for students with disabilities. The school will be an inclusive space if there is coordination with public policies that guarantee citizens the exercise of their right to education, as an asset (Carvalho, 2010).

The aforementioned author describes and characterizes pedagogical practice in the classroom, addressing three broader dimensions to better understand the educational system. Such dimensions were called the macropolitical level (educational system), mesopolitical level (the school) and micropolitical level (the classroom) (^{Carvalho, 2010}).

For ^{Carvalho (2012}), the participation of subjects in school, in decisions and in school organization is one of the aspects that configure democratic management. However, there are other issues to think about. Thus, the meaning of inclusion does not mean the effort to promote introspection within the same school environment and the challenge to learning, since inclusion practices themselves are the target of a biopolitics. It has to do with a context in which categories are created, based on a metric or average, such as in/out, enabled/not enabled, achieved/not achieved, or in the process of achieving.

^{Lopes and Fabris (2017}) argue that there are not two dichotomous poles - inclusion or exclusion -, so that this inside or outside bias must be overcome. Furthermore, the aforementioned authors state that “[...] for inclusion to be assumed as a truth for everyone, even going beyond specific types already thought to be included, it is necessary to transform it into an ethical, philosophical, political problem and educational” (Lopes & Fabris, 2017, p. 11). In this sense, it is powerful to call these processes in/exclusion.

Based on this problematization, the question that guided the studies was the following: how are inclusive practices established in the school management of different education networks during the new Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, and how are the conceptions and strategies of its implementation during the pandemic period?

Management of In/Exclusion in the biopolitical context

It is from the 19th century onwards that ^{Foucault (2002}) identifies the emergence of abnormality as a population problem on which institutions should focus, including the school. From this perspective, we can refer to Michel Foucault's work The Abnormals, which discusses the three figures that represent the invention of the 'abnormal' in different historical moments: the human monster, the individual to be corrected and the onanist (^{Foucault, 2002}). The figure identified by ^{Foucault (2008}) of the individual to be corrected is pertinent to the present study, bringing the notions closer to school subjects who are the target of 'normalizing' techniques and practices: “The individual to be corrected is very common, insofar as is immediately close to the rule, it will always be difficult to determine” (^{Foucault, 2008}, p. 72).

For ^{Foucault (2002}), from Modernity onwards, an art of governing was established that is not related to political government, but rather to the way of directing the conduct of the subjects of society. They are derivations of inventions from the 18th century, analyzed by ^{Foucault (2008}), which establish what is ‘normal’ and what is ‘abnormal’ in the constitution of the norm. In this way, the discourses that define times and spaces for ‘abnormal’ subjects (those who are outside the average) end up interfering with the realization of inclusion as a right.

The operation of a biopolitics is evident, which puts into operation necessary mechanisms both for the normalization of children and young people positioned as included and for the regulation of the population and the regulation of subjects' conduct (^{Sardagna, 2013}). Spaces of normalization are characterized by mechanisms of power and biopolitics that reinforce the centralized vision between normal and abnormal, included and excluded, especially in the current moment marked by a time of discursive reproduction over the population.

In this sense, it is worth warning that we look at each educational practice, each expression we use to name others and place them under suspicion. Words that mean tolerance, blaming others, hegemonic cultural standards, stable identity, universality, multiculturalism, exoticism, deficit, respect, integration are some examples of expressions that must be problematized when used to think about inclusion (^{Lopes & Fabris, 2017}, p .107)

Normalizing actions do not come only from schools, but from society, together with other disciplinary mechanisms that seek to guide the subjects. In this way, they began to see people with disabilities as someone to be corrected or normalized by standards based on average. In this context, the responsibility for this correction lies with institutions, such as schools, medicine, etc.

In Brazil, the 1990s marked the imperative of including people with disabilities in regular education, based on international negotiations. Countries like Brazil began to be guided by global declarations, such as the 1990 World Declaration on Education for All and the 1994 Salamanca Declaration, which resulted from the World Conference on Special Education. This aimed to respect the differences and characteristics of the individual in relation to the pedagogical process.

These statements had great repercussions in Brazil at the beginning of the 21st century, including in the official discourse, which was supported by community consultation. “Inclusion is seen as an advance in relation to integration, as it implies a restructuring of the common education system” (^{Jannuzzi, 2012}, p. 187). The imperative discourses of inclusion that come at the heart of major declarations, as well as legal regulations and guiding documents, end up constituting normalizing processes that, although they are described as open to difference, institute similar regimes for all education systems, including , the fields of knowledge. In other words, inclusion discourses are not questioned, as they exist for the ‘good’ of people with disabilities.

In terms of policy, many facts caused changes and advances regarding the implementation of inclusive education, mainly with regard to the evolution of Brazilian laws. In this sense, it is important to define the conception of school inclusion, not in a pragmatic way in the sense of being for or against, nor in the binary tone of inside-outside or in defense of certain practices to the detriment of others, but accentuating the meaning that This conception was formed over the years. It is understood that both the ‘in’ of ‘inclusion’ and the ‘ex’ of ‘exclusion’ are historical constructs forged in the very constitution of abnormality. From this perspective, ^{Veiga-Neto and Lopes (2011}, p. 122-123) challenge us to rethink inclusion while proposing the need to establish a critique that goes beyond being against or for, but “[...] making a Criticism of inclusion - aiming to look at other things that we have not yet looked at and think things that we have not yet thought about the practices that determine it and the policies that promote it - implies, among other things, going against the dominant current”.

In a brief description of the main concepts, from which the present study is inspired, the notion of governmentality is understood as a form of power exercised by different mechanisms of the State, such as educational institutions, which aim at political economy and use as government tactics and security devices. ^{Foucault (2001}) points out that the art of governing is the way in which the population is led to do what they want in an imperceptible way.

Biopolitics is used in an approach to educational policies, as a form of management and regulation of life, as a set of technological mechanisms and procedures (involving knowledge and power) with the aim of maintaining and expanding a relationship of domination of the mass population. (^{Foucault, 1999}). Thus, biopolitics is related to policies directed at multiple heads, through the action of what ^{Foucault (1999}) called biopower, in the context of the advancement of capitalism.

To discuss inclusion in education, the notion of in/exclusion is also pertinent, in relation to social, cultural and political practices, in the neoliberal State. It is understood, from ^{Lopes, Lockmann, Hattge and Klaus (2010}, p. 6, authors' emphasis), that “[...] any subject, within their 'level of participation', may, at any moment, be included or excluded from certain practices, actions, spaces and policies”. In this context, ^{Saraiva and Lopes (2011}, p. 19, authors' emphasis) corroborate this idea when seeking “[...] not to leave anyone out of the game and prepare non-governmental organizations to welcome those 'excluded' today, to be re-educated and brought back to the market”.

From the point of view of educational management, it cannot be ignored that this comprises the organization of the institution, promoting effective conditions to guarantee the advancement of the teaching-learning process. However, we seek an approach to the notion of governmentality which, inspired by Michel ^{Foucault (2001}), is a form of managing life and conduct, in the same way as the management of in/exclusion with the government practices of the school community.

^{Aquino (2017}), when analyzing education in the context of biopower, understands that biopolitics, as a governance strategy, has a strong ally in educational practices. After these considerations, he states that “[...] biopolitical governance essentially uses actions of a pedagogical nature - or, to be more precise, pedagogizing -, without which its intentions would not be effective” (Aquino, 2017, p .55).

These notions contributed to constituting a look at the pandemic scenario, especially to think about how students with disabilities were/are excluded from school institutions and how their managers created alternatives for such practices.

Methodological procedures

The study employed a qualitative, exploratory and descriptive approach, using Foucauldian notions as an analytical tool. The information obtained through the responses of the participating managers was related to a discursive context that ends up constituting knowledge, meanings and subjectivities. The concept of discourse, in the sense given by ^{Foucault (1996}), was taken as a practice that acts in social construction, constituting and naturalizing world views of people and their institutions. According to ^{Foucault (1996}), it is a set of sayings that may belong to different fields of knowledge, but that follow common operating rules.

Regarding the approach, qualitative research highlights meanings, motives, aspirations, beliefs, values and attitudes, in the search for a greater incursion into the researched context, understanding processes and their phenomena not reduced to the operationalization of variables (^{Minayo, Deslandes, & Gomes, 1999} ). Qualitative research seeks to understand a specific phenomenon in depth, working with descriptions, comparisons and interpretations. Thus, it is more concerned with the level of reality that cannot be quantified than with generalizations that are proven numerically or statistically.

The exploratory nature allowed interviewees to be encouraged to think freely about a topic, even allowing subjective aspects to emerge. ^{Minayo et al. (1999}, p. 54-55) states that “[...] in the qualitative approach we cannot claim to find the truth with what is right or wrong, that is, we must have as our first concern understanding the logic that permeates the practice what happens in reality.”

The research subjects are five school managers and a pedagogical coordinator, and the instrument used was a semi-structured questionnaire, consisting of 13 objective and essay questions. The managers are linked to five Basic Education schools in the North Coast region of Rio Grande do Sul. The invitation was made to the management team of twelve schools belonging to the three education networks (municipal, state and private/community) in the municipalities of that region. region (Capão da Canoa, Osório, Torres, Tramandaí). However, managers of five schools, belonging to different networks, in the municipalities of Osório, Torres and Tramandaí remained until the end of the investigation. Schools will be identified by letters, followed by the municipality as specified in Table 1: ‘A’ corresponds to the municipal network; ‘B’, to the state network; ‘C’, to the private/community network.

School A, located in the district of Atlântida Sul, was founded on April 17, 1986, with the City Hall of Osório/RS as its sponsor. The school serves 310 students, enrolled from Early Childhood Education, in preschool classes, to the 9th year of Elementary School.

School B Osório, located in the urban area of ​​the municipality, was founded on May 8, 1962, and its sponsor is the State Department of Education. Currently, it serves 390 students from the 1st to the 9th year of Elementary School.

School B Torres, located in the center of the municipality, was founded on July 7, 1961, and its sponsor is the State Department of Education. It serves 992 students enrolled from the 1st to the 9th year, also offering Youth and Adult Education (EJA) in the final years of Elementary School.

School B Tramandaí, located in the center of the municipality, was founded on July 11, 1962. Currently, the institution serves around 1,200 students, enrolled in Elementary Education (1st to 9th year), High School, Professional Education and at EJA. Its sponsor is the State Department of Education.

School C is located in the urban center of Osório and is characterized as a confessional school. It was founded in 1984 and currently serves 689 students enrolled in preschool classes, from the 1st to the 9th year of elementary and high school.

The questions focused on the schools' proposals, the types of support services they offer, resources, materials and articulations for accessibility, structural and pedagogical strategies to promote inclusive education during the pandemic, guidelines for teaching during the pandemic, articulations with family members and/or those responsible for students during social isolation, management practices for classes during the pandemic and upon the return of in-person classes.

Data analysis was inspired by Foucauldian studies, understanding that inclusive practices are one of the ways to regulate subjects and control the population. By crossing the information with the conceptual field, it was possible to identify that the recurrences were presented under three main focuses: pedagogical strategies for inclusion in remote teaching; digital alternatives for remote teaching; education management practices in remote teaching.

Analytical exercise: inclusive education in the pandemic

The first focus of the analysis, 'pedagogical strategies for inclusion in remote teaching', makes it clear that school managers demonstrated concern regarding the choice of proposals and the availability of materials and equipment, whether or not they would be coherent with the specificities of students with disabilities. . Regarding the guidelines, there is the following example:

In the case of students in the final years, teachers were instructed during remote classes to carry out interdisciplinary projects, aiming to seek, in addition to cognitive aspects, also to maintain the link with the school. In the case of students in the initial years, the single-teaching teachers already work in a globalized way, supervision suggested activities suited to the specific needs of each student and also to the family context (time available for those responsible to carry out remote activities, economic conditions, etc. ) (School Manager A Osório, 2022).

During the pandemic, the work of both managers and teachers went beyond work shifts, as coordination with families often took place across three shifts (^{Saraiva, Traversini, & Lockmann, 2020}). Regarding the planning and operationalization of classes, as well as specialized services, one of the managers highlights:

The main guidelines for planning activities for students with disabilities in remote education are: - ensure that all classes are available online; - offer personalized pedagogical support; - adapt the tools used according to the needs of each student; - create an inclusive and welcoming virtual environment (Coordinator School B Tramandaí, 2022).

Remote education was a major challenge for schools and teachers in general. ^{Saraiva et al. (2020}, p. 12) identified that aspects such as “[...] insecurity, need for quick adaptations, invasion of the home by work and school, anxiety regarding sanitary and economic conditions [...]” are elements that marked the educational scenario in the pandemic. Other mentions are highlighted as possible strategies, for example, individualized work with each student with disabilities, considering their peculiarities, the family context and collaborative work between teachers in the regular classroom and AEE:

The guidance we have and that we work on is that special needs students have the same rights as students at any level of education, with the same quality. The service is differentiated for each student, working within their needs and potential in relation to the degree of difficulty and socioeconomic level. At that time, the activities were planned together with the resource room teacher - AEE and the regular education teachers, aiming to serve everyone (School Manager B Torres, 2022).

Also added is the mention of the adapted curriculum and the curricular adjustments that establish a possibility to address the difficulties of students with disabilities or who present learning difficulties, with the aim of assisting in the construction of knowledge. In this sense, Article 59, Item I of the LDBEN recommends that education systems must ensure “[...] specific curricula, methods, techniques, educational resources and organization, to meet their needs” (Law no. 9,394, 1996).

The materials were developed for each individual where students who have access to the platform participate in classes normally, together with their peers, where the contents are adapted and students who do not have access, the contents are printed. Our students have intellectual disabilities, Down syndrome and autism (School Manager B Torres, 2022).

Still regarding the guidelines for classes during the pandemic period, the manager of Escola C Osório highlights “[...] planning with an adapted curriculum; after-school reinforcement classes, fortnightly diagnostic activities for monitoring” (School Manager C Osório, 2022).

Combined with flexibility and adaptation to the pandemic moment, governance practices, from the perspective of ^{Foucault (2002}), are present through mechanisms for 'adjusting the student', which operate in institutions and, simultaneously, in pedagogical operators. This conception can be reinforced in the following statement: “The assessment is carried out according to the capacity of each student, where access to the same content is always observed, but with adaptations according to potential and easy to understand so that the family can help. them” (School Manager A Osório, 2022).

It is noted, for example, that the reference to students considered included is in the class collective. Historically, institutions have used tests, skills training and capacity assessments, using homogenizing parameters. These are practices based on a type of knowledge that sometimes allows students to be labeled as 'problematic' or 'undisciplined', or a knowledge that qualifies them and, consequently, values them.

Regarding the focus on ‘digital alternatives for remote teaching’, the study shows that there was a search for bringing technology closer together with other resources to assist in the learning process. In this axis, practices that involved contact between schools and students, with their means and alternatives for classes during the pandemic, are highlighted.

When mentioning the means to carry out classes, the manager of Escola A Osório also highlights the concern in maintaining the bond with students, highlighting the sending of videos, the use of an educational platform, remote meetings and even the use of the personal WhatsApp application , as well as other social networks: “The majority used videos in posts on the platform, they also made video calls using the WhatsApp application, mainly in order to maintain the bond with students [...]” (School Manager A Osório, 2022 ).

In Torres, there is also a search for welcoming and meeting specific needs, highlighting that some did not have access to the internet; therefore, the alternative was to seek partnership with the family to obtain printed materials. In this situation, mediation was the responsibility of the family.

In partnership with the family, we developed the activities, where those who have access to the internet participate in online classes through the classroom platform, where special students have content on different topics, respecting their journey. And for students who did not have access to the internet, the content was sent in printed form. The concern is to have an inclusive welcome in relation to the student and the family (School Manager B Torres, 2022).

In the community school, the means used are also mentioned, such as digital alternatives and the use of the internet, as a platform, videos and online activities, such as interactive games. According to the manager of the private/community school C in Osório: “during the period of remote classes, assessments for PNE students were carried out via the platform and through practical proposals, interacting through video or photo posts. Through game results contextualized to content or oral activities via Zoom” (School Manager C Osório, 2022).

Regarding the use of platforms, access did not cover the entire student population. Studies show that “[...] although there are some schools that manage to promote moments of digital meeting, through the use of different platforms, this model is reserved for a minority” (^{Saraiva et al., 2020}, p. 13).

Still regarding alternatives, one of the school representatives brings up the need for a professional interpreter in remote activities. “The activities are adapted to the students’ needs, with the use of tools and applications to facilitate these students’ learning. We also have interpreters who served students through video classes and lives” (School Manager B Osório, 2022).

A diversity of means is evident, with greater emphasis on digital tools, via the internet, via platforms and social networks, but also direct contact with physical materials, in situations of lack of connectivity. From the managers' statements, it can be seen that inclusion in the pandemic moment raised several questions and concerns, which is why it was necessary to consider the reality faced in such a peculiar, unprecedented moment, as well as the analysis of the students' diverse situations.

When mentioning the alternatives found by schools for remote and hybrid teaching, in addition to the development of curricular programs, there is a great concern in evaluating learning, with remote tools, as schools have historically been guided by an average implicit in the curriculum, even if Note the attempt to consider individual peculiarities.

At the same time, there are mentions regarding the exercise of individual monitoring. “During the remote period, feedback on proposed activities was evaluated within the interests and possibilities of each person. Guidance was given during online meetings” (School Manager B Tramandaí, 2022). In this sense, the representative of another school points out: “It is important that the guidance given by teachers is appropriate to their needs (making teaching material available in alternative formats such as books). That promote activities adapted to the student’s learning level” (School Manager B Torres, 2022). Still reinforcing this practice, the manager points out “[...] that the assessment must be differentiated, qualitative and constant, considering each student’s progress and their peculiarities” (Estor Escola B Osório, 2022).

Regarding the focus on ‘education management practices in remote teaching’, it was evident that, in general, the implementation of inclusive practices during the pandemic was one of the biggest concerns, both on the part of teachers and managers. The correlation existing in the new configuration of classes in the remote teaching model is notable, bringing new demands for the articulation between school, educators and families, as the activities were carried out in homes. Thus, another challenge for institutions and teachers was to keep families present in this new educational situation.

Some actions were carried out by school management, with regard to adapting the calendar, curricular proposals and class format. Regarding this, one of the interviewees emphasizes:

During the meetings it was discussed with the teachers and everyone contributed with suggestions, there was no guidance on how to do it, but suggestions discussed among the group. The majority used videos in posts on the platform, and also made video calls using the WhatsApp application, mainly in order to maintain links with students (Gestor Escola A Osório, 2022).

It is noted that there were many elements to consider in these discussions, structural, pedagogical, technological, health and even human interactions. Another manager emphasizes these problems, highlighting emotional losses:

I consider that the period was extremely delicate and certainly compromising. The work of the school pedagogical team, and now I make considerations, regarding the school unit that I manage, carried out a noble work in search of differentiated methodologies and investment in the digital platform to welcome inclusion students. The partnership of families and the adapted activities proposed in the plans contributed to the role of reaching students, however, and now I close the peculiar notes, the pandemic context in general, brought a lot of emotional and social damage. These factors also bring a pedagogical outcome of searching for new alternatives and possibilities to achieve gradual academic success for students (School Manager C Osório, 2022).

It was observed that the difficulties were complex and that management involved issues of a pedagogical, technological, social nature, among others, far beyond the role of the school.

Inclusive practices depended heavily on student access to technology and help and encouragement from families. As of 2021, students without access to technology and, therefore, without online meetings to interact with classmates and teachers had the option of collecting printed activities, but this depended on the families' availability to go to school to collect and return the activities with students (School Manager A Osório, 2022).

The manager of School B Osório, in turn, also brings up anxieties regarding the pedagogical aspects of curricular adaptation and external structural factors, such as internet, equipment and family monitoring:

I believe that it was a moment of great learning, but also of a lot of anguish and difficulties, as remotely we rely on external factors such as the internet, digital tools and the participation of those responsible, which often falls short of what is necessary to advance in the future. learning (School Manager B Osório, 2022).

Regarding the challenges of the period, the Tramandaí school manager stated that “[...] implementing inclusive practices is not an easy task, especially in the current context of the Pandemic” (School Manager B Tramandaí, 2022). However, there is also the conviction that, despite the limitations of social isolation, everyone was served satisfactorily, as expressed by another manager, who also emphasizes the need for social interaction.

I believe that the inclusion students were served satisfactorily within the limitations imposed by the pandemic and were more dependent on the attention and monitoring of their families. Like other students, those included feel the lack of coexistence and social interaction, meaning that upon return there will be a new adaptation to the school environment (School Manager B Torres, 2022).

Social interaction was a factor of concern for managers, both in relation to the quality of learning and socialization.

Students with disabilities returned to the school space from the beginning of 2022. The return was extremely important. The main factor was social interaction. Regardless of age group, socialization contributes to learning. Face-to-face classes empower the student and provide the teacher with opportunities to practice quality teaching, considering the opportunity that the student has to point out their needs and difficulties in the teaching-learning process, through daily reception (School Manager C Osório, 2022).

Presenting another problem, the manager of the municipal school of Osório brings up the difficulty of managing human resources to assist students, due to the limited number of specialists for the AEE. This professional forms the bridge between the student and the teacher in the common classroom, allowing exchanges of experiences and articulations in relation to pedagogical practices, thus contributing to qualify the teaching and learning process.

A relevant fact that I observed during this period was how much the strategy adopted by the sponsor harms the school's AEE, as the specialist teachers are distributed using the demand criterion (students with an established diagnosis), so these teachers spend a short time at the school, developing little connection with the school community, which at this time was essential for mediation with families to develop activities. The sponsor does not consider active search as a relevant factor, or the care of students without a medical report [...] (School Manager A Osório, 2022).

In the responses about means and alternatives to enable pedagogical practice for school inclusion in remote education, concern with assessment is evident, highlighting attention to the specificities of each student. One of the managers interviewed describes that: “The assessment is carried out according to the capacity of each student, where there is always access to the same content, but with adaptations according to potential and easy to understand so that the family can help them” (School Manager B Torres, 2022).

The managers' mentions leave no doubt regarding the concern that teachers had about facing the pandemic and managing the pedagogical field, in addition to the desire to keep all their students present in online classes. It was observed that the decisions were made with the participation of the management and pedagogical coordination of the schools, under the guidelines of the sponsors. Therefore, by involving teachers, an important collaborative educational work was also created for the post-pandemic period.

On the other hand, it is clear that, due to the impact of the moment in which the pandemic was declared, the need to make structural, pedagogical and education management decisions as a whole, as well as social isolation, proposals were being created without extensive discussions. Looking at the field of school management allows us to understand how the participating institutions implemented inclusive education management practices, creating new formats, with a view to learning.

However, there are still many doubts regarding the nature of these adaptations and their post-pandemic developments. Actions for articulation between regular classroom teachers and specialist AEE teachers to promote inclusive pedagogical strategies are highlighted. It is also clear that schools were making attempts to comply with classes and the calendar, without knowing for sure whether the proposal would be implemented.

Through the information, the tensions faced during the COVID-19 pandemic by the institutions of the three education networks on the North Coast are noticeable in terms of guaranteeing the right to education, as provided for in educational policies and guaranteed in legislation. On the other hand, the analysis proposes to problematize the curriculum referenced in normalities, based on which students with disabilities are compared. The tensions present in school experiences corroborate that human beings are made up of experiences, which are unique to each subject. Likewise, agreeing with ^{Sardagna (2013}), narratives contribute to this formation, as they categorize, hierarchize and classify subjects.

Management practices were related to the conduct of social and school inclusion/exclusion practices, which, in the context of governmentality, aim to reach the largest number of subjects. School institutions are also means of guiding and controlling the student through assessment (considering their average). This student with a specific need is the target of constant surveillance at school, in order to know what level of average they are at, what skills they have, what assistance they need, what standardizing practices are required and where they can be positioned within the scope of services. support in the school context. It is in this context that in/exclusion practices also operate, from the perspective discussed by ^{Lopes and Fabris (2017}), that each person, within their 'level of participation', can be included or excluded, since both positions They are inventions arising from society's normalizing practices.

Final considerations

The study highlights the tensions faced during the pandemic period, which required a sudden adaptation of the entire social body. The main obstacles faced by participating school managers were the following: the lack of technological accessibility for students, in the case of equipment and internet; the lack of family assistance during online classes; difficulties in using the digital platforms available to continue teaching and maintain institutional ties; difficulties in organizing proposals due to social isolation; tensions in human resources management, especially regarding the demand for specialists to monitor the learning process of students with disabilities.

It was evident that, in the contexts of the participating schools, there was a constant search to achieve inclusive education, with a focus on learning and socialization. Understanding school as a social environment that constitutes subjects and that takes difference as part of its constitution, the idea of educating everyone implies assuming that not only students with disabilities need a sensitive look, as they learn at a different pace, but that everyone Students have their specificities.

In summary, it can be stated that inclusive practices were partially implemented during the pandemic period, due to obstacles posed by social distancing. There were attempts to use remote teaching strategies, using digital tools and the internet; however, it did not reach all students.