Neuroscientific Strategies for Assisting Students with Learning Disabilities.

Elvira Marangoni Baptista Tiburcio; Kelly Danelon

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602856

Article derived from a Course Conclusion Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the E&S Magazine with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by Instituto Pecege for textual synthesis and organization.

Summary

The growing number of students with disabilities and neurodevelopmental disorders in Brazilian public schools has intensified demands on school organization and teaching work, highlighting challenges in infrastructure, teacher training, and the effectiveness of inclusive education policies. The study aimed to propose pedagogical strategies based on neuroscience and critically analyze public policies for the care of children with learning disorders, seeking to contribute to the improvement of educational quality and the reduction of teacher workload. A qualitative and descriptive research was conducted through bibliographic and documentary analysis, based on specialized literature and official documents from bodies such as INEP, MEC, and IBGE. The results indicated that, despite the expansion of access to regular schools, structural, pedagogical, and institutional limitations persist that impact the quality of care and the working conditions of teachers, especially for students with learning disorders not fully covered by Specialized Educational Assistance (AEE). It was concluded that the effectiveness of school inclusion depends on the articulation between public policies, institutional conditions, and scientifically based pedagogical practices, highlighting the need for structural and training investments that support teaching work in the context of inclusive education, and the developed practical guide serves as effective support.

Keywords: Teaching; Special education; Public education; Neuroscience; Neurodivergences.

1. Introduction

The Brazilian educational scenario has been marked by an expressive growth in the number of students with disabilities and neurodevelopmental disorders enrolled in public schools. This reality imposes significant transformations on daily school life and intensifies the demands on pedagogical organization and teaching work. Recent data from the 2025 Basic Education School Census reveal a 17.2% increase in enrollments for students in Specialized Educational Support (AEE) between 2023 and 2024, rising from 1.8 million to 2.1 million students. In a historical series, a 58.7% growth in special education enrollments is observed in relation to the year 2020 (Brazil, Ministry of Education, 2026).

Although this advancement indicates an expansion of access to regular schooling, it also exposes historical fragilities related to infrastructure, teacher training, and the effectiveness of inclusive education public policies. The context is characterized by institutional deficiencies, insufficient resources, and an overload of work for education professionals, especially those who directly assist students with specific educational needs. The concrete conditions of care still present structural and pedagogical limits, directly impacting the work of the regular teacher.

The situation becomes even more delicate in the case of students with learning disabilities, whose needs are not always fully met by Specialized Educational Services (AEE). This increases the responsibility of the regular classroom teacher and strains the school routine. Educational literature frequently discusses inclusive practices and ideal service models, but there is a gap in the exploration of the real conditions for implementing these practices in public schools and the objective demands placed on teachers in the classroom.

In this sense, school inclusion cannot be treated merely as a normative principle. According to Mantoan (2003), inclusion implies a change in perspective for special education, not being restricted to students with disabilities or learning difficulties, but encompassing all students so that they achieve success in general education. This understanding requires an effective commitment to transforming the conditions of teaching, learning, and staying in school.

Brazilian educational policies, especially after the municipalization of elementary education in the 1990s, transferred increasing administrative, pedagogical, and financial responsibilities to schools, without the due expansion of material, human, and institutional conditions (Prieto, 2023). Law No. 14.254/2021, although it represents an advance in the recognition of students with learning disorders, still presents significant gaps in its effective implementation in daily school life, by not explicitly stating clear guidelines for medical and educational monitoring, professional training, and curricular adaptations.

This absence of specific implementation mechanisms transfers the direct responsibility for meeting these demands to the lead teacher, without the necessary support. Consequently, studies indicate that teachers working with neurodivergent students face exhaustive workloads, low pay, scarcity of resources, and lack of continuous training. Such conditions contribute to teacher burnout, professional devaluation, and the precariousness of pedagogical work (Wagner and Carlesso, 2019; Zaragoza, 1999). The effectiveness of school inclusion depends on the guarantee of pedagogical, structural, and institutional conditions that enable the meeting of students’ specific needs (Mantoan, 2015; Goés and Laplane, 2022; Libânio, 2021).

Given this complex scenario, which highlights the need to critically reflect on the limits of current educational policies and the possibilities for pedagogical intervention to qualify the support for students with learning disorders, the present research is justified by the urgency to offer support to education professionals. Thus, the study aims to critically analyze public policies aimed at the care of children with learning disorders, seeking to contribute to the improvement of the quality of educational care and to the reduction of the overload faced by teachers and other public education network professionals, and to offer a practical guide with pedagogical strategies based on neuroscience and other scientifically proven methodologies.

2. Material and Methods

This research was characterized as a qualitative and exploratory-descriptive study, seeking to deepen the understanding of public policies and educational practices in the context of inclusion. The methodological approach was based on the assumptions of Minayo (2014) and Lüdke and André (2013), who recognize the relevance of the qualitative perspective for analyzing the complexity of educational phenomena in their diverse social, institutional, and political contexts. The central objective was to critically analyze public policies aimed at the care of children with learning disorders and to propose a practical guide.

The study was conducted through a critical analysis of a bibliographic and documentary nature. The research strategy involved the investigation of diverse information sources, which constituted the unit of analysis. Federal, state, and municipal laws, educational guidelines, institutional documents, public reports, and professional records were considered. All materials were accessed in freely accessible institutional repositories, allowing for an integrated view of special and inclusive education public policies and the conditions for their implementation.

The investigation was structured around three main axes. The first axis consisted of consulting and analyzing reference works in the field of neuroscience applied to education. Authors such as Relvas (2022), Roberto Lent (in dialogue with Cosenza and Guerra, 2011), Cosenza and Guerra (2011), Hudson (2025), and Rohde et al. (2019) were studied. These works were articulated with a review of authors in the field of inclusive education and educational policies, including Maria Teresa Eglér Mantoan (2015) and José Carlos Libâneo, Oliveira, and Toschi (2021), for the construction of the theoretical framework.

The second axis corresponded to the documentary analysis of specific legislation aimed at special and inclusive education. Official documents at the national, state, and municipal levels were examined, covering programs from the Ministry of Education (MEC), municipal education plans, and institutional reports. A survey and critical examination of current legislation were carried out, with emphasis on Law No. 13.146/2015 and Law No. 14.254/2021, seeking to understand their scope, limitations, and implications in the Brazilian school context.

The third axis involved the analysis of documents and studies related to teaching practice in basic education, with a focus on special and inclusive education. Materials were examined that highlight teachers’ working conditions and the challenges faced in the process of including neurodivergent students. This axis allowed for a deeper understanding of the objective demands placed on teachers and the need for support in attending to students with specific educational needs.

For the organization and interpretation of the collected data, the methodological assumptions of content analysis by Cellard (2008) and Bardin (2011) were adopted. This approach enabled the systematization of written and normative data through analytical reading, followed by thematic categorization and critical interpretation. The process aimed to identify recurring patterns and themes in the sources, allowing for an in-depth analysis of the information.

The selection criteria for the analyzed material were based on thematic relevance, the currency of the sources, and the capacity of the documents to highlight crucial aspects. We sought to prioritize materials that could illuminate the effectiveness of public policies aimed at supporting neurodivergent students, as well as the conditions for teacher performance in public schools. From this set, it was possible to problematize the adequacy of current legislation and its implementation limits.

From an ethical standpoint, the research did not involve the collection of data directly from participants, nor the identification of subjects. The study was developed exclusively from bibliographic, documentary sources, and publicly accessible institutional records. Thus, it was framed under item VII, sole paragraph, of article 1 of CNS Resolution n° 510/2016, which exempts submission to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP). Additionally, the Gemini tool was used for the elaboration of figures for the practical guide and adaptation of technical vocabulary, with full review by the author.

3. Results and Discussion

The results of this research, organized from Bardin’s (2011) content analysis and Cellard’s (2008) documentary analysis, reveal a complex panorama of inclusive education in Brazil. Recurring units of meaning were identified in the documents and literature, which were grouped into four main thematic categories. These categories structure the discussion and allow for an understanding of the tensions and challenges faced in attending to neurodivergent students in public schools, as well as the possibilities for pedagogical intervention. The initial findings address the growth in the number of neurodivergent students in public schools, followed by an analysis of the limits of public policies for learning disabilities, teaching working conditions and their relationship with precariousness, and, finally, the production of a practical guide as a response to these demands.

The growing number of neurodivergent students in schools

The analysis of data from the 2025 Basic Education School Census showed significant growth in the number of students in Specialized Educational Support (AEE) enrolled in state and municipal schools. Between 2023 and 2024, enrollments increased by 17.2%, from 1.8 million to 2.1 million students. In a historical series, an increase of 58.7% in special education enrollments was observed compared to the year 2020 (Brazil, Ministry of Education, 2026). These numbers indicate a notable advance in expanding access to public schools for students with disabilities and neurodevelopmental disorders, reflecting a positive movement towards school inclusion.

However, the interpretation of these data in light of the concrete operating conditions of educational institutions reveals an intensification of demands on school staff. The significant increase in enrollments, although representing an advance in access, has not been accompanied by a proportional expansion of the material, human, and institutional conditions necessary to guarantee quality service. This situation creates a tension between the expansion of access and the effectiveness of service conditions, directly impacting the work of the regular teacher and the AEE professionals, who find themselves facing a growing and complex demand without adequate support.

The perception of workload among teachers and AEE teams is recurrent in studies and institutional records, showing that the increase in enrollments is not detached from structural challenges. Infrastructure limitations, insufficient investments, and gaps in teacher training are elements that persist and contribute to the complexity of the scenario. The School Census data, therefore, not only describe the educational reality of these students but also serve as a crucial instrument for public policy planning, allowing us to question the extent to which the growth in enrollments has been accompanied by adequate conditions for the quality of educational support.

Limits of public policies for learning disorders

Documentary research revealed significant gaps in public policies for special and inclusive education, particularly regarding the support for students with learning disabilities. A considerable portion of these students is not formally covered by Special Education policies and, consequently, is not included in the official data of the public served by Specialized Educational Support (AEE). This formal exclusion creates a structural limitation in the organization of educational policies, as the expansion of access to regular schools has not been accompanied by an equivalent expansion of pedagogical and institutional support mechanisms.

According to Mantoan (2015), school inclusion transcends mere access, requiring the guarantee of effective learning conditions, which implies a profound reorganization of pedagogical practices and educational systems. The absence of a comprehensive approach to learning disorders in formal policies compromises the quality of care and the effectiveness of inclusion. Law No. 14.254/2021, although representing an advance in the recognition of this public, presents weaknesses in its effectiveness in daily school life, mainly due to the lack of clear guidelines for medical and educational monitoring, professional training, and curricular adaptations.

This lack of specific implementation mechanisms transfers the direct responsibility for meeting the demands of students with learning disabilities to the supervising teacher, without the necessary institutional support. This scenario intensifies the demands on teaching work and exposes a mismatch between the formulation of public policies and their materialization in school practices. Libânio (2021) emphasizes that the effectiveness of educational policies is not limited to their normalization but intrinsically depends on the concrete conditions of their implementation in the daily life of schools. Thus, the research findings problematize the capacity of current public policies to equitably serve these students, highlighting the need for greater articulation between legislation, pedagogical practices, and institutional support.

Teaching working conditions and precariousness

The analysis of literature and official documents showed that teaching work, in the context of inclusive education, is marked by processes of intensification and precariousness. These phenomena stem from the expansion of pedagogical demands, the insufficiency of material and institutional resources, and the weaknesses in the continuous training of teachers to attend to students with specific educational needs. The regular teacher, when dealing with neurodivergent students, faces multiple simultaneous demands, encompassing both those attended by Specialized Educational Assistance (AEE) and those with learning disorders not yet diagnosed, which requires constant curricular adaptations, differentiated planning, and individualized monitoring.

This configuration of teaching work, which requires meeting the goals of the regular curriculum and institutional demands, without due support, constitutes a process of intensification. As discussed by José Carlos Libânio, this intensification is directly related to the organization of the educational system and the concrete conditions of school functioning. The expansion of responsibilities assigned to the teacher has not been accompanied by proportional structural and training investments, which compromises the sustainability of quality pedagogical practice. The lack of adequate resources and support contributes to overload and professional burnout.

Authors such as Zaragoza (1999) describe “teacher distress” as a consequence of contexts marked by overload, multiple demands, and lack of institutional support, resulting in professional burnout, illness, and difficulties in remaining in the career. In the field of inclusive education, Mantoan (2015) and Goés and Laplane (2022) emphasize that the effective implementation of school inclusion is not restricted to students’ access to regular school, but to the guarantee of pedagogical, structural, and institutional conditions that enable the meeting of their specific needs. The precariousness of teaching working conditions, therefore, is part of a broader context, where the expansion of educational demands, especially in inclusion, is not accompanied by effective public policies that guarantee adequate support for teachers and educational institutions.

Guide Production

Given the panorama of teacher overload and the absence of adequate institutional resources, the research proposed the development of a practical guide as a tool for mediation and support for teachers in the classroom. This guide, titled “Practical Guide to Neuroscientific Strategies for Neurodivergent Students – A Contribution to Teaching Practice”, is configured as a tool based on neuroscience, teaching methodologies, and pedagogical instrumentalization, synthesizing strategies based on scientific evidence. Its purpose is to serve as effective support for teachers and other education professionals involved in the educational support of neurodivergent students, aiming to facilitate learning and inclusion.

The development of the guide was based on studies by Libânio (2021), Mantoan (2015), and Zaragoza (1999), which highlight the deficiencies in the infrastructure of the educational environment and the need for instruments that enable not only access but also the provision of quality educational services for all students with specific educational needs. The neuroscientific basis of the guide is structured in works by Relvas (2022), Roberto Lent (in dialogue with Cosenza and Guerra, 2011), Cosenza and Guerra (2011), Hudson (2025), and Rohde et al. (2019), integrating knowledge from neuroscience applied to education with teaching practice. The guide aims to be a support instrument that empowers professionals to act with confidence in the teaching process of neurodivergent students.

The guide starts from the understanding that the lead teacher, acting under great overload and in a work context marked by a lack of infrastructure and adequate training, lacks facilitating tools to fully meet the demands of their students. Educational institutions, in turn, need effective public policies that guarantee decent working conditions and preserve the health and well-being of teachers, preventing illness and career dropout. Structured with basic knowledge about neuroscience, such as brain structure and functions and their relationship with learning, neuroscience-aligned teaching methodologies, socio-emotional skills, and learning disorders, the guide proposes teaching strategies for neurodivergent students and practices for teacher well-being and health.

In summary, the research results point to significant challenges in public education systems, stemming from the increase in enrollment of neurodivergent students without adequate infrastructure, teacher training, and public policies. This situation leads to the precariousness of teaching work and impacts the quality of educational services. The practical guide proposal, based on neuroscience and scientifically proven methodologies, emerges as an essential contribution to qualify teaching practice, facilitate learning and inclusion, and alleviate the burden on teachers, directly responding to the objective of proposing pedagogical strategies and critically analyzing public policies, offering effective and evidence-based support for inclusive education.

4. Conclusion

This research sought to critically analyze public policies aimed at supporting children with learning disorders and to propose pedagogical strategies based on neuroscience, with the goal of improving educational quality and reducing teacher workload. An expressive increase was observed in the number of students with disabilities and neurodevelopmental disorders in public schools, which, although representing an advance in access, highlighted structural tensions. It was identified that, despite the expansion of access to regular schooling, limitations in infrastructure, gaps in teacher training, and weaknesses in the effectiveness of inclusive education public policies persist. It was observed that the needs of students with learning disorders are not always fully addressed by Specialized Educational Support (AEE), transferring direct responsibility for support to the classroom teacher without adequate institutional backing. This situation contributes to the intensification and precariousness of teaching work, impacting the quality of instruction and the well-being of professionals.

In light of this scenario, the study’s main contribution materialized in the development of the “Practical Guide to Neuroscientific Strategies for Neurodivergent Students – A Contribution to Teaching Practice”. This guide offers effective support to teachers and other education professionals, synthesizing neuroscience-based pedagogical strategies and scientifically proven methodologies to facilitate learning and inclusion, as well as alleviate teacher workload. However, the research presented limitations inherent to its methodological design, based exclusively on documentary and bibliographic analysis. For future studies, it is suggested to deepen the understanding of teaching experiences and school dynamics in the context of inclusive education, through approaches that consider the perspective of the actors directly involved in the process.

Bibliographic References

BARDIN, Laurence. Análise de conteúdo. São Paulo: Edições 70, 2011.

BRASIL. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira (INEP). Censo Escolar da Educação Básica 2024: resumo técnico. Brasília, DF: Inep, 2025. Disponível em: https://www.gov.br/inep/pt-br. Acesso em: abr. 2026.

CELLARD, André. A análise documental. In: POUPART, Jean et al. A pesquisa qualitativa: enfoques epistemológicos e metodológicos. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2008.

COSENZA, Ramon Moreira; GUERRA, Leonor Bezerra. Neurociência e educação: como o cérebro aprende. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2011.

GOÉS, Maria Cecília Rafael de; LAPLANE, Adriana Lia Friszman de. Políticas e práticas de educação inclusiva. 4. ed. Campinas: Autores Associados, 2022.

HUDSON, Diana; SUMMA, Giovanna. Diferenças específicas de aprendizagem. 2. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2025.

LIBÂNEO, José Carlos; OLIVEIRA, João Ferreira de; TOSCHI, Mirza Seabra. Educação escolar: políticas, estrutura e organização. São Paulo: Cortez, 2021.

LÜDKE, Menga; ANDRÉ, Marli Eliza Dalmazo Afonso de. Pesquisa em educação: abordagens qualitativas. 2. ed. São Paulo: EPU, 2013.

MANTOAN, Maria Teresa Eglér. Inclusão escolar: o que é? Por quê? Como fazer? São Paulo: Summus, 2015.

MINAYO, Maria Cecília de Souza. O desafio do conhecimento: pesquisa qualitativa em saúde. 14. ed. São Paulo: Hucitec, 2014.

Prieto, 2023 [Referência completa não encontrada no documento original]

RELVAS, Marta Pires. Neurociências e transtornos de aprendizagem. 7. ed. Rio de Janeiro: WAK, 2022.

ROHDE, Luis Augusto; BUITELAAR, Jan K.; GERLACH, Matthias; FARAONE, Stephen V. Guia para compreensão e manejo do TDAH World Federation of ADHD. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2019.

Wagner e Carlesso, 2019 [Referência completa não encontrada no documento original]

ZARAGOZA, José Manuel Esteve. O mal-estar docente: a sala de aula e a saúde dos professores. Bauru: EDUSC, 1999.

Article originating from a Final Coursework on Neuroscience and Learning in Education

To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform