Neuroscience And Learning In Education
September 16, 2026
Neuroscience, UDL and Inclusion in the Mathematics City Curriculum of the São Paulo City Hall
Priscila Macedo Andreani; Bárbara Solana Scarlassara
DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602311
Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the Revista E&S with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute for textual synthesis and organization.
Abstract
The demand for flexible and adapted teaching systems to student diversity has driven research into the theoretical bases that underpin official curricular documents. The Mathematics Curriculum of the City of São Paulo was analyzed to identify whether its propositions contemplated the foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and the premises of Inclusive Education. The methodology employed applied, documentary, and descriptive research, with a mixed approach and the use of thematic Content Analysis technique. The results revealed a robust theoretical alignment of the document with the analyzed axes, with emphasis on the stimulation of executive functions and curricular flexibility. However, triangulation with secondary data showed persistent disparities, such as high rates of absence of students with special educational needs (SEN) in official assessments and a lack of physical accessibility and specialized support in some school units. It was found that, although the curriculum has high technical and innovative potential, its effective implementation in practice was limited by structural barriers and the incomplete provision of Specialized Educational Support (SES). It was concluded that full inclusion in mathematics teaching requires articulation between the pedagogical innovations of the theoretical plan and the real conditions of infrastructure and teacher support. Theory, in isolation, did not guarantee the reversal of performance inequalities in the municipal network.
Keywords: Universal Design for Learning; Inclusive Education; Mathematics Teaching; Educational Neuroscience; Municipal Network.
1. Introduction
Currently, Inclusive Education is a fundamental value in school education, driven by the Salamanca Statement of 1994, which mobilized governments and international organizations (UNESCO, 1994). In Brazil, the National Policy on Special Education in the Perspective of Inclusive Education, from 2008, was established to guarantee the inclusion of people with disabilities, global developmental disorders, and high abilities/giftedness in regular education (Brazil, 2008). Supported by the Brazilian Inclusion Law (Law nº 13.146/2015), Inclusive Education goes beyond mere integration, proposing the transformation of educational systems to meet the diversity of all students, eliminating barriers to learning and participation (Brazil, 2015).
In this context, Inclusive Education demands flexible and adapted pedagogical responses. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) emerges as a promising approach to develop educational environments that confront and eliminate barriers in schooling, including for people with disabilities (Bock et al., 2018). UDL is based on three essential principles: multiple means of representation, of action and expression, and of engagement, aiming to optimize the brain networks of recognition, strategic, and affective (Zerbato, 2018).
In parallel, advances in Neuroscience offer significant contributions to the understanding of learning processes. The concept of neuroplasticity stands out, which refers to the brain’s ability to remodel itself based on experiences and stimuli. Cognitive Neuroscience, in particular, clarifies how the brain processes information, regulates emotions, and develops executive functions, such as attention, working memory, and planning. It also demonstrates the variability of these functions in people with disabilities and disorders, which demands pedagogical strategies that respect neurodiversity (Cosenza and Guerra, 2011; Lima, 2015).
In this scenario, the curriculum assumes a central role as a guiding element of pedagogical practices and a strategy for educational action in schools (D’Ambrósio, 2012). It is fundamental for the materialization of UDL principles and neuroscience discoveries in the classroom. From the UDL perspective, the curriculum is designed to meet the needs of all students from the initial planning, offering flexibility in objectives, methods, materials, and assessments, considering student variability (Sebastián-Heredero, 2020).
However, the implementation of these concepts still faces considerable challenges. Research indicates that the application of UDL in the curriculum, in Brazil, often focuses on the method, with less attention to materials, and there is a scarcity of investigations on the topic (Ribeiro and Amato, 2018). Furthermore, the presence of neuroscientific knowledge in teacher training is still low, hindering the application of pedagogical strategies aimed at diversity (Grossi et al., 2024). In mathematics teaching, misconceptions about the discipline, such as the idea of innate aptitude, contribute to school failure, requiring a curriculum that deconstructs these beliefs and offers flexible and neuroscientifically based pathways for learning (Boaler, 2018).
Given this panorama, this study takes as reference the Curriculum of the City of Mathematics of the Prefecture of São Paulo, implemented in 2018. This document establishes guidelines for the pedagogical practices of the network, adopting integral education, inclusion, and equity as guiding concepts. The investigation is justified by the need to understand how these guidelines materialize in didactic orientations and to identify the theoretical basis that sustains curricular implementation, going beyond the merely normative field.
Thus, the present work seeks to analyze the Mathematics Curriculum of the City of São Paulo to identify if its propositions contemplate the fundamentals of Educational Neuroscience, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and the premises of Inclusive Education.
2. Material and Methods
The present study was characterized as an applied research, of documentary and descriptive nature, with a mixed approach (qualitative and quantitative). Data collection, carried out from official public sources, did not require ethical review as it involved public domain documents.
The primary data source was the Mathematics City Curriculum of the São Paulo City Hall (São Paulo, 2019), a public document from the Municipal Secretariat of Education of São Paulo. For contextualization and triangulation, public secondary data on performance and school inclusion indicators from the municipal network were collected, obtained from the Open Data Portal of the São Paulo City Hall and the National Institute for Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira [INEP]. These quantitative data covered the period from 2019 to 2024.
The analysis of the primary document followed the thematic Content Analysis technique, according to Bardin (2016), operationalized in three stages: pre-analysis (organization and exhaustive reading of the material); material exploration (coding of the text based on predefined categories derived from the theoretical framework, allowing the identification of Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience, Principles and guidelines of Universal Design for Learning [UDL], and Strategies and perspectives of Inclusive Education for students of Special Education); and data treatment and interpretation (systematization of categories, frequency, depth, and context analysis, resulting in a critical interpretive analysis).
Secondary data were organized with the aid of the Google Sheets tool and submitted to descriptive statistics, with calculation of central tendency measures (mean) for the performance indicators in Mathematics and school inclusion, generating tables for visualization of distribution and variability.
The final phase of the methodology consisted of triangulating the results of the qualitative and quantitative analyses, confronting the guidelines and potentialities identified in the document with the real scenario described by the network data, to support the argumentation about the challenges and practical implications of the curriculum.
3. Results and Discussion
This research’s primary source was the Mathematics Curriculum of the City of São Paulo (São Paulo, 2019), an official document that proposes a pedagogical approach aligned with the National Common Curricular Base. The curriculum is structured into three cycles – Literacy, Interdisciplinary, and Authorial – and is based on principles of integral education, equity, and inclusion, aiming for the full development of students. The conception of Mathematics adopted integrates social, cultural, and formal dimensions, valuing mathematical literacy and student protagonism, through structuring and articulating axes.
The preliminary analysis indicated an innovative and contextualized curriculum, which emphasizes diversified teaching strategies, such as problem-solving, modeling, and the use of technologies, in addition to formative and regulatory assessment. The document reinforces the teacher’s role as a mediator and the student’s as an active agent, seeking to form critical and ethical citizens. For the exploration of the material, categories and subcategories were defined, detailed in Table 1, elaborated based on theoretical contributions from Cosenza and Guerra (2011), Lima (2015), Sebastián-Heredero (2020), and Zerbato (2018), which served as pillars for the analysis and coding of the data.
Table 1. Categories for content analysis
| Main Category | Subcategories | Indicators / Key Concepts |
|---|---|---|
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A1. Brain Plasticity | The brain’s capacity to remodel itself through stimuli, having experiences with an encouraging environment conducive to discussions, and age-appropriate performance expectations and standards. |
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A2. Attention | The brain’s capacity to process important information, being significant in the context in which the individual lives, meeting expectations, or being stimulating and pleasant. |
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A3. Memory | Storage and processing capacity of information: encode information; store through repetition with diversified strategies, elaboration by relating contexts, and consolidation from connections; and, evoke knowledge. |
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A4. Emotions | Influence of affective and motivational states on learning, with bond creation as a precursor. |
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A5. Executive functions | Set of skills and abilities that allow the execution of necessary actions to achieve a goal: working memory to operate necessary information; inhibitory control to have selective attention, cognitive and behavioral inhibition; and, cognitive flexibility to be open to changes. Ability to plan, set goals, identify issues, make inferences, generalize, identify errors, discrepancies, and lack of logic. |
| A) Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience | A6. Human dimension in the curriculum | Learning of values and behaviors through ethical plasticity and social models. Formation of neural circuits linked to the human and socio-emotional dimension. |
| B) UDL Principles and Guidelines | B1. Curricular flexibility | Consider the diversity of students, flexibilize objectives, methods, materials, and assessments, seeking to satisfy diverse needs, presenting options that allow everyone to progress from where they are in their learning. |
| B) UDL Principles and Guidelines | B2. Multiple presentation modes (Recognition network) | Provide different means of understanding, access to languages, and perception (auditory, visual, and concrete). |
| B) UDL Principles and Guidelines | B3. Multiple modes of action and expression (Strategic Network) | Diversification of strategies through which students can demonstrate what they know (communication channels, physical actions, etc.). |
| B) UDL Principles and Guidelines | B4. Multiple modes of implication, engagement, and involvement (Affective network) | Emotions and affectivity as crucial elements for learning. Strategies for increasing engagement through contexts, level adjustments, and incentives and rewards, diverse interactions. |
| C) Perspectives of Inclusive Education | C1. Inclusive school culture | Set of values, attitudes, practices, and norms shared by the school community that promote acceptance, respect for diversity, equity, and full participation of all students, with the participation of the entire school team in building a collaborative identity and culture. |
| C) Perspectives of Inclusive Education | C2. Curricular Accessibility vs. Adaptation | Focus of planning on removing barriers from the curriculum instead of focusing on the student’s “deficiency”. |
| C) Perspectives of Inclusive Education | C3. Paulistana Policy and Specialized Support | Mention of the Special Education audience, Specialized Educational Services [AEE] and collaboration between regular and special education. |
Source: Original research results
Category A, Fundamentals of Cognitive Neuroscience, comprised approximately 56% of the selected excerpts in the curriculum. Subcategory A5 (Executive Functions) stood out with 48% frequency, indicating that the curriculum prioritizes the development of higher cognitive processes, such as student protagonism in problem-solving and argumentation. This predominance converges with the importance of these functions for academic success, according to Cosenza and Guerra (2011).
The A1 subcategory (Brain plasticity), with 25% frequency, reinforced the belief in the learning capacity of all students, based on brain plasticity. Lima (2015) points out that the nervous system is shaped by stimuli and experiences, justifying the curriculum’s emphasis on enriched learning environments and adequate challenges. The other divisions, A3 (Memory) with 16%, A4 (Emotions) and A6 (Human dimension in the curriculum) with 10% each, and A2 (Attention) with 6%, indicate the curriculum’s understanding of the inseparability between cognition and affect. Lima (2015) emphasizes that emotions modulate memory and attention, making the curriculum’s focus on knowing students and their contexts relevant to foster engagement and learning.
Category B, UDL Principles and Guidelines, corresponded to approximately 36% of the selected excerpts. Subcategory B1 (Curricular Flexibility) showed the highest incidence, with 37% of the frequency, revealing that the curriculum prioritizes planning that considers the diversity of students’ paces and contexts. Sebastián-Heredero (2020) highlights flexibility as the foundation of UDL, allowing teachers to anticipate barriers and offer multiple pathways for everyone’s progress.
Category B2 (Multiple Means of Representation) accounted for 30% of the mentions, aligning with the research by Ribeiro and Amato (2018), which indicates a greater concentration of UDL use in the content presentation method. Zerbato and Mendes (2018) suggest that this is the aspect with which teachers feel most comfortable. Subcategory B4 (Engagement and Involvement), with 26%, demonstrated the document’s concern with the affective dimension of learning. Sebastián-Heredero (2020) emphasizes that mobilizing student interest with meaningful tasks is fundamental to sustaining effort and persistence.
On the other hand, the low frequency of the B3 subcategory (Multiple modes of action and expression), with 7%, revealed a point of attention. Zerbato and Mendes (2018) indicate that the lack of guidance on how students can express what they have learned, beyond written tests, can limit participation and impose curricular barriers.
Category C, Perspectives on Inclusive Education, presented the lowest total frequency, with approximately 25% of the analyzed excerpts. Subcategory C1 (Inclusive school culture) obtained a 57% frequency, indicating that the curriculum prioritizes the construction of an ethical foundation and values, emphasizing the elimination of attitudinal barriers and the recognition of differences. Zerbato and Mendes (2018) argue that school inclusion should occur through an articulated network of professionals, resources, and continuous training.
In subcategory C2 (Curricular Accessibility vs. Adaptation), with 33% of mentions, the focus shifts from the student’s “disability” to curriculum accessibility. This perspective converges with Sebastián-Heredero (2020) and Zerbato and Mendes (2018), who view the curriculum as a barrier requiring modification strategies. The low incidence of subcategory C3 (São Paulo Policy and Specialized Support), with 10% frequency, mentioned the importance of collaborative work and Specialized Educational Support (AEE). Zerbato and Mendes (2018) and Cosenza and Guerra (2011) corroborate the need for multidisciplinary work to implement inclusive pedagogical practices.
In summary, the qualitative analysis revealed that the City Curriculum of Mathematics demonstrates convergence with neuroscience, UDL as an instrument for flexibility and removal of barriers, and Inclusive Education, establishing a culture conducive to learning.
Analysis of school inclusion and performance data
To complement the analysis, performance data from the São Paulo Test and data from the School Census between 2019 and 2024 were considered. The São Paulo Test, an annual external assessment, monitors the performance of students from the 2nd to the 9th grade. The data were compared between students with and without special educational needs (SEN), considering the number of students, attendance in the math test, and proficiency.
Table 2. Comparative frequency in the mathematics test
| Year | Number of Students with SEN | Number of Students with SEN | Present in the exam without SEN | Present in the exam with SN | Absence percentage without NEE | Percentage of absence with SEN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 367071 | 11886 | 328057 | 7153 | 10,63% | 39,82% |
| 2021 | 283339 | 4873 | 266568 | 4418 | 5,92% | 9,34% |
| 2022 | 378270 | 302 | 329173 | 222 | 12,98% | 26,49% |
| 2023 | 358540 | 14053 | 322634 | 6726 | 10,01% | 52,14% |
| 2024 | 372530 | 17426 | 337855 | 12144 | 9,31% | 30,31% |
Source: Elaborated by the author based on data from São Paulo (2026)
Table 2 does not include the year 2020 due to the suspension of in-person classes by the COVID-19 pandemic. The year 2021 showed the smallest difference in absences between students with and without SEN, with a significant drop in the number of students with SEN. The Municipal Secretariat of Education of São Paulo (2021) reported that the Prova São Paulo was applied in a digital format, which may have influenced evaluative accessibility. The reduction in students with SEN in 2021 may be linked to health insecurity, keeping some of these students in isolation due to their clinical vulnerability. The year 2022 raised questions about possible inconsistencies in data recording, with a significantly lower number of students with SEN.
The high rate of absence among students with SEN (average of 32%), in contrast to the rate among students without SEN (average of 10%), suggests an accessibility barrier. This observation, when cross-referenced with the low frequency of subcategory B3 (multiple means of action and expression) in the curriculum, corroborates the hypothesis of a lack of inclusive assessment practices. Sebastián-Heredero (2020) emphasizes the need to expand assessment methods to reduce barriers and embrace diversity in classrooms. The inability to measure students’ real performance hinders pedagogical improvement and discourages participation, making external assessment a space of exclusion for students with SEN.
Table 3. Comparison of average proficiency in the mathematics test
| Year | Student | 2nd year | 3rd year | 4th year | 5th year | 6th grade | 7th grade | 8th grade | 9th grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | without SN | 142,77 | 152,85 | 182,2 | 198,31 | 207,12 | 218,23 | 229,25 | 245,52 |
| 2019 | with SEN | 102,2 | 120,16 | 143,64 | 157,2 | 171,71 | 186,48 | 191 | 210,99 |
| 2021 | without SN | 171,7 | 161,2 | 162,7 | 180 | 185,3 | 202 | 210,6 | 228,9 |
| 2021 | with SEN | 160,2 | 156,3 | 154 | 155,3 | 168,2 | 184,6 | 190,7 | 219,6 |
| 2022 | without SN | 137,53 | 140,45 | 167,71 | 182,96 | 193,47 | 209,89 | 229,93 | 232,59 |
| 2022 | with SEN | 115,73 | 111,26 | 110,14 | 140,48 | 140,14 | 154,05 | 123,15 | 191,73 |
| 2023 | without SN | 136,14 | 159,42 | 171,57 | 204,13 | 207,16 | 225,85 | 239,12 | 236,11 |
| 2023 | with SEN | 119,33 | 141,75 | 148,28 | 164,57 | 169,51 | 179,25 | 188,64 | 192,53 |
| 2024 | without SN | 161,88 | 162,12 | 167,91 | 179,66 | 185,88 | 191,82 | 196,77 | 201,55 |
| 2024 | with SEN | 124,58 | 138,71 | 144,36 | 156,7 | 173,52 | 177,93 | 184,33 | 188,85 |
Source: Elaborated by the author based on data from São Paulo (2026)
The analysis of the Mathematics proficiency data in Table 3 revealed a scalar growth over the school years, but with a persistent disparity between students with and without SEN. The group with SEN rarely surpassed the “Basic” level in the early grades, with averages predominantly in the “Below Basic” zone, according to the Prova São Paulo scale. The recorded difficulties can be interpreted in light of Boaler (2018), who points to failure as a practical challenge in the transition to a growth mindset. Stagnation is not limited to students with SEN, as the data show that, in most years, students without SEN also do not reach the adequate proficiency level. This scenario indicates that the problem lies in the rigidity of the system, which has not yet adopted open and creative approaches. Boaler (2018) suggests that equity and success in mathematics require flexible curriculum and assessments to contemplate everyone’s potential.
When crossing these proficiency indexes with the documentary analysis, it was observed that, although the City Curriculum of Mathematics presents a foundation in subcategories A5 (Executive functions) and B1 (Curricular flexibility), this theoretical richness does not translate into satisfactory performance. Low proficiency, added to the lack of strategies from subcategory B3 (Multiple means of action and expression), suggests that the curriculum, despite being advanced in discourse, fails to provide practical tools to teachers.
To understand the students’ context, the research was complemented with data from the School Census, the main data collection instrument for Brazilian basic education. The analysis was restricted to Elementary School schools in the city of São Paulo, focusing on data from Specialized Educational Assistance (AEE), Multifunctional Resource Rooms (SRM), structural accessibility, number of enrollments, and number of teachers.
Table 4. Number of schools, existence of SRM, offering of AEE and type of Special Education
[Table 4 — data not extracted]
Source: Elaborated by the author based on Brazil (2026)
The results from Table 4 indicate that, on average, 61% of elementary education units have SRM and only 48% offer the AEE service. This data is relevant because the City Curriculum foresees collaborative work between regular teachers and specialized professionals. The absence of AEE in more than half of the units makes this guideline impractical for most teachers, who are deprived of the technical support necessary for inclusive pedagogical mediation. This gap between the curricular discourse and the reality of the schools is reflected in the lower frequency of citations of Category C (Inclusive Education) in the document. Normative Instruction SME No. 14/2025 (São Paulo, 2025) establishes that all elementary education schools must have SRM, providing for adaptation plans and ensuring the offer of AEE.
Table 5. Structural accessibility
| Year | Elevator | Tactile flooring | Ramps | Visual signal | Non-existent accessibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 86 | 34 | 275 | 7 | 179 |
| 2020 | 76 | 22 | 262 | 3 | 188 |
| 2021 | 64 | 30 | 277 | 8 | 183 |
| 2022 | 86 | 32 | 275 | 7 | 181 |
| 2023 | 58 | 27 | 268 | 4 | 193 |
| 2024 | 250 | 165 | 284 | 4 | 124 |
Source: Elaborated by the author based on Brazil (2026)
Table 5 data reveal a sharp discrepancy in the existence of elevators and tactile floors in 2024 compared to previous years, raising the hypothesis of inconsistency in data collection or reporting. No records of structural interventions were found to validate this data. On average, 30% of school units still lack any structural accessibility. These gaps confront the Brazilian Inclusion Law (Law nº 13.146/2015), which provides for accessibility as a priority duty of the State. Although Normative Instruction SME nº 14/2025 (São Paulo, 2025) reiterates the promotion of structural accessibility, the absence of determined deadlines for its execution keeps physical barriers as a persistent obstacle.
Table 6. Number of enrollments
| Year | Elementary education | Special edition in regular class | Spec. Ed. in exclusive class |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 417864 | 14057 | 749 |
| 2020 | 413523 | 14406 | 727 |
| 2021 | 416336 | 14272 | 742 |
| 2022 | 416850 | 15204 | 767 |
| 2023 | 416361 | 16684 | 766 |
| 2024 | 435220 | 19126 | 749 |
Source: Elaborated by the author based on Brazil (2026)
The survey in Table 6 shows that the number of public Special Education students enrolled in the elementary schools of the São Paulo municipal network presents progressive growth, representing, on average, 4% of the total enrollments. The cross-referencing of this data with that from Table 2 confirms the hypotheses of the absence of students with SEN in 2021 (pandemic) and the drop in records in 2022 as atypical events or local inconsistencies, given that the School Census maintains the upward trend of enrollments. Although the average percentage of 4% may seem modest, the growth in enrollments makes the structural precariousness (Table 5) and the scarcity of AEE (Table 4) more serious. The system numerically accommodates, but does not fully guarantee the conditions for permanence and success foreseen in the curriculum. Ribeiro and Amato (2018) point out that teachers often do not feel prepared to serve this growing diversity, which reinforces the urgency of practical implementation of inclusive proposals and expansion of support services. Without this support, the increase in access does not translate into effective learning.
Table 7. Number of faculty
| Year | Elementary education | Special edition in regular class | Spec. Ed. in exclusive class |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 20614 | 17898 | 132 |
| 2020 | 19902 | 17300 | 119 |
| 2021 | 19770 | 16977 | 125 |
| 2022 | 19748 | 17207 | 132 |
| 2023 | 19819 | 17593 | 130 |
| 2024 | 20986 | 19060 | 148 |
Source: Elaborated by the author based on Brazil (2026)
The data in Table 7 indicate that the variable “Number of Inclusive Special Education teachers” is interpreted broadly, suggesting that most teachers fall into this category, which makes it impossible to precisely distinguish those who specifically work in offering Specialized Educational Support (AEE). Although the Municipal Department of Education of São Paulo (2025) reports an increase in the number of professionals, totaling 1,189 Specialized Educational Support Teachers (PAEE), there is a gap in open data regarding the exact number of specialists exclusively working in Elementary Education, preventing a conclusive measurement of direct support at this stage.
Grossi et al. (2024) discuss that teacher training still presents gaps in Neuroscience knowledge, essential for providing opportunities for practices that stimulate students’ integral development. Cosenza and Guerra (2011) emphasize that learning difficulties can be attributed to individual aspects, the environmental context, or both. Therefore, it is imperative to evaluate not only the training but also the structural, pedagogical, and human resources available in school units.
In summary, the analysis of the City Curriculum of Mathematics reveals a technical potential by converging with Cognitive Neuroscience, UDL, and Inclusion, aligning with evidence that demands a paradigm shift in Mathematics teaching. However, the discrepancy between the document and performance indicators reinforces that theory, in isolation, does not guarantee learning. For the curricular potentialities to translate into results, it is essential that support networks be structured and that classroom practices reflect the necessary flexibility to welcome all students.
4. Conclusion
This study analyzed the Mathematics Curriculum of the City of São Paulo’s Prefecture to verify the incorporation of the foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and the premises of Inclusive Education in its propositions. A robust theoretical alignment of the document with the analyzed axes was found, with emphasis on the stimulation of executive functions and curricular flexibility, indicating a technical and innovative potential for mathematics teaching. However, triangulation with secondary data revealed a significant gap between the curricular discourse and the practical reality of the municipal network. High rates of absence of students with special educational needs in official assessments and a persistent disparity in mathematics proficiency between groups were observed, with the performance of students with SEN predominantly below the basic level. Furthermore, a lack of physical accessibility and incomplete provision of Specialized Educational Support in a large part of the school units were identified, which compromises the implementation of inclusive guidelines.
The main contribution of this work lies in demonstrating that, although the City Curriculum for Mathematics presents an advanced theoretical foundation, its effective implementation in practice is limited by structural barriers and the insufficient offer of specialized support. It was concluded that full inclusion in mathematics education requires an urgent articulation between the pedagogical innovations proposed in the theoretical plan and the real conditions of infrastructure and teacher support, ensuring that support for teachers and specialized support networks keep pace with the theoretical evolution of the document. The stagnation of proficiency among students with SEN at elementary levels and the high rates of absence in official assessments demonstrate that the curriculum, in isolation, is not capable of reversing historical performance disparities or guaranteeing school engagement. A limitation highlighted is that some inconsistencies in secondary data on structural accessibility and a gap in open data on the exact number of AEE specialists prevented a conclusive measurement of direct support. For future studies, it is suggested to investigate the use of technology in evaluative accessibility and to expand research evaluating the practical implementation of UDL and Educational Neuroscience in the classroom, considering the available structural and human resources.
Bibliographic References
Bardin, L. 2016. Análise de conteúdo. São Paulo: Edições 70.
Boaler, 2018 [Referência completa não encontrada no documento original]
Bock, G. L. K.; Gesser, M.; Nuernberg, A. H. 2018. Desenho universal para a aprendizagem: a produção científica no período de 2011 a 2016. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial 24(1): 143-160.
Brasil. 2008. Política Nacional de Educação Especial na perspectiva da Educação Inclusiva. Brasília, jan. 2008.
Brasil. 2026. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira (Inep). Censo Escolar: resultados. Brasília, DF: Inep.
Cosenza, R. M.; Guerra, L. B. 2011. Neurociência e educação: como o cérebro aprende. Artmed, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
D’Ambrosio, U. 2012. Educação matemática: Da teoria à prática. 23ª ed. Papirus, Campinas, SP, Brasil.
Grossi, M. G. R.; Oliveira, E. S.; Fonseca, R. G. P. 2024. Currículo, neurociência e a formação de professores. Revista e-Curriculum 22: 1-26.
Lima, E. S. 2015. Contribuições da neurociência para a concepção de currículo. Revista Retratos da Escola 9(17): 321-335.
Ribeiro, G. R. de P. S.; Amato, C. A. de L. H. 2018. Análise da utilização do Desenho Universal para Aprendizagem. Cadernos de Pós-Graduação em Distúrbios do Desenvolvimento 18(2): 125-151.
Sebastián-Heredero, E. 2020. Diretrizes para o Desenho Universal para a Aprendizagem (DUA). Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial 26(4): 733-768.
São Paulo (SP). 2019. Currículo da cidade: Ensino Fundamental: componente curricular: Matemática. 2.ed, SME/COPED, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
São Paulo (SP). 2026. Portal de Dados Abertos da Prefeitura de São Paulo. São Paulo: Controladoria Geral do Município.
São Paulo (SP). Secretaria Municipal de Educação. 2021. Provinha e Prova São Paulo são aplicadas pela primeira vez no formato 100% digital e incluem questionário sobre impacto da pandemia. São Paulo: SME.
São Paulo (SP). Secretaria Municipal de Educação. 2025. Instrução Normativa SME n° 14, de 4 de março de 2025. Dispõe sobre a organização e o funcionamento das Unidades Educacionais da Rede Municipal de Ensino. São Paulo: SME.
São Paulo (SP). Secretaria Municipal de Educação. 2025. Secretaria de Educação amplia em mais de 600% profissionais de apoio na Educação Especial da Rede Municipal. São Paulo: SME.
UNESCO. 1994. Declaração de Salamanca sobre Princípios, Política e Práticas na Área das Necessidades Educativas Especiais. Aprovada pela Conferência Mundial sobre Necessidades Educativas Especiais: Acesso e Qualidade. Salamanca, Espanha, 7-10 de jun. 1994.
Zerbato, A. P.; Mendes, E. G. 2018. Desenho universal para a aprendizagem como estratégia de inclusão escolar. Educação Unisinos, São Leopoldo 22(2): 147-155.
Article originating from a Final Course Work on Neuroscience and Learning in Education
To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform