A lot has changed, in the last thirty years, in the common
attitude relating to the crucial and delicate matter of "disability". A
matter that cannot and must not concern the individuals themselves or
their families, but the whole society. The adoption of new sets of rules
and the development of new educational models have placed at the forefront
two fundamental aspects: the essential value of "integration"
or "inclusion" of persons with disabilities within the social system
(whether that be for education, work or leisure); and the consideration of
"disability" no more defined as handicap or impairment, but in a global
sense with its complexity, because every person is complex and unique in
its limitations and potential. We have moved from a culture of "either or"
to a culture of "both and"; we have moved from an idea of mere
differentiated "support", owed or worse "granted" to persons with
disabilities from the "able people" society, to a broader and more
inclusive idea of acknowledgement and enhanced value of individuals'
specificity and potential.
Experts recognize the effects of this
different conception in the "International Classification of Functioning,
Disability and Health" (ICF); a classification focused on the necessity of
an evaluation expressed by persons with disabilities, about their needs
and specificities, in order to allow the elaboration of a life project to
which must participate various institutional and informal players. In this
prescriptive and conceptual context, education, besides being a right
ratified in legislation, must be considered as an essential instrument for
overcoming disability – or at least for balance and mitigation – in a
perspective which would not involve mere learning, but authentic
construction of autonomy. Since education and training, from primary
school to university, are essentially focused on the widespread and equal
acquisition of knowledge, it is an essential obligation of the education
system to remove every obstacle and barrier that prevent any individual to
access whatever level of education. We must not think of "barriers" as
being only physical, rather we must also and above all consider cultural
and methodological barriers.
In this sense, technology has been and will always be an important ally in regards to sensory disabilities, notably. One needs only to think, as a concrete example, to the opportunity for blind individuals to access printed texts in digital format through voice synthesis. A pilot project of the Alma Matter Studiorum of the University of Bologna, specifically at the Department of Classic Philology and Italian Studies, is looking into widening the availability of such texts to documents in ancient Greek, a field of study that is still not today accessible to blind people. Every single step is relevant towards true and equal accessibility to knowledge. Technology is not considered only as a valued support: it has to be a mean to guarantee and build the authentic autonomy of persons with disabilities. It is not enough to make the instrument available: it is necessary to promote its use in an independent manner by persons with disabilities, as an integral part of the educational pathway. Persons with disabilities must have access to the tools, but must also have the necessary culture to make these tools a mean to reduce or eliminate their dependence on others. It is in fact to such a culture of autonomy that the educational system must contribute in a determinant way. Also, it is a duty of the school and the university to not only help with the choice of studies, but also to facilitate the most adequate choices and promote, where necessary,
We touch here the basic point. Because not only the disabled person is educated and guided towards a culture of autonomy; educators, above all, have to acquire its principles, learning how to recognize the limitations, skills, potential and responsibilities of that person. Sets of rules and technology help, certainly: they are in fact necessary conditions, but they are not enough. Besides sets of rules and technology, economic and cultural means are important and must always be more and more relevant. Economic means: because without a steady and concrete support, it will not be possible to build anything for anyone who is in a situation of disadvantage by nature or society. Cultural means: because what we need, what can no longer be postponed is to focus on the person's value and, consequently, the community's value. Only this will allow us to see in a new way: to learn to see what is most important, for which we often "have eyes but cannot see".