Conference Program

The significant increase in life expectancy among persons with disabilities has made visible a profound demographic and social transformation that challenges educational and welfare systems: the ageing of individuals who have lived with a disability since childhood or adulthood (ageing with disability). Unlike disabilities acquired in later life, this phenomenon entails a cumulative stratification of biological, social, and institutional vulnerabilities, requiring a pedagogical rethinking of self-determination, participation, and quality of life across the life course. This theoretical and argumentative contribution lies at the intersection of special education, ageing studies, and policy analysis. It draws upon the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), the European Disability Strategy 2021–2030, and the recent Italian disability reform (Law 227/2021; Legislative Decree 62/2024). Within this framework, the individual, personalised and participatory life project is analysed not merely as an administrative tool, but as a pedagogical device ensuring continuity and safeguarding active citizenship in older age. Ageing with disability reveals a “middle ground” between welfare systems: older persons with disabilities risk being neither fully recognised within mainstream ageing services nor adequately supported within adult disability services. This fragmentation leads to discontinuities in support, reduced opportunities for participation, and processes of double stigmatisation (age and disability) that undermine agency. From this perspective, educating for inclusive citizenship means challenging custodial and protectionist approaches and promoting enabling environments in which individuals are recognised as rights-holders capable of contributing to community life, even in advanced age. Particular attention is devoted to the narrative and participatory dimension. Recent literature highlights the limited presence of the direct voices of older persons with intellectual disabilities in research and decision-making processes. This raises a crucial pedagogical issue: the need to create spaces for listening, accessible communication tools, and co-design practices capable of making self-determination effective. In this sense, multidimensional assessment grounded in the ICF framework and the shared construction of the life project can become key levers for integrating health, relationships, housing, and social participation into a coherent and personalised plan oriented towards quality of life. The contribution outlines several operational directions for a pedagogy of inclusive ageing: (1) ensuring educational and project continuity across the life course; (2) integrating socio-health and educational dimensions; (3) valuing subjective well-being and meaningful relationships; and (4) strengthening local networks and co-programming practices with third-sector organisations. Within this perspective, special education functions as a translational device between formal rights and everyday practices, contributing to the construction of inclusive communities capable of sustaining active and self-determined citizenship in older age. Ageing with disability should therefore not be framed as a merely assistential emergency, but as a test case for inclusive democracy: educating for active citizenship entails guaranteeing continuity, dignity, and participation throughout the entire life course.

The challenges associated with ageing with disabilities (AWD), highlight the importance of moving beyond welfare models and adopting measures capable of transforming the expected legislative objectives (Law 227/2021; Legislative Decree 62/2024) into meaningful experiences, resulting in a real improvement in the quality of life (Giaconi, 2015; Schalock & Verdugo, 2006) for individuals and communities. The intentional and continuous construction of a personalised life plan throughout the entire lifespan, which guarantees constant access to fundamental rights (CRPD), is preparatory to the prevention of secondary vulnerabilities for older persons with disabilities, providing a solid basis for identity and relationships. To this end, Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAI) can be particularly important as they aim to promote experiences that involve not only the motor sphere, but also the emotional and cognitive dimensions of individuals, with positive effects on individual well-being, social participation and the perception of quality of life in older people (Badin et al., 2022; Dincer et al., 2022), suggesting a possible preventive function with regard to the development of frailty. In Italy, The National Guidelines for Animal-Assisted Interventions (Ministry of Health, 2015) define objectives, methods of intervention and the rights of those receiving assistance, highlighting the importance of training and the involvement of various professionals (doctors, veterinarians, educators, animal assistants, etc.), who are essential in forming a team of operators capable of ensuring the effectiveness of the approach on both a therapeutic and educational level. Contact with animals represents an emotional exchange in which the person with disabilities is an active participant, encouraging the rediscovery of residual abilities and openness to the outside world. Starting from these premises, this paper empirically explores the educational role of AAI in fostering an environment conducive to health promotion (World Health Organisation [WHO], 1986), self-determination and inclusion (Del Bianco, 2024), with a particular focus on the path towards ageing with disabilities. The aim is to highlight best practices, the methods adopted and the relational climate that translate current regulations into concrete actions of participatory democracy, focusing on the role of AAI as a possible contribution to strengthening the socio-environmental adaptation skills of participants with disabilities and supporting the transition to old age. The survey documents the activities of a centre specialising in AAI, in particular with horses and dogs, through observation of the intervention settings, interviews, and collecting testimonies from participants and operators, with the intention of providing a choral and authentic narrative that highlights the potential of the proposed approach in preventing vulnerability and combating isolation and early institutionalisation of elderly people with disabilities. The research also aims to offer a critical reflection on the role of the educator, not only as a facilitator of the educational process, but also as a democratic mediator, capable of contributing synergistically, in collaboration with the local community, institutions and families, to Life Projects aimed at guaranteeing dignity and rights to people with disabilities, even in the most advanced stages of life.

Introduction. This study examines play as a pedagogical, cultural, and political resource to foster active ageing among persons with disabilities, contributing to the international debate on Ageing with Disability. Gameplay is conceptualized as a vital bridge connecting rights, self-determination, and everyday inclusive practices across the stages of life. It serves as a primary instrument for operationalizing active citizenship and lifelong learning.

Methodology. This exploratory study employed a qualitative empirical design centred on focus groups. This technique was selected to elicit nuanced opinions, motivations, and strategic proposals from a multi-stakeholder perspective involving political, social, and educational actors. The sample comprised 15 stakeholders from the Metropolitan City of Florence, spanning various professional and voluntary sectors. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis to identify emerging themes, points of convergence, and dissonances within the data corpus.

Results. The analysis of turn-taking revealed an iterative renegotiation of the concept of play and its practical applications; this confirms the polysemy of ludic methods documented in the literature. Regarding Ageing with Disability, three primary research trajectories emerged: a) territorial mapping of past experiences and current services; b) analysis of factors modulating participation and engagement levels; and c) project optimization coupled with the collection and assessment of enhancement proposals. The participants have perceived a gap, across these themes, in targeted local policies, with such responsibilities largely delegated to the third sector.

Discussion. From the perspectives of special education and critical gerontology, ludic activity can be proposed as a practice capable of bolstering the agency of older adults and their sense of community belonging. Self-determination is framed not merely as an individual skill to be developed, but as a human right to be secured through the design of enabling environments, accessible contexts, and support networks. In this light, local ludic services emerge as pivotal spaces for deconstructing stereotypical representations of ageing and dependency, thereby promoting participation and mutual aid even for individuals with significant functional limitations.

Conclusions. The findings suggest that it would be beneficial to use play as part of a reconceptualization of active aging in an inclusive form, linking it to other stages of life (for instance promoting it in early adulthood) and not reserving it for specific “categories” (with or without impairments, including those resulting from age). It is imperative to frame play as a rights-based pedagogical principle and to formulate the ludic experience within an evidence-based conceptual framework, promoting a local ludic culture free from stereotypes and prejudices.

In educational and social services addressing people with disabilities, the concept of a life project has progressively assumed a central role in supporting developmental pathways, transitions to adulthood, and the construction of forms of social participation. However, when individuals enter the stage of old age, this planning dimension often tends to weaken. In many care contexts, advancing age coincides with a gradual reduction in spaces for self-determination and with the strengthening of predominantly assistance-oriented intervention models, in which decisions related to everyday life are increasingly mediated by service organizations (Genga & Lattanzio, 2015).

This transformation raises significant questions for contemporary special education. People who have lived with disability since childhood or early adulthood are now experiencing increasingly longer life trajectories, bringing to light new educational, relational, and social needs.

In this scenario, there is a risk that advancing age may be interpreted primarily as a phase of progressive dependency, in which the life-planning dimension gradually loses meaning (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2021).

This contribution proposes a pedagogical reinterpretation of the concept of life planning in later life, questioning interpretations that confine it mainly to the early stages of existence or to transition phases related to disability. Through a theoretical-critical reflection that intertwines Disability Studies and special education, the paper interprets the life project as a dynamic and continuous process that accompanies the individual throughout the entire life course. From this perspective, attention shifts from the mere planning of services to the enhancement of life stories, meaningful relationships, and lifelong learning opportunities that sustain identity continuity and social participation (Regional Council, 2021).

This perspective is also in dialogue with the Capability Approach (Sen, 2000; Nussbaum, 2012), which interprets well-being as the real opportunity to choose and pursue meaningful forms of life, and with the bio-psycho-social model of disability promoted by the ICF (WHO, 2001), which highlights the role of social and cultural contexts in supporting or limiting opportunities for participation.

Within this framework, the contribution highlights the educational value of the caring relationship (Mortari, 2006), understood not merely as an assistance-based response to need, but as a relationship capable of recognizing the person in the entirety of their biographical experience and in their possibility to continue orienting their own existence (Hesse, 2002). From this perspective, rethinking life planning in aging with disability means acknowledging existential projectuality as a constitutive dimension of human dignity, even in conditions of greater fragility.

Special education can therefore offer a significant contribution in promoting educational and social practices capable of supporting quality of life, participation, and democratic citizenship throughout the entire life course, counteracting the reduction of aging with disability to a merely assistance-based issue (Applewhite, 2017).

Ageing with disability (AWD) is one of the most relevant and insufficiently explored theoretical and practical issues in contemporary special pedagogy (Jeppsson Grassman & Whitaker, 2012). Older people who have lived with a disability since childhood or early adulthood face a condition of double structural vulnerability, determined by the convergence of ageism (Butler, 1969) and ableism, i.e. cultural and institutional devaluation (Campbell, 2009; Goodley, 2014; Devlin & Pothier, 2006). This requires a theoretical reinterpretation of the epistemological foundations of special education (Jeppsson Grassman & Whitaker, 2012; Shakespeare, 2018).

This contribution interprets AWD as a complex pedagogical phenomenon, bringing together Disability Studies (Goodley, 2014; Devlin & Pothier, 2006), critical gerontology (Jeppsson Grassman & Whitaker, 2012) and democratic education theory.

The CRPD (2006) and the European Disability Strategy 2021–2030 (European Commission, 2021) highlight how the intertwining of ageism and ableism contributes to the marginalisation of older people with disabilities, fuelling a structural risk of social and institutional invisibility.

The Life Project, introduced by recent national regulatory reforms on disability, is analysed as a theoretical and operational tool to combat double vulnerability, promoting the integration of social, educational and care dimensions while respecting the self-determination of the individual (Wehmeyer, 2005).

The importance of support communities as democratic mediators in transforming recognised rights into practices of authentic inclusion (United Nations, 2006; European Commission, 2021) is highlighted, restoring epistemic centrality to those who risk 'voicelessness' in decision-making processes (Walmsley, 2001; Strnadová & Walmsley, 2018).

Special education for older people with disabilities must establish itself as a driver of emancipation and social change, promoting a culture of inclusion so that no one is left behind on life's journey (Goodley, 2014; Oliver, 1990).