Conference Program
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | |
F.03. Deaf Inclusion as a Democratic Imperative (2/2)
Convenor(s): Alessandra Faggiotto (Università di Macerata, Italy); Donata Chiricò (Università Magna Graecia – Catanzaro, Italy); Enrico (3,4) Dolza; Danilo Del Piro (Università della Calabria, Italy) | |
    | |
Accepted
Deafblind Inclusion: Tactile Communication and Personalized Approaches as Educational Imperative Marsili, Italy Deafblind individuals face a unique condition of dual sensory impairment, requiring Accepted
Access to Healthcare Services and Democratic Inclusion of the Deaf Community Università degli Studi di Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy Access to healthcare services represents a crucial juncture in the exercise of citizenship and in the relationship between individuals and institutions, as it is within these contexts that fundamental rights are translated into concrete practices and power relations. Healthcare constitutes a particularly sensitive space, characterized by informational asymmetries, conditions of vulnerability, and a strong dependence on communication between citizens and professionals. In this framework, the presence of communication barriers directly affects the possibility of exercising rights in a full and effective manner. For the Deaf community, such barriers assume a structural relevance, since communication is not an ancillary element of the care pathway, but rather an essential condition for decisional autonomy, informed consent, and the establishment of trust in healthcare institutions. Despite the formal recognition of the right to health, the lack of services designed according to accessibility criteria continues to produce often invisible forms of exclusion, transforming legally guaranteed rights into merely nominal rights. This contribution analyzes access to healthcare and public services as a matter of substantive democratic inclusion, challenging a conception of accessibility understood solely as a technical accommodation or an emergency solution. The intervention is situated within a broader reflection on the accessibility of healthcare services, including their increasingly digital dimension, interpreted as a structural requirement of equality and as a condition for the effective exercise of citizenship. Through a critical perspective that intertwines disability studies, democratic theory, and the analysis of public institutions, this contribution highlights how inclusion cannot be reduced to a logic of concession or individual adaptation, but must be recognized as an organizing principle of healthcare policies and public services. From this standpoint, accessibility emerges as a fundamental parameter for assessing the democratic quality of healthcare systems and as a central element in the construction of a truly inclusive citizenship. Accepted
A Phenomenological Investigation Into The Perception Of Loneliness In Deaf Adults 1Università degli Studi di Messina, Italy; 2Università degli Studi di Catania, Italy The experiences of deaf adults transcend the purely sensory domain and cannot be fully captured through audiological measures alone. From a phenomenological-clinical standpoint, deafness constitutes a transformation in one’s very “being-in-the-world,” reshaping the perception of social space, the modalities of communication, and the embodied sense of self. In this context, the body emerges as the primary medium of expression and relational engagement. Loneliness, therefore, should not be reduced to a voluntary social withdrawal; rather, it may be understood as the manifestation of a progressive disruption in intersubjective processes (Döge et al., 2025; Heffernan et al., 2022). Such experiences are further intensified by the communicative and relational demands imposed by auditory impairment - heightened interpretative effort, sustained vigilance, increased visual attention to faces and lip movements, and cognitive fatigue. When these adaptive efforts are not adequately supported through rehabilitation (Rostkowska et al., 2021), deaf adults may experience communicative isolation and a pervasive sense of social “invisibility” (Bott & Saunders, 2021; Shukla et al., 2020). Grounding the body as a foundational dimension of experience and meaning-making, this study explores the subjective experiences of ten deaf adults (with congenital or acquired deafness) who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants, recruited within a speech-language rehabilitation setting. The research adopts a qualitative design, combining questionnaires on lived experience with a narrative role-playing task. Participants were invited to produce three brief texts, each addressed to a different interlocutor: a family member, an unfamiliar peer living with the same clinical condition, and their therapist. In each text, they described daily challenges, bodily sensations associated with listening, and the principal communicative difficulties encountered in everyday life. The study seeks to examine how, and to what extent, the narration of subjective experience is shaped by the addressee and by the quality of the relational and emotional bond. Specifically, the study aims to observe how deaf adults ascribe meaning to their experiences and whether they modulate the communication of their lived experience as the relational distance from the interlocutor increases. Analysing potential communicative variations - namely, which aspects of experience are emphasized, downplayed, or left unspoken - may reveal which experiential dimensions are more easily shared and which tend to remain implicit, particularly within formal care contexts. These findings have direct implications for the clinical understanding of the individual experience and, consequently, for the planning of rehabilitative interventions. From a phenomenological-clinical perspective, it becomes essential for hearing rehabilitation professionals to listen empathically to deaf individuals, attuning to even the less explicit facets of their clinical experience. This approach integrates objective assessment tools with systematic attention to subjective characteristics, thereby informing more effective rehabilitative strategies and support adaptive processes that respect how deaf individuals ontologically reorganize their experience. Accepted
Between Inclusion and Representation. Politics, Power and Agency in the Italian Deaf Community 1LIS School “Gruppo SILIS”; 2Lab LaCAM, ISTC CNR; 3ENS; 4Sapienza University In the Italian public debate, deaf people are predominantly portrayed as recipients of accessibility measures rather than as active participants in decision-making processes and knowledge production. Inclusion thus tends to be framed in terms of external technical-instrumental measures (interpretation, translation, subtitling) and internal ones (hearing aids), while the issue of exclusion from the spaces where policies, priorities, and models of citizenship are defined remains less addressed. This paper aims to describe the Italian Deaf community from an internal perspective, highlighting how forms of social injustice manifest not only in access to services but also in limited participation in educational, cultural, and institutional governance. Even the most recent legislation directly concerning the deaf community, Law 69/2021, while representing a historic step in the recognition of LIS, is nevertheless focused almost exclusively on the training and stabilization of interpreters, treating them primarily as a technical tool, without addressing more broadly the issues related to rights, representation, and the active role of the deaf community in decision-making processes; its implementation is producing ambivalent effects. Nor has it encouraged the creation of deaf spaces, such as the establishment of Italian/LIS bilingual schools, specific vocational training programs, or new fields of study in line with practices in other countries, such as training in Deaf Studies. Many expectations that have developed over the years remain unmet, as has been the case in other countries (De Meulder et al., 2019): linguistic recognition has not automatically translated into a structural strengthening of the autonomy, leadership, and creativity of Deaf people in educational, professional, and cultural contexts. At the same time, those who did not support the recognition of LIS express dissatisfaction with the perceived imbalance of resources toward the linguistic dimension at the expense of other services. This paper will analyze how this scenario contributes to reorganizing the field of demands, fueling new tensions and redefining political priorities. Particular attention will be given to the dichotomies that tend to polarize public discourse and which, despite the passage of time, have not seen substantial changes: deaf-mutes/deaf-speakers vs. signers/oralists; the deaf community or the signing community; gesture/word vs. sign/word; LIS vs. Italian; individual autonomy according to the hearing model vs. isolation in the “deaf ghetto.” These are oppositions that often oversimplify a far more complex reality, characterized by diverse paths and multiple affiliations, making for a more nuanced approach capable of valuing the diversity within the Deaf community (Kusters et al., 2017; Leigh, 2017; Monaghan et al., 2003), which is also evident in light of studies conducted outside the Global North (Friedner & Kusters, 2015; Green, 2024; Kusters et al., 2024). The paper argues that the inclusion of deaf people must be interpreted as a democratic imperative: not only ensuring access, but promoting effective participation in decision-making processes and recognizing the epistemic authority of the deaf community as a competent partner in defining policies that affect it. From this perspective, the challenge is not merely to increase accessibility tools, but to rethink the relationships between representation, power, and knowledge production. Accepted
The Inclusion of Deaf People in the Italian School System: Historical, Educational, and Democratic Perspectives University of Chieti-Pescara (Italy), Italy The relationship between education and democracy is closely linked to the concept of inclusion and to the ability of institutions to ensure that all individuals have equal opportunities to participate in processes of personal development and learning, while maintaining high standards of educational provision. Within this framework, the historical trajectory of the inclusion of people with sensory disabilities in the Italian education system is a significant case study, as it demonstrates the nation’s democratic progress and civic commitment. With particular reference to deaf or hard-of-hearing people, this paper aims to examine the process that led first to integration and later to inclusion within the school system. In order to do so, it will analyse both legislative developments and paradigm shifts in the pedagogical field. These will be linked to the transformation of the very concept of disability, special education, and teacher training. Adopting a historical-educational perspective, the study anchors the Italian experience within broader European debates on inclusive education and the democratic mission of learning institutions. It is no coincidence that the history of deaf education has long been characterised by tensions between competing epistemological and pedagogical models, particularly the opposition between sign-language-based education and oralist approaches, traditionally associated with two leading figures: Charles-Michel de l’Épée and Samuel Heinicke. In Italy, specialised institutes for deaf students historically represented the primary pathway to schooling for deaf children. However, while these institutions ensured access to education, they also reproduced segregated educational frameworks, which denied access to public schooling and the opportunity to participate in national civic life. Later, during the 20th century, legislative awareness of social issues became increasingly crucial. The proposal of an initial approach to integrating people with sensory disabilities into the wider debate on the function of education and school was made by Giovanni Gentile. In 1923, as Minister of Education, he applied the principle of compulsory education for the first time to “the blind and the deaf-mute” as well; however, it was only following the reforms of the 1970s and the 1990s that a genuine change was brought into the school system, thereby establishing Italy as a true pioneer in the field of inclusive education. These reforms redefined schools as democratic institutions responsible for fostering participation, equity, and social and individual recognition of people with disabilities. However, deafness gives rise to particular challenges, which intersect with linguistic, cultural, and communicative dimensions. These, in turn, challenge traditional assumptions about teaching, learning, and participation in the classroom. These issues have significant implications for democratic education, as they require educational systems capable of recognising diversity while ensuring equal access to knowledge and personalised solutions. This study therefore sets out to explore the relationship between the Italian educational experience and the changing concepts of disability, welfare policies and education, with a view to gaining a deeper understanding of how historical trajectories have shaped contemporary meanings and how, even today, they can prove useful in the development of processes aimed at inclusion and active citizenship. Accepted
The Educational and Societal Value of Diversity Based on LSF Université Toulouse Jean Jaures, France Our proposal wish to highlight the richness and complexity of the mixed teaching environment we have, which fosters a shared democratic practice through cultural, linguistic, and professional mutual understanding. We will do so by presenting the audiences involved (Deaf/hearing, professionals/academics) (Ristic, 2022)(Mohd Rashid and al., 2026), the funding models (university funding for students, ministerial funding for academic professionals), facility arrangements (dedicated recording rooms, classrooms, offices, safety measures), pedagogical collaborations (project-based approach, collaborative practices among students) (Kordić and al., 2023), and pedagogical adaptations (visual teaching supports, extensive use of video) (Howerton-Fox ans al., 2024)(Golos and al., 2023)(De Raeve, 2015). The Department of Translation, Interpreting and Mediation (D-TIM) trains – among others – French to French Sign Language (LSF) translators, French to/from LSF interpreters, and LSF mediators at the Master's level, under the "European Master of Translation" (EMT) label of excellence. Students, whose first language is either LSF (primarily Deaf individuals) or French (primarily hearing individuals), can join the program in the first year of their Bachelor's degree, with LSF as the primary subject taught, and French or English respectively as the second subject. At the Master's level, Deaf students can then choose translation or mediation, while hearing students choose interpretation. From the first year of the Bachelor's (L1) to the final year of the Master's (M2), these students take an increasing number of shared courses. Once language foundations are consolidated in L1, the curriculum focuses on LSF-based subjects such as translation, linguistics, and Deaf Studies, as well as more technical fields related to the specific option chosen in the Master's program. The teachers are either Deaf or hearing, and largely signers, which allows for direct teaching in LSF; otherwise, interpretation is provided to ensure course accessibility. These teachers are professionals in their fields (teaching, translation, mediation, interpreting) as well as academics, ensuring a rich educational experience with varied perspectives. One of the academics is a Deaf associate professor attached to the department. The accessibility provided relies on funding allocated either to the students by the university for classes, conferences, and seminars, or to the Deaf associate professor by the Ministry of Higher Education, for internal meetings. These teachers are also involved in reflections on the program’s evolution and in student evaluations at the end of the last year of the Master (thesis defense, practical exams), ensuring the training remains in constant alignment with field requirements. Furthermore, our program develops a project-based pedagogy in partnership with local and national Deaf or hearing organizations to implement accessibility solutions for events requiring, for example, interpretation, translation, communication, or subtitling. Students lead these projects under the supervision of a faculty advisor, complementing their theoretical university learning. We also foster collaborative pedagogy within various courses to encourage sharings between students, utilizing specific room arrangements, video usage, and visual and multimodal teaching aids. Accepted
A Democratic School before Democracy: Charles-Michel L'Épée and the Birth of Sign Language UNIVERSITÀ "MAGNA GRAECIA" - Catanzaro, Italy In the history of Western education, the earliest known institution is the Academy of Athens. Founded by Plato in 387 BCE, he remained its preeminent teacher throughout his life. As the locus of a multifaceted philosophical tradition spanning 916 years, the Academy still comprised disciples and masters when it was forcibly closed by Emperor Justinian in 529 CE. This event marked the final act of a ruthless policy of cultural hegemony that had persisted for over a century and a half, representing the culmination of the Roman Empire's project of enforced Christianization. Before this suppression—and before the study of original Greek philosophical sources was criminalized—it was within this very Academy that the foundational work of our philosophical reflection on language originated: the Cratylus. This dialogue serves as a testament to the absence of preconceived biases regarding the use of visual-gestural modalities of language. This crucial awareness, established by Plato, remains discernible at least until Augustine’s De Magistro (389 CE). Within a few short decades, however, this entire heritage of knowledge and observations concerning Deaf individuals and visual-gestural communication was effectively erased from history. It would not be until the 18th century that these themes were revisited and systematically addressed. Furthermore, it was necessary for philosophy to reclaim the autonomy stripped from it by the pervasiveness of religious dogma and theology, eventually asserting itself as properly "enlightened" (Kant 1784). It is no coincidence that this period reflects a worldview in which corporeality and its performances are conceptualized as a disparate apparatus of self-governance—as an act of agency rather than mere mechanical execution (Condillac 1746, 1754). The resulting concept of the subject is of profound interest, as it emphasizes that the subject exists insofar as it "works" toward a conversion of its own naturalness—primarily a bodily one. This naturalness does not, and must not, represent a predestined state or a privilege to be wielded against those (animals, children, disabled individuals, women, non-European populations) who might appear to lack it due to their perceived "distance" from a presumed ideal form. Moreover, this aligns with the perspective of the compelling socio-political framework known today as Crip Theory (McRuer 2018). Above all, it is the vision that inspired the "pedagogical-linguistic heresy" (Chiricò 2016) expressed by Charles-Michel de L’Épée when he established the first school for the Deaf in history in Paris. This institution was entirely unprecedented for its time. Even by contemporary standards, it remains avant-garde, particularly for its bilingual sign-word character and its advocacy for the education of Deaf people as a public responsibility. In a pre-revolutionary France that would wait until the Constitution of 1793 to affirm that “education is the need of all” (Art. 22), L’Épée realized a democratic school prior to the formal advent of democracy. | |