Políticas de inclusão na educação superior: ecos da acessibilidade arquitetônica na UFU

• Autor(a) principal: Freitas, Márcia Guimarães de
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFU
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/32616; http://doi.org/10.14393/ufu.te.2021.269
• topic: acessibilidade arquitetônica; Universidade Federal de Uberlândia; heterotopias.; CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS

This research aimed to analyze how the presence of architectural barriers at UFU (Federal University of Uberlândia), Santa Mônica campus, represents power practices on students with disabilities, even today, in 2020, as well as the mechanisms that are involved in these power relations an what effets they have on students with disabilities. In this research, we approached the theme of architectural accessibility in the academic space of Federal University of Uberlândia (UFU), considering the Santa Mônica Campus as a sample.Using photographs that point out indications of architectural inadequacies in an exemplary manner, we demonstrate that, although inclusion has ceased to be an option and has become an imperative, in addition to be legalized and formalized at higher levels and at UFU itself, barriers still exist that restrict the use of this academic environment by students with disabilities. Based on Foucault’s discussions, we chose to think of this context from the perspective of power relations, the tactics of governing disciplinary society, the principle of normalization, among other foundations; and in a special way, from the perspective of heterotopias. In this sense, we identified the UFU space as heterotopic in relation to the city of Uberlândia and, at the same time, cut out by internal heterotopias, which take different forms and make this environment not be equally accessible to the entire academic community. The internal heterotopies of interest for this research were related to architectural accessibility and specifically affect students with disabilities. We were able to infer that such heterotopias have power effects on this group of students, imposing limitations on their participation in academic life, starting with the real possibilities of circulation inside the campus, which leads these learners to limit their presence to spaces that impose less difficulties on them or that are more inevitable for academic survival like classrooms (even when they present barriers). It is evident that, through the heterotopias constituted by architectural barriers, the academic life of students with disabilities requires extraordinary determination and effort from them, with a high risk of waiver and, as for those who persist, their participation possibilities are restricted, due to obstacles contained in an environment idealized for people without disabilities. It appears that UFU, which calls itself inclusive, is subject to legal requirements for the implementation of accessibility, formalizes in its institutional documents the fulfillment of the dictates of inclusion, among them, the reservation of vacancies for people with disabilities; even so, it does not really execute an accessibility that offers, to students with disabilities, the same opportunities for participation that other students have. Although society as it occurs today imposes inclusion and accessibility for whatever reasons and interests; and although the university opens its doors to students with disabilities, it appears that their full participation in academic life is not desirable, given that architectural barriers are maintained, creating heterotopias that keep them on the margins.