{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019949624412099055, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007556338185141431, 'mean_word_length': 5.15756244853143, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
TOGETHER OR SEPARATED? THE SEGREGATIVE AND INTEGRATIVE MODEL OF CULTURAL ACCESSIBILITY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Culture takes an increasingly important position in the debate about the accessibility of public space for persons with disabilities. Many questions about how to include them in cultural life have emerged. The subject of the present article is a theoretical reflection on actions taken in this area by cultural institutions and non-governmental organizations. Basing on a comparative analysis of two events of such kind, and using the achievements of special pedagogy, I present two models of cultural accessibility for persons with disabilities: the separative and integrative model. I ponder on their advantages and disadvantages. I conclude by claiming that both can be useful in the process of making culture accessible for persons with disabilities, providing that the beneficiaries will be allowed to choose what kind of events they will attend. These considerations accord with the recently burgeoning field of accessibility studies, while disability studies serves as a broad theoretical frame.


INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the theme of accessibility has received ever-increasing public attention in Poland. Quiet hours in supermarkets for persons on the autism spectrum, sign language interpretation of many public events for the D/deaf or tactile paths on the pavements for the blind are just a few examples of the presence of accessibility in the public space. When we think about accessibility, usually education, labour market or architecture spring to mind. Other crucial aspects of social life, such as culture, frequently stay in the shadows. That is probably why for a long time the theme of cultural accessibility has remained beyond the interest of the Polish government. In consequence, it was mainly promoted by non-governmental organizations. Given the fact that there were no official clues on how to do it, cultural accessibility in Poland has been created through trial and error. Each organization and cultural institution have elaborated its own strategies basing on its own intuition. Nowadays, scrutinizing the cultural offer accessible for persons with disabilities in Poland, we can see that it is quite diverse. Screenings of films with audio description and closed captions take place regularly in Poznan, Warsaw, Cracow, and Wroclaw. Theatres in Lublin, Katowice, Chorzow, and Warsaw also offer these arrangements for their performances. Some museums prepare tactile models; others give guided tours in sign language. The broad scope and momentum of these activities trigger a scholarly reflection upon some theoretical aspects of accessibility.
The goal of this paper is to identify and examine different approaches to cultural accessibility present in Poland. I argue this point on the basis of the analysis of activities undertaken in the field of accessibility in our country. Two models of cultural accessibility can be distinguished. I call them the segregative and integrative models and I present them on the example of two accessible festivals in Poland: Festiwal Kultury i Sztuki (dla Osób Niewidomych) [Festival of Culture and Art (for Blind Persons)] and Festiwal Kultury bez Barier [Culture without Barriers Festival].
The concept of two models of cultural accessibility in Poland has sprung to my mind after my longstanding participation in different accessible cultural events in various institutions in various cities. Nevertheless, theoretical reflection proposed in this paper is mainly built on the analysis of the two above mentioned festivals. This reflection is grounded on my own experience both as a receiver and as a provider of accessibility as well as the Internet content, for instance, media reports. To ponder on the theme of accessibility, I use concepts provided by accessibility studies, special pedagogy and disability studies. Basing on the achievements of the relatively young field of Accessibility Studies, I present existing assistive technologies and reflect on the practical and symbolic implications of their application. Furthermore, basing on elaborated in the field of special pedagogy segregative and integrative model of education, I propose, by analogy, a segregative and integrative model of cultural accessibility. Finally, using the concept of models of disability constituted in the field of Disability Studies, I investigate their relation to proposed models of cultural accessibility.

ACCESSIBILITY STUDIES
Making culture accessible for persons with disabilities is a long and multilateral process. It is associated with the development of two revolutionary techniques: audio description and closed captions, which make possible for persons with sensorial disabilities to enjoy audiovisual cultural production. Audio description can be defined as "a verbal commentary providing visual information for those unable to perceive it by themselves. AD helps blind and partially sighted people access audiovisual media and is also used in live settings such as theatres, galleries and museums" (Fryer 2016: 1). Closed captioning is defined as a "process of converting the audio content of a television broadcast, webcast, film, video, CD-ROM, DVD, live event, or other productions into a text and displaying the text on a screen, monitor, or another visual display system. Captions not only display words as the textual equivalent of spoken dialogue or narration, but they also include speaker identification, sound effects, and music description" (NAD n.d.). In 1972 "The French Chef" in the USA was delivered with closed captions as the first TV show in history (NCI n.d.). In 1981 the first audio-described performance took place in Arena Stage theatre in Washington (Chmiel and Mazur 2014: 32). Since then, both techniques improved a lot and spread around the world. They were introduced to many more venues than cinemas and theatres. Plenty of new facilities of cultural accessibility have emerged, such as touch tours in museums for the blind and guided tours conducted in sign language for the D/deaf. The concept of cultural accessibility has also broadened to include persons with an intellectual disability or persons on the autism spectrum.
Like almost every other social phenomenon, cultural accessibility has also gained the interest of academia. However, the previous research tended to focus more on technical aspects of accessibility than on the accessibility as a holistic phenomenon. Audiovisual translation for several years has been a subject of deep and broad investigation (Maszerowska et al. 2014;Romero Fresco 2015). Nonetheless, as Matamala and Orero indicate, finally "the object of study and its methodology have out-grown the field where they were initially studied" (Matamala and Orero 2016: 2). That is why they propose a formulation of a new field of study, namely, accessibility studies that is to comprise audiovisual translation, assistive technologies, audience development, Universal Design, tourism management and services, new media technologies and many more (Matamala and Orero 2016: 2).. At first glance, Accessibility Studies might seem to address too specific and narrow a question for an interdisciplinary reflection. However, it is essential to understand the notion of accessibility comprehensively. If the field aims to introduce accessibility in ever more spheres of social life, it is crucial to define what accessibility is and what is not. It is essential to establish what conditions should be fulfilled to call some solution an accessible one, no matter if it is in the field of architecture or culture. That is why there an urgent need to create an interdisciplinary field of the transfer of knowledge. Process of creating accessibility requires both technological solutions and theoretical reflection. For example, an architect designing an entrance accessible for persons with disabilities on the back door of the building fulfils the official standards of accessibility, but on the symbolic level, reproduces the social mechanism of segregation. The task of Accessibility Studies is to educate society to promote and implement inclusivity at all levels. To achieve this goal, a thorough interdisciplinary scientific reflection on different dimensions of accessibility seems pivotal. That is why recently even more scholars contribute to this burgeoning field. Gian Maria Greco, for instance, develops the concept of accessibility studies positioning accessibility in the context of human rights (Greco 2016; and postulates the development of pedagogy of accessibility (Greco 2020). The growing need for pondering on accessibility is also reflected in academic curricula. For example, Central Washington University in the USA offers a minor in accessibility studies (CWU n.d.).
The main goal of Accessibility Studies, in my opinion, should be promoting the belief that accessibility ought not to be an element of postproduction, but ought to be present in the process of designing from the very beginning in any sphere of social reality starting from architecture through education and ending up with culture. Accessibility is not only about the use of assistive technologies, but first of all a way of thinking.

ACCESSIBILITY IN POLAND
The process of making culture accessible has a different history and strategy across various countries. In some countries, it enjoys strong state support, in others less so. In Poland, this process has been in operation for several years now, and it is mainly founded upon the private initiative of NGOs later joined by a few cultural institutions. The first public screening with audio description took place on November 27, 2006 in Białystok and is usually considered the symbolic beginning of this process (Jankowska and Walczak 2019). Currently, the are a few NGOs dedicated to improving cultural accessibility in Poland, for example, Fundacja Kultury bez Barier in Warsaw, Stowarzyszenie Defacto in Płock, Fundacja Katarynka in Wroclaw, Fundacja Siódmy Zmysł in Cracow and Fundacja Mili Ludzie in Poznan. These organizations mainly deal with the preparation of audio description and closed captions for films and theatre performances in their cities. They also give training for cultural institution's employees in the field of accessibility. As can be seen on the basis of the examples above, cultural accessibility in Poland used to be a grassroots initiative rather than a part of the state cultural policy. The break was made last year with the adoption of two crucial legal acts: Ustawa o dostępności cyfrowej stron internetowych i aplikacji mobilnych podmiotów publicznych [The Digital Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Apps of Public Services Act] and USTAWA o zapewnianiu dostępności osobom ze szczególnymi potrzebami [Accessibility for Persons with Specific Needs Act], which aim to improve access for various public services for persons with disabilities including culture.
The progress made in legislation is not yet on a par with the academic debate on accessibility. Given the fact that cultural accessibility in Poland is a relatively recent phenomenon, it still lacks profound investigation. It does not mean that the theme of accessibility is totally absent in Polish academia. However, this theme is usually explored narrowly. There exists a very vivid academic community focused on subjects of audio description and closed captions.
Taking into consideration international trends in investigating accessibility, it seems that it is high time also for Polish scholars to go beyond the confines of specialized fields and open up for an interdisciplinary discussion about the broad concept of accessibility. In other words, it is necessary to place accessibility studies within the range of Polish academia. I hope that this article will contribute to this process.

THE THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF SEGREGATIVE AND INTEGRATIVE MODEL OF CULTURAL ACCESSIBILITY
The terms Integrative and Segregative Model may bring to mind special education. In conceptualizing the models of cultural accessibility, I use the achievements of special pedagogy. There are a few reasons for this decision. Firstly, education was probably the first field which addressed the question of accessibility. The seventeenth-century philosopher and pedagogue John Amos Comenius in his famous work Great Didactic postulated universal education which he understood as the inclusion of children of both sexes, all social backgrounds and any intellectual condition in the school system. He argued that children with some kind of limitations need education even more than regular pupils (Comenius 1907: 67). The first schools for the D/deaf were founded in the eighteenth century and followed by schools for the blind in the nineteenth-century. These were the first institutions in history adapted for the needs of persons with disabilities (Gasik 1990). Secondly, special education, thanks to its long and rich history, has elaborated not only practical tools of accessibility but also a theoretical reflection on the theme of disability. For the founders of first special schools, there was no doubt that children with disabilities should be educated in institutions dedicated only to them. However, within the development of special pedagogy as a scientific discipline in the twentieth century, many new conceptions appeared. Among other things, there emerged the idea of integrating pupils with disabilities with their able-bodied peers. At the end of the 20th century, different models of education of children with special needs were conceptualized, well-described and investigated and can serve as a methodological background for other disciplines involved in the theme of accessibility. Thirdly, contemporary cultural institutions are more strongly related to education than ever before. Education became for them an objective that was as important as the presentation of art. Almost every museum has a department of education, which offers museum classes or thematic workshops. There are pedagogues of theatre in many theatres. Cultural institutions staff use in their work several tools generated by pedagogy and increasingly special pedagogy. Very often, thanks to their accessible educational activity, cultural institutions become leaders in promoting the idea of cultural accessibility (Rizzo 2019).
Furthermore, a general reflection on the theme of inclusion often covers not only education but also culture. As a forerunner of this way of thinking, John Amos Comenius can be evoked again. In his last work "Pampaedia," he developed his concept of universal education indicating that education and culture always go together and all human beings, including individuals with any sort of mental o sensorial disability, should have a possibility to access culture (Comenius 1986). These days special pedagogy increasingly highlights the importance of culture in the social life of persons with disabilities (Rzeźnicka-Krupa 2009: 9). Also, international organizations and agencies engaged in the promotion of the idea of inclusion, although they mainly focus on education, include in their definition culture as well (UNESCO 2003;. Finally, it is worth noting that Accessibility Studies can use some theoretical tools elaborated by modern pedagogy to reflect critically on the process of making culture accessible. The achievements of critical pedagogy can be particularly helpful here. Its representatives point to the ambiguous nature of education, which contributes to the conservation of prevailing social structures (including inequalities), but at the same time it has an emancipatory potential (Freire 2000;Giroux 2011). According to critical pedagogues, one of the important mechanisms of reproduction of social and cultural schemes is the so-called Hidden Curriculum which is an unexpressed agenda adopted by educational institutions. It is, for example, transmitted by norms of behaviour required at school. However, it also impacts the process of selection of material to be taught. An analogous situation takes places in the process of making culture accessible. The selection of events to be accessible is usually arbitrary and done by persons preparing accessibility as opposed to persons with disabilities. As a consequence, it does not reflect the interests and needs of persons with disabilities but the assumptions of accessibility makers about what is valuable and worth showing to the disability community. As Szkudlarek highlights, educational programs are usually based on elite culture, which does not reflect the interest and background of the majority of students (Szkudlarek 2003). The same tendency can be observed in the process of making culture accessible in Poland. Most movies or performances are equipped with audio description and closed captions, which are indispensable for accessing high culture. There is a relatively small number of accessible events representing simple entertainment.

WHAT ARE THE SEGREGATIVE AND INTEGRATIVE MODELS OF CULTURAL ACCESSIBILITY?
To explain how I understand the segregative and integrative model of cultural accessibility, it is requisite to make a brief summary of what is segregation and integration in education. United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in its General Comment No. 4 defines them as follows: Segregation occurs when the education of students with disabilities is provided in separate environments designed or used to respond to a particular or various impairments, in isolation from students without disabilities. Integration is a process of placing persons with disabilities in existing mainstream educational institutions, as long as the former can adjust to the standardized requirements of such institutions (UNCRPD 2016).
What should be stressed in integrative education is the fact that the school system is designed for able-bodied students, and students with disabilities are supposed to adapt to it. The obvious advantage of the integrative model in comparison with the segregative model is the fact that the students can go to school in their neighbourhood, while in the segregative system they usually have to move away from their home and attend the residential school. The latest paradigm, called inclusive education is also worth mentioning. According to UNCRPD: Inclusion involves a process of systemic reform embodying changes and modifications in content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies in education to overcome barriers with a vision serving to provide all students of the relevant age range with an equitable and participatory learning experience and environment that best corresponds to their requirements and preferences (UNCRPD 2016). What distinguishes this model from the former two, is the fact that it refers not only to students with disabilities but to students discriminated against on the basis of their race, social status, etc. These three approaches to the education of persons with disabilities are derivated from three models of disability that have developed across centuries. Segregative education is a consequence of the charity model of disability. This model has its roots in the Bible or more generally speaking in Christian philosophy, which sees persons with disabilities as a subject of charity and pity (Braddock and Parish 2001). In this model, persons with disabilities are denied autonomy and are forced to live in separation from the able-bodied society. Integrative education is a practical implementation of the medical model of disability. In this model, disability is perceived as an entirely physical occurrence. A person with a disability is allowed to live in able-bodied society but has to rehabilitate to meet its requirements. According to the WHO definition conceptualized within the theoretical frames of this model: "a handicap is a disadvantage for a given individual, resulting from an impairment or a disability, that limits or prevents the fulfillment of a role that is normal (depending on age, sex, and social and cultural factors) for that individual" (WHO 1980: 14). Following the medical model, integrative education concentrates its efforts on the adaptation of the student to the existing conditions.
Inclusive education is an application of the social model of disability in which the unit responsible for creating optimal life conditions is the society, not the individual with a disability (Oliver 1990). The postulates of the social model and the goal of inclusive education are the same: universal designing and creation of barriers free environment accessible for all.
Basing on above-presented models of education of people with special needs, I attempt to define the models of cultural accessibility. The segregative model consists in organizing an accessible event or activity dedicated exclusively for persons with one kind of disability. This can be achieved by designing a completely new event or activity or adapting an already existing item like a theatre performance, movie or exhibition by preparing suitable arrangements like audio description or closed captions. Admission is only for persons with disabilities and their assistants, usually upon a presentation of a disability card and free of charge. As an example may serve the special performance of the play "Mój dzikus" with audio description organized in the Kamienica Theatre in Warsaw on November 27, 2018(Fundacja Mir 23.11.2018).
The integrative model consists in organizing an event or activity accessible for persons with various disabilities. This can be achieved by designing a completely new event or activity or adapting an already existing item like a theatre performance, movie or exhibition by making special arrangements like audio description or closed captions. Admission is open to the wider public and usually is free of charge or price-reduced. As an example may serve the screening of the movie "Król Lew" with audio description, closed captions, sign language translation and hearing loop organized in Elektronik Cinema in Warsaw 5 December 2019 (Fundacja Kultury bez Barier n.d.).
Based on the inclusive model of education, the inclusive model of cultural accessibility also can be defined here; however, it will not be a subject of a specific study in this paper. The inclusive model refers to accessibility in the process of preparing an event or item from the very beginning. In the field of cinema, Pablo Romero Fresco calls it accessible film making (Romero Fresco 2013). Another example is integrated audio description to a theatre performance which is prepared in collaboration with the performance director (Roofthooft et al. 2018;Fryer 2018). For a better understanding of what is an inclusive model of accessibility, it might be useful to refer to Looms's considerations about the accessibility of television. Pondering on the question: "is the accessibility of television a medical or a social problem" this author indicates that in the medical model viewers with disability get specialized equipment from the public health system. In contrast, in the social model, the television company assumes responsibility for being accessible (Looms 2010: 20).
In a broader context of general cultural accessibility, these two approaches correspond with the integrative and inclusive model. In the first one, persons with disabilities need special equipment and can enjoy only selected and adapted items and events. In the second one, accessibility is an integral part of an item or the event. Persons with disabilities can choose what items or event they will enjoy. Ideal cultural inclusion will consist of offering accessibility for any screening of any movie in the whole country, the same with performances, concerts and exhibitions. At a glance, it seems challenging because of many reasons: economic, infrastructural and legal, to name only a few. For the moment, complete implementation of the inclusive model seems very difficult. However, in some countries, the inclusive approach to the question of accessibility is already in place. For example, in Spain, accessible screenings are provided with the use of an app called Audescmobile. A person with a disability who wants to see a movie can go to any cinema that uses this system (Agenda Cultural Accesible n.d.). Of course, this offer does not embrace all movies screened in the country, because it is limited to these films that are equipped with audio description and closed captions. However, it is a noteworthy step towards the implementation of the inclusive model.

THE SEGREGATIVE MODEL OF CULTURAL ACCESSIBILITY IN PRACTICE
Having defined two models of cultural accessibility, I will now analyze them on the basis of the examples of two festivals. Festival Kultury i Sztuki (Dla Osób Niewidomych), in my opinion, is a perfect example of the implementation of the segregative model. It has been organized by Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" in Płock since 2011. During this one week event, persons with visual impairment can enjoy movies and theatre performances with audio description and additional events like meetings with directors and actors. Admission for events is free and is limited to persons with visual impairment and their assistants. It is probably the only one event of its kind in Europe (Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" 2016).
Firstly, as the name indicates, it is dedicated only to the blind. In practice, there are also partially sighted participants (Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" 2019), but the audience is limited to persons with visual impairment and their assistants. Secondly, serving to provide all participants with accessibility, organizers deliver audio description for all audiovisual settings during the festival (Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" 2011; 2018; Teatr Dramatyczny im. Jerzego Szaniawskiego w Płocku 2019), but there are no arrangements for other groups or persons with disabilities for example closed captions for the D/deaf. Organizers also provide volunteers that help blind participants during the festival. Thirdly, arrangements are prepared to already existing films and performances. What is more, audio-description for films is delivered mainly by a live reader, which makes it a one-time event. Another segregative aspect of the venture is the fact that the screenings of films are available only for visually impaired persons and their assistants. Other events, such as after-film discussion, meetings with writers and performances are open to the wider public (Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" 2019). The segregative procedure is also present at the stage of enrollment. Persons willing to participate in the festival have to take part in the recruitment process a few months before the event. They are required to fill the application form and write an essay related to the theme of cinema (Stowarzyszenie "De Facto" 2018). Once accepted, the participants obtain free accommodation, meals and admission for all events for the duration of the festival for themselves and, if they declared it in the application form, for their assistants. The festival takes place in Płock, but participants come from the whole country. That is why the organizers provide them with accommodation (Płock Nasze Miasto 30.09.2014; Płock 21.09.2019). Participants are accommodated together and go for events also together using transports arranged by the organizers. On the one hand, this process allows participants to integrate, but on the other hand, it reinforces the segregation from the able-bodied community. Although the organizers and commentators stress that it is the only event of its kind in Europe and one of the most important cultural events in Poland, its audience is not very numerous. There were 90 participants in 2013 (Petronews 09.09.2013) and about 100 in 2014 (Płock Nasze Miasto 30.09.2014).

THE INTEGRATIVE MODEL OF CULTURAL ACCESSIBILITY IN PRACTICE
Having analyzed the organisation of Festiwal Kultury i Sztuki as an example of the segregative model of cultural accessibility, I would like to pass to the integrative model to examine it on the example of Festival Kultury bez Barier which has been organized by Fundacja Kultury bez Barier since 2013 in the whole country. For many years, the event has gone by different names, for example, Warszawski Tydzień Kultury bez Barier [Culture without barriers Warsaw week] or Warszawski Festiwal Kultury bez Barier [Culture without Barriers Warsaw Festival], but it is commonly known simply as Festiwal Kultury bez Barier. It is also the name of the last edition in 2019, so that is why I use this name in my article. Its length has also varied over the years. It is currently a ten-day-long event. Most activities take place in Warsaw, but there are also many other Polish cultural institutions engaged. Participants have the opportunity to enjoy several activities accessible for people with specific needs offered by various cultural institutions. There are performances and movies with audio description and closed captions, guided tours in museums and galleries, provided with tactile models or conducted in sign language and plenty of workshops dedicated to persons with specific needs. Admission for most of the activities is free, although for theatre performance spectators have to buy tickets. Usually, they are price-reduced.
The first notable difference between this festival and the formerly discussed one, is the fact that the Festiwal Kultury bez Barier is open to the wide public. Both persons with disabilities and non-disabled persons can participate in all activities. All offered events are made accessible but are not dedicated exclusively to persons with disabilities and their assistants (Klimczak 17.09.2018). However, it should be noted that not all activities are designed for persons representing all kinds of disability. There are several activities dedicated to a specific audience. For example, guided tour for the blind with audio description and typhlographics in POLIN Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw (WFKbB 2017) or guided tour in sign language for the D/deaf in the National Museum in Warsaw (WFKbB 2018). This is related to the fact that some kind of arrangement helping one group could be a distractor for another group. However, there are plenty of activities accessible for persons with various disabilities at the same time, for example, "performance Medium" in the Kwadrat Theatre in Warsaw delivered with audio description and closed captions (FKbB 2019). Most of the events have free admission. In order to facilitate participation for persons with disabilities in Warsaw, the organizers provide service of volunteers who help them get from their homes to the activities.
The procedure of enrollment is definitely integrative. Registration for the particular events is open about one week before the festival starts and is available for all. Everybody can register for as many events as he or she wants. Registration is possible through filling the online form, by calling or texting or by sending an e-mail to organizers. This variety of ways of registration guarantees equal access to the events for everybody. Texting or sending e-mails, for example, is the form of communication preferred by the D/deaf, while calling is more suitable for elderly people for whom filling the online form might be too challenging.
Festiwal Kultury bez Barier is a nationwide event. Although the festival takes place mainly in Warsaw, it also involves many cultural institutions scattered across the country (Galeria Labirynt 2018; Muzeum Dobranocek ze zbiorów Wojciecha Jamy w Rzeszowie 2017; Cricoteka n.d.; Muzeum Śląskie 2017). Thanks to this, persons with disabilities in many cities can participate in accessible cultural events, so they have the opportunity to integrate with their local community.
It is also significantly larger than the previously described event. According to the organizers, in the VII edition in 2019, 3607 participants took part in the events in Warsaw and 2677 in other cities in Poland (Festiwal Kultury bez Barier 27.10.2019).

DISCUSSION
The historical record of both of the discussed festivals shows that cultural accessibility is an important and worth-discussing issue. The popularity of both events steadily grows, which may indicate that persons with disability exhibit increasing interest in culture. Each of the debated festivals provides access to culture differently, and each has its supporters and opponents. Both models of cultural accessibility have their advantages and disadvantages. In major part, the arguments for segregative and integrative education could be evoked here. Some arguments formulated many years ago in favour of segregation seem to be still valid. The pioneer in the field of special education, John Wallin, claimed that in segregated class pupils with disabilities feel more comfortable because they are not exposed to jokes and other cruel behaviours of their able-bodied peers. Instead, they "encounter understanding, helpfulness, and sympathy" (Wallin 1924: 93). This argument can also be used in favour of a segregative cultural event. Persons with disabilities sometimes declare that they prefer to remain in a group of people with the same condition to feel safe and familiar, not to be exposed to rude comments and impertinent questions. In the case of Festiwal Kultury i Sztuki visually impaired participants feel safe because they stay all the time in the small group of well-known persons and they move in a few well-known places. Organizers provide them with transport, accommodation and food, which is a part of economic convenience that gives participants a sense of security. The core argument against segregation in education and culture is that it is a violation of human rights. It is also in conflict with assumptions of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Article 30 claims "States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to take part on an equal basis with others in cultural life" (UN 2006). However, this argument can be challenged in the situation when the person with a disability is allowed to chose between segregative or integrative events.
In the case of the integrative model, the principal argument in favour is the possibility of participation in mainstream social life for persons with disabilities. Festiwal Kultury bez Barier gives its participants the possibility to enjoy the current cultural life of their community. They can go to the nearby museum or theatre together with their friends or familiars. Noteworthy is also another fact that is usually underestimated, namely the beneficial dimension of integration for the abled-bodied part of society. Sheryl Dixon indicates that integration is profitable not only for students with disabilities but also for the able-bodied ones because children learn from each other: "Variety of abilities and disabilities, allows students to experience and accept the differences and commonalities that make up our diverse society" (Dixon 2005: 42). Participation of persons with disabilities in the regular cultural life of their local community raises social awareness about disability facilities that exist and help to overcome stereotypes. It is not unusual to see non-disabled spectators in the cinema during Festiwal Kultury bez Barier intrigued with the idea of audio description devices and their use.
Since the "Salamanca Statement" released by UNESCO in 1994, the leading educational policy for pupils with disabilities has been one of inclusion (UNESCO 1994). However, several studies have shown that it is not the only reasonable choice. It is not unusual for students with special needs to decide to pass from mainstream school to the special one (Cooper 1993;Pitt and Curtin 2004) or have attended a special school to evaluate it positively in retrospect (Pietrowiak 2019). We can detect the same situation in the field of cultural accessibility. The popularity of Festiwal Kultury i Sztuki among the blind persons from all across the country shows that segregation is not always as negatively perceived as one can suppose.
Furthermore, it turns out that it is sometimes hard to separate segregative practices from the integrative ones, and it is even harder when it comes to the distinction between integration and inclusion. In the field of inclusive education, we can find segregative practices, which are assessed positively as a sort of compensation for a student with special needs, for instance, the possibility of writing an exam in a separated classroom. The same occurs in the field of cultural accessibility. Some segregative practices are included in integrative events and are evaluated positively by persons with disabilities, just because they provide them with a better comfort of participation. As the example of Festiwal Kultury bez Barier shows, an event intended to be integrative also uses segregative practices in order to meet the particular needs of its audience. For instance, a guided visit in the museum is dedicated to either the blind or the D/deaf rather than both. Listening to an audio description of the object that they can see is simply boring for the D/deaf and waiting for everything to be translated into sign language is a waste of time for the Blind. That is why segregation could be a desired form of adaptation. Nevertheless, it is a very sensitive issue. It is essential for cultural accessibility providers to find the golden mean in this matter. As Ravaud and Stiker emphasize, although some segregating practices are the result of a will toward assimilation, such compensation could lead to the social isolation of persons with disabilities (2001: n.p.).
It is not the intention of this paper to favour one or another model as the only one appropriate as it usually takes place in the field of discussion about education. The significant difference between culture and education is the fact that culture in major part, however not exclusively, is addressed to persons who can decide independently which way of participation meets their needs more adequately. Education usually refers to persons who do not have an impact on the decision of choosing this or that kind of school. Another critical difference is the fact that the same person can in a parallel way attend both segregative and integrative cultural events, which may not be possible in the case of education. Festiwal Kultury bez Barier can serve as an example here. It is perfectly realizable for a blind participant to go firstly for an integrative movie screening with audio description and closed captions and afterwards for a segregative workshop in a museum dedicated for the blind. It is also achievable to participate in both discussed festivals. In fact, there are many people who do just that. Thus, in the case of cultural accessibility, it is possible not only to choose a more suitable model but also propose a configuration of models according to current needs and personal preferences. Taking this into consideration, the pivotal aspect of the process of making culture accessible seems to be the diversity of methods and approaches. It will allow a person to make an independent decision. There is no ideal model for either accessible education or accessible culture. The variety of models of education is a troubling issue due to the necessity to decide between imperfect solutions. However, in the case of culture, this variety can be seen as valuable because it provides one with a diverse spectrum of complimentary offers. Nevertheless, a diversity of models of cultural accessibility will be a positive value only if the participant has the choice.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper aims to be a general draft of theoretical frames for investigating the models of cultural accessibility, which in my opinion is a crucial question for further development of Accessibility Studies. I try to define and analyze the segregative and integrative model. I discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both of them. Nevertheless, the presented survey is by no means definitive. To support the proposed theoretical paradigm, further research and more empirical evidence are needed. This goal can be fulfilled only by conducting a thorough qualitative inquiry, including interviews with beneficiaries and providers of accessible cultural events. The main question that should be addressed in the debate about cultural accessibility is as follows: what are the needs and preferences of persons with disabilities themselves when it comes to participation in culture? Furthermore, such data could be obtained only in direct contact with broad and diverse groups of persons with disabilities.
It is important to understand that even though a set of features of both models can be formulated, the line between them is not clear. The same practice can be identified as exclusive or emancipatory, depending on the obtained perspective. Free admission for accessible events can serve as an example here. As the analyzed festivals show, now a day free admission is considered an inherent element of accessibility for persons with disabilities, no matter which model it is. However, recently in the disability community voices are being heard which say, that if the event is accessible, the participants with disabilities are ready to pay for it like everybody else. On the one hand, free admission can be seen as an emancipatory tool of accessibility for persons with disabilities who are usually financially worse off than the non-disabled. On the other hand, it risks reinforcing the oppressive image of people with disabilities as dependent on the non-disabled. Economic accessibility is undoubtedly an aspect of cultural accessibility that should be addressed in further research.
Another important concept that deserves a separate investigation undertaken in the frames of Accessibility Studies is the signalled above inclusive model of accessibility. It seems that it is not yet widely known in Polish culture, but some inclusive practices can be already identified and ought to be promoted. The main question that a theoretical reflection upon this model should address is to what extent is the inclusive model possible to implement? The experiences of other countries show that it is possible to make many accessible film screenings at the same time using an application. However, they are accessible only in some respects. What about persons who do not have a smartphone? Or a blind person who does not speak the language in which audio description is provided? Another aspect of inclusion is overcoming limitations in accessing local cultural events. Currently, most accessible cultural events take places in big cities: Warsaw, Cracow, Gdansk, Poznan etc. What about persons with disabilities living in small towns and villages? Digital resources of accessible movies can be an example of inclusive practices, but they are still relatively small due to limited funding. Taking in consideration these few examples, the intersectionality of exclusion from culture seems a fundamental issue to be addressed by the inclusive model of accessibility.
In my opinion, the most serious flaw of both segregative and integrative models is the fact that accessibility is not a part of the process of making culture, but is a niche activity of a small group of enthusiasts. What needs to be done is raising awareness among managers of culture and artists about accessibility. According to Polish copyright laws, any kind of adaptation or translation of a piece of art (including audiovisual translation) is a derivative work and requires the author's permission. It often occurs that theatre directors or film distributors refuse to arrange for closed captions or sign language translation claiming that it is likely to disturb the experience of the so-called "normal" viewers. The biggest issue of accessibility in Poland is the fact that it is still treated as an extravagance. As long as accessibility remains on the margin of cultural production, persons with disability will be seen as a marginal group of audience. Complete inclusion seems very challenging and surely will be a long process, but only striving for inclusion is the way to equal treatment of all society members.
I hope I have managed to demonstrate that the theme of culture should take an essential position in the public and academic debate about accessibility and that the development of Accessibility Studies will contribute to Disability Studies significantly. As Barnes and Mercer stress, engaging persons with disabilities in mainstream culture is one of the crucial elements of inclusion and should be recognized as an important goal by disabled people's movement (Barnes and Mercer 2001).