1
An Introduction to Preschool Inclusion Support Practices
Inclusive schools begin with a philosophy and vision that all children belong and can learn in the mainstream of school and community life. The classroom is seen as a community where diversity is valued and celebrated and all children work, talk, cooperate and share.
āWinzer and Mazurek (1998, p. 103)
There is no better time or place to begin accessing inclusive communities than in preschool. This book is about preschool inclusion support. It is the intent of this book to describe the practices that support early childhood inclusion. The concept of āinclusionā has evolved from the 1975 legal mandate in federal education law that children who have disabilities must be placed in the āleast restrictive environmentā (LRE). This provision, reauthorized in the Individuals with Disabilities Act Amendments (IDEA) of 1997 (PL 105-17), requires that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities are educated with children who do not have disabilities (IDEA Part B, 34 CFR §§300.550).
āInclusionā is not a legal term. Rather, inclusion, and the phrase āfull inclusion,ā are often described as a philosophy or a value related to fully belonging to a classroom or a community. (See the 2009 Division for Early Childhood [DEC] and the National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC] joint position statement later in this chapter.)
Unlike in Kā12 education, one of the challenges of preschool inclusion is the need to find, or create, an appropriate general education program for placement. However, placement is only the first step. As is often noted, inclusive education is not just about place. Simply placing a child in a setting with typical, same-age peers, without support and collaboration of key players, not only fails to meet the mandates for and expectations of an LRE but also can be very stressful for the child, family, and staff. Early childhood staff may feel overwhelmed and unsupported. Typical peers may feel threatened or confused by certain behaviors or characteristics of the included child. Families may suffer the feeling that their child is being rejected or not reaching his or her potential. This book is intended to offer readers strategies for mitigating these challenges by offering guidance on how to make successful preschool inclusion a reality.
We know what great inclusive preschool classrooms should look like, and we know that children withāand withoutādisabilities can thrive in those environments. The field of early childhood special education (ECSE)āthe only field devoted exclusively to the developmental and educational well-being of young children who have disabilitiesāhas produced volumes of evidence describing effective programs and practices. A well-established organization, the Early Childhood Technical Assistance (ECTA) Center (previously National Early Childhood Training and Assistance Center [NECTAC]), serves as a clearinghouse and provides technical assistance related to teaching strategies, adaptations, and classroom quality for early childhood inclusion. However, despite these resources and evidence-based recommended practices, challenges related to the quality of inclusion supportāand the imperative of collaboration among key playersāoften threaten the sustainability of inclusive programs.
Effective inclusion support must be a careful, collaborative process that creatively plans and delivers the specialized services, accommodations, curriculum modifications, and differentiated instructional strategies appropriate to the specific needs and the unique strengths and interests of each child. Just as important, if not more important, administrative and organizational structures must be designed not just to support the child with a disability but also to maintain a creative, collaborative work environment for staff. It is the childrenāsāas well as their teachersāāsense of belonging, accomplishment, and the joy of learning that is the real focus of this book.
One of the most significant achievements in U.S. education and civil rights law was passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (PL 94-142). Two of the most far-reaching provisions of PL 94-142 were mandates that ensured a āfree and appropriate educationā (FAPE) and guaranteed placement of students with disabilities in the āleast restrictive environment.ā FAPE ensures that the educational program and services provided are paid for by the government (i.e., free) and appropriate to the individual learning characteristics and needs of the student. The LRE provision ensures that these services are provided in the same setting in which children without disabilities receive educational instruction or in a setting that is as close to that environment as is appropriate given the individual special challenges of the child. In addition, states must offer a continuum of services and settings in order to guarantee the childās access to appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. This federal law was reauthorized as the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986 (PL 99-457) to ensure these same entitlements for preschool children and to encourage states to extend early intervention services to infants. In 1990 the law was again reauthorized, this time as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 (PL 101-476). The right of preschool-age children with disabilities to receive public education services under Part B (Section 619) of IDEA is the law of the land. The law automatically requires that these services be provided in the least restrictive environment, just as they are in Kā12 education. ( See below.)
IDEA: Least Restrictive Environment
300.114(a)(2) GENERAL LRE REQUIREMENTS
(2) Each public agency must ensure thatā
(i) to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities ⦠are educated with children who are nondisabled; and
(ii) special classes, separate schooling or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occur only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.
300.116 PLACEMENT
In determining the educational placement of a child with a disability, including a preschool child with a disability, each public agency must ensure thatā
(a) The placement decisionā
(1) Is made by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data and the placement options: and
(2) Is made in conformity with the LRE provisions.
Source: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 (PL 101-476).
These provisions, when combined with a commitment to creative problem solving and to the individualization component in the individualized education program (IEP), can be used with confidence by members of a childās team to design supportive program plans to guarantee success in an inclusive setting. The law provides significant opportunity for creativity and flexibility in its insistence that each educational program be specifically designed to meet the individual needs of a young child eligible for services. IDEA is widely viewed as the strongest special education law in the world. Early childhood special educators should become very familiar not only with its provisions and protections but also with the way in which it can be used to create successful, inclusive early education for young children with special needs.
As described by Lipsky and Gartner (2001), the 1997 reauthorization of IDEA (PL 105-17) presumed that the first placement option the IEP team considers for a child should be the school the child would attend if the child did not have a disability. The team must give serious consideration to what supplementary aids and services would be needed to meet the childās educational needs in that placement. Gartner and Lipsky further commented that āthese requirements clearly apply to preschool-age children and also the birth-to-three groupā (2001, p. 43).
Despite the requirement by U.S. federal law that developmental and educational services be provided in the least restrictive environment, and the lawās unequivocal support for providing those services in classrooms with same-age peers without disabilities, realization of widespread inclusive education in the United States continues to present challenges. For example, Sindelar et al. (2006) described difficulties with sustainability of even high quality inclusive programs, often due to changes in administrative personnel. Even within preschool populationsāwhere full inclusion is often assumed to be more easily attainable because of less challenging academic demands than those required for Kā12 studentsāsuccessful inclusion can present many challenges.
An inclusive classroom is not the ideal placement for every child with special needs at every moment in his or her educational life. IDEA does not guarantee inclusive placement for every child. It does require good faith consideration of how to create a meaningful, effective plan designed specifically for that child. The IEP must also consider what supports and services the child needs and how these supports and services can be accommodated in the general education classroom. The IEP must be delivered in a manner and place that is as similar as possible to the classroom and instructional practices experienced by students without disabilities, that is, the least restrictive environment. In some cases a childās educational needs cannot be reasonably accommodated in a typical setting (e.g., because of significant health or behavioral needs). Placement in the general education classroom may not be feasible, and therefore it is not the least restrictive environment at that time. For most preschool children with disabilities, however, placement and learning in a general early childhood education (ECE) classroom can be both reasonable and feasible.
STATUS OF INCLUSIVE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES
A 2011 U.S. Department of Education report provides statistics on the numbers of children ages 3 through 5 in each state receiving special education services through Part B of IDEA in inclusive or āotherā settings (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2012). These data also describe the numbers of students in inclusive settings who received special education services in those settings or received them elsewhere. Using these data it is possible to calculate the percentage of preschool children with disabilities who received special education services within regular early childhood settings. For all special education preschoolers eligible for Part B services (745,954 children), approximately 62% spent some time in a regular education setting, but only 42% receive special education services in those settings.
Closer examination of these data reveals great variations across states. The percentage of preschoolers with special needs in each state who receive services in their inclusive setting ranges from as low as 9% to as high as nearly 90%. Reasons are not provided for why 42% of children do not attend a regular education setting or, if they do attend a regular education setting, why there is such variability in whether they receive special education services in those settings or receive them elsewhere (e.g., clinics, home, segregated special education classroom). However, one might speculate that it is due to the kinds of challenges discussed in this book. It is surely also related to the choices and commitments of state and local education decision makers to not only make inclusive placement options available but also to provide appropriate services and supports in those environments.
More than a decade ago, Bricker (2000) was one of the first to identify several challenges of inclusive preschool education, particularly related to the lack of teacher skills in collaboration and the importance of providing appropriate and effective supports. Those challenges continue.
The following essay is written by Karen Spinelli, mother of Luke Spinelli, an independent young man who has Down syndrome. Luke has his own YouTube channel and currently attends college. Karen recalls the many fears and questions she had when Luke was a baby. She worried about what Lukeās disability would mean for his future. She reflects on how one teacherās early encouragement about inclusive education influenced the trajectory of Lukeās life.
I Believe in Inclusion: A Lifelong Pursuit!
My name is Karen Spinelli, better known as āLukeās mom.ā My son Luke has Down syndrome. At age 22 Luke is fully i...