INCLUSION
One of the strongest findings from the literature which we saw con- firmed in our data was that centre staffs’ and centre directors’ experi- ences with inclusion affected them greatly, and also affected the range of children with special needs that they included. Over and over, staff repeatedly commented that, in con- trast to their general attitudes and beliefs, the extent to which they were more committed to inclusion personally, the extent to which they were accepting of a broader range of children with special needs being included in their program or were more cautious, and how comfort- able and confident they felt about working with children with special
needs, had been strongly affected by their experiences.
Positive experiences with inclusion enable ECEs and RTs to strengthen their more general commitment to inclusion by realizing that it can work and be a positive experience for all concerned. Positive experiences provide understanding, learning op- portunities, skill development, and more self-confidence. Moreover, posi- tive experiences with including chil- dren with special needs appears to promote a greater willingness to ac- cept new challenges and to expand the range of children that one sees as likely to be able to be included successfully. We call this process a positive, VIRTUOUS CYCLE. The full sense of the components that feed into it and the outcomes that result are shown in Figure 10.1.
A B
C D
E
A well functioning, high quality program Appropriate staff education and training
Stable, effective staff EFFECTIVE INCLUSION AND POSITIVE MOMENTUM POSITIVE EFFECTS ON CHILDREN, PARENTS, STAFF AND CENTRE F G H I
Policy goals and centre resources that promote quality
child care services and effective inclusion
Staff feel more comfortable
Staff feel more confident, develop additional skills
Staff and Director more committed to inclusion more accepting of a broader range of children Strengthened commitment to inclusion
as part of centre’s mandate
Involvement of and effective collaboration with community professionals
Organizational support within the centre:
• Centre staff support each other
• Consideration given to staff needs, planning time, consultation • Priority given to maintaining positive relationships with parents
Director is a leader
• effective in promoting on-going learning and collaboration
Effective infrastructure is in place
• physical environment is accessible • financial and human resources allocated to support inclusion, adapt curriculum
Director and staff have positive attitudes toward inclusion
Figure 10.1
On the other hand, centre staff, and particularly centre directors who, while still committed to inclu- sion in principle, described them- selves as less committed person- ally and/or less accepting of a broader range of children with spe- cial needs in their centre, often described a negative or DISCOUR-
AGING CYCLE of experiences.
In these situations, lack of, or re- ductions in, financial and human resources available to the centre to support their efforts with inclusion; administrative barriers and diffi- culties related to subsidies and their allocations, and reductions in the base level of support for child care quality generally that was ex- perienced by many centres as a result of limited or regressive policy
changes, were constructing situa- tions in which further or even on- going efforts to include children with special needs were seen as unsustainable. (See Figure 10.2.) While resources are always finite, centre directors who were less ac- cepting of a broader range of chil- dren with special needs being in- cluded in their programs and who were starting to be less committed, as well as some directors who de- scribed their centres as not having become more successful in inte- grating children with special needs in the last few years, saw their re- sponses as realistic and perfectly justified on two bases. These were: 1) their concern that children with special needs and other children would be ill-served by having them
A B
C D
E
Centre faces challenges in maintaining high quality program
Limited staff education and training re: inclusion
Limited staff/ director experience DIFFICULT EXPERIENCES WITH INCLUSION NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON CHILDREN, PARENTS, STAFF AND CENTRE F H I J
Policy goals and centre resources that jeopardize the quality of
child care services and effective inclusion
Staff and director may make heroic efforts, but without adequate supports
Difficult experiences lead to stress and discouragement for staff Less committed to inclusion in this centre;
Much more cautious about range of children that might be included, if any.
Involvement with community professionals is limited or is unreliable
Organizational capacity within the centre is limited:
• Staff have their hands full as is
• Director cannot provide additional time for planning and/or consultation
Director is not willing or is not able to provide
leadership, create momentum, find additional resources, motivate staff or board members
No infrastructure to support inclusion
• physical environment is not accessible • financial and human resources to support inclusion are not available or are very limited
Director and/or staff have ambivalent attitudes toward inclusion
G Relationships with parents may be difficult – lack of coordination between centre and parents
K
Weakened commitment to having inclusion as part of centre’s mandate and identity
Figure 10.2
in situations in which their needs could not be met effectively, and 2) their concern for their staff and for safeguarding the overall quality of the program.
In either case, these directors found themselves facing ethical dilemmas that sometimes caused them to start rethinking their beliefs about inclusion as an appropriate goal and expectation for underfunded community-based programs, given the scarcity of resources. We be- lieve this is exactly what explains the divergence of responses ob- tained to one of the six general be- lief statements about inclusion. When asked to respond to the statement, “It would be better to have some child care programs accept children with special needs (with specialized resources) than try to have all child care programs be inclusive,” 40.2% of centre directors agreed or strongly agreed, 41.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed, and 18.1% said they were uncertain.6 This response was
in sharp contrast to the pattern of responses that was strongly pro- inclusive on most other statements. A split of a somewhat less severe magnitude was also evident among front-line staff, especially the ECEs.