Running Head: PHILOSOPHY OF EARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSION
Philosophy of Early Childhood Inclusion
Nicole Mishue
University of South Carolina
Philosophy 1

Philosophy 2
Abstract
This position paper explores my philosophy of early childhood inclusion. Background information is given on the trends and laws leading to early childhood inclusion. The position includes a personal and an accepted definition of early childhood inclusion, as well as, it’s role in education. I aim to discuss benefits and barriers to early childhood inclusion.

Philosophy 3
Philosophy of Early Childhood Inclusion
The inclusion of children with disabilities in early childhood settings has been on the rise for several decades, especially within the last three decades. An essential move was made by the public education system in the 1990s to include or involve elementary and secondary students with disabilities in general education classes, or mainstreaming. During this era, several public laws significantly influenced the concept of mainstreaming and inclusion of young children with disabilities. Amendments to PL. 94-142, PL. 99-457, and PL. 102-199, which led to the
Individuals with Disabilities Educational Act (IDEA), paved the way for students with disabilities to receive free, appropriate public education (FAPE) starting at three years of age. In some states, FAPE services are provided for children birth to three years of age with disabilities.
IDEA also requires children with disabilities to receive services in the least restrictive environment (LRE). The LRE intends for children with disabilities to learn, play, and participate in typical settings with same-age peers. For young children with disabilities, the least restrictive environment includes settings with typically developing children such as child-care centers, preschool programs, and within the community. Prior to 2009 a formal definition of early childhood inclusion was undefined. In 2009, The Division of Early Childhood (DEC) and the
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) define early childhood inclusion as: the values, policies, and practices that support the right of every infant and young child and his or her family, regardless of ability, to participate in a broad range of activities and contexts as full members of families, communities, and society. The desired results of inclusive experiences for children with and without disabilities and their families include a sense of belonging and membership, positive social relationships and friendships, and development and learning to reach their full potential. The defining features of inclusion that can be used to

Philosophy 4 identify high quality early childhood programs and services are access, participation, and supports. (DEC/NAEYC. 2009) Therefore, I understand early childhood inclusion to be young children with disabilities actively learning, playing, building positive relationships and participating with typically-developing peers, to achieve functional goals and objectives, in natural early childhood environments and within the community.
Inclusion of young children is beneficial in several aspects. First, positive outcomes result for both young children with and without disabilities by employing evidenced-based practices.
Young children with disabilities increase positive behavior. Typically developing peers help to provide models of positive behavior and social interactions. Young children with disabilities also make developmental gains towards functional goals and objectives in inclusive environments comparatively to self-contained models. Typically developing children gain a decreased social bias of children with disabilities. Typically developing children increasingly develop empathy for others with differences. Secondly, early childhood inclusion not only has positive implications for children with developmental delays and typically developing children, but families also gain from inclusion. As the definition from DEC/NAEYC reflects, it is imperative for families to be involved and feel involved for successful early childhood inclusion.
Parents of young children with disabilities want to play an important role in the partnership with teachers and to be valued team members sought to share information about their child’s progress
(Swick and Hooks, 2005, Knopf and Swick 2007). Families of young children with disabilities gain a sense of acceptance within their community. Families of typically developing students may feel they are contributing to the community through any positive efforts on towards families of young children with disabilities. Finally, communities benefit from early childhood programs

Philosophy 5 by responding to a nation driven to accept diversity through upholding to moral standards by advocating for truly FAPE and LRE settings for young children with disabilities.
Despite the benefits of early childhood inclusion many barriers exist such as lack of professional training and development, lack of ability to appropriately monitor effectiveness and progress, and differences in philosophical views from early childhood education and early childhood special education. Since many teachers and interventionist do not feel adequately prepared to handle the implications of early childhood inclusion, available opportunities for professional development may enhance inclusion of children with disabilities (Etscheidt 2006).
Many administrators of programs and even policymakers may find it difficult to offer professional development due to financial restraints. The financial restraint to appropriately implement early childhood inclusion adds to the concern of cost of high-quality inclusive programs. However, it was found that an average of 8%-10%, inclusive programs were less expensive than traditional special education programs (Odom, Parrish & Hikado, 2001. Odom,
Vitztum et al., 2004). Another barrier that results from lack of professional training and funds for training is lack of monitoring effectiveness and progress of inclusive programs. Without proper training and development, professionals are limited in monitoring success of early childhood inclusion programs. It is vital to the success of early childhood inclusion to have unifying means to measure its effectiveness for all stakeholders. Obvious differences in philosophical views from early childhood education and early childhood special education act as barriers to early childhood inclusion. There are differences in views concerning language development, curriculum models, and teaching strategies. Early childhood educators tend to rely on a notion of
“wait and see” as compared to special education’s notion of early intervention strategies.

Philosophy 6
However, a shift towards similar philosophical views can be seen in the 2009 revision of
NAEYC’s position statement of developmentally appropriate practices.
Early childhood inclusion continues to be on the rise and seems to be making greater gains through evidence-based practices in early childhood programs. Young children with disabilities and their families need to be viewed as full members of society and the community with the right to take part in all aspects. Although benefits of including young children with disabilities are increasing, it is crucial for professionals in early childhood education and in early childhood special education to work together to break down the barriers that still exist.

Philosophy 7
References
DEC/NAEYC. (2009). Early childhood inclusion: A joint position statement of the Division for Early Childhood (DEC) and the National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC). Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child
Development Institute.
Etscheidt, S. (2006, Fall2006). Least Restrictive and Natural Environments for Young Children
With Disabilities: A Legal Analysis of Issues. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 26(3), 167-178. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from Psychology and Behavioral
Sciences Collection database.
Knopf, H., & Swick, K. (2007, February 1). How Parents Feel about Their Child's
Teacher/School: Implications for Early Childhood Professionals. Early Childhood
Education Journal , 34 (4), 291-296. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from ERIC database.
NAEYC. (2009). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving
Children from Birth through Age 8.
the Education of Young Children
Copyright © 2009 by the National Association for
Odom, S. L., Parrish, T. B. & Hikado, C. (2001) ‘The costs of inclusive and traditional special education preschool services.’ Journal of Special Education Leadership , 14, pp. 33–41.
Odom, S. (2000, Spring2000). Preschool Inclusion: What We Know and Where We Go From
Here. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20(1), 20. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection database.

Philosophy 8
Odom, S.L., Vitztum, J., Wolery, R., Lieber, J., Sandall, S., Hanson, M.J., Beckman, P.,
Schwartz, I., Horn, E. (2004, November). Preschool inclusion in the United States: a review of research from an ecological systems perspective.
Special Educational Needs , 17-49.
Journal of Research in
Swick, K., & Hooks, L. (2005). Parental experiences and beliefs regarding inclusive placements of their special needs children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(6), 1–6.
Nicole,
Through this paper you have effectively communicated an understanding of the rationale for inclusion, what inclusion really means, and common barriers that must be addressed before successfully implemented. Well done!
30/30