Portraits of Inclusion: Part Two

Part 2

SPECIAL EDUCATION POLICY for young children who need individualized assistance to develop and learn is guided by a cluster of federal and state laws. These laws, generated over the course of three decades, are periodically reauthorized and amended. They embody the basic, widely accepted principles of a "free appropriate public education," placement in the "least restrictive environment," regular assessment, documented educational goals, evaluation of outcomes, and due process.

The nation's 15,000 local school districts are responsible for determining, through assessments, what children are eligible for special education services.

Local districts must provide eligible students with the services mandated by federal and state policies.

Several programs and services may be combined to make inclusive program options available to young children. This process sometimes brings conflicting philosophies and educational models together and results in multiple program placements and transitions.

At the local level, early childhood special education programs are implemented in tandem with Head Start and other educational programs for low-income children.

Implementation of special education policies, and financing for services, is often linked to categories of disability. Some state governments are attempting to change this policy. Recently, several independent research studies as well as documents prepared by the federal Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services have noted the shortcomings of the categorical model of special education and the dangers of a fragmented service delivery system. Education policy makers are increasingly calling for a needs-based and supports-based system.

PATRICK SITS IN A CIRCLE ON THE FLOOR OF HIS PRESCHOOL CLASSROOM and offers two clues to help his classmates guess (per his teacher's instructions) about the object he has hidden behind him. "It's got glass pieces and piping," he accurately describes the hand-crafted bracelet he brought for show-and-tell. His parents and grandfather have come to school to help Patrick celebrate his birthday.
Patrick will be 5 years old in two days. He is excited to attend school, and he likes his teachers and friends there. He has friends from school with whom he plays at home. Patrick is a budding artist, and his work is appreciated at home and school. One of Patrick's large colorful paintings hangs in his family's living room. The extraordinary thing about Patrick's life is its ordinariness.
Despite the fact that he can occasionally express himself very clearly, Patrick has been diagnosed as having a communication disorder. But Patrick attends a public preschool classroom with nondisabled children-something his parents believe is very important for Patrick to learn to communicate. Patrick has normal intelligence and is like other children except for his communication problems. Still, his parents had some difficulty finding a program that matched Patrick's needs and their wish that he participate in typical school activities.
The communication specialist who evaluated Patrick at his neighborhood school believed that the school wasn't "equipped" to provide a young child like Patrick with the kind of intervention needed. The staff at the child care program Patrick attended also said they lacked the expertise to help. It took a while to figure out how to ensure that Patrick's eligibility for categorical services would enable him to obtain the assistance he needs to become a competent and confident communicator without taking him away from all the people and activities that Patrick loves and that give his life meaning. So now Patrick rides the bus to his inclusive public school program each morning, and from public school to his afternoon child care program each afternoon, while his parents work. Patrick's parents try to smooth transitions among home, public school, and community child care settings, and his teachers cooperate and support them in their efforts.
Even as they enjoy these ordinary pleasures, Patrick's parents worry about maintaining them. Next year Patrick will attend kindergarten, and his family has not yet received word whether Patrick will be welcome in his neighborhood school, or whether his eligibility for categorical services will mean a referral to a segregated special education classroom.

MONEY THAT SUPPORTS early childhood special education flows from federal, state, local, and private sources. State education administrators allocate federal and state funds, and at the school district level, officials blend these resource streams and secure local funds when needed to supplement them. Administrators must use funds creatively to address the complex and changing needs of children and families, while they accommodate intensive oversight of multiple programs.

Special education is mandated by the federal government, funded through state governments, and implemented by local school districts.

Publicly supported early childhood education programs are not available to all young children in the United States. Therefore, it is often necessary to combine programs to achieve inclusive environments.

Some students with learning difficulties need individualized or more intense instruction. To find the resources, administrators turn to the reliable funding stream of special education.

Categorical restrictions on programs and funding may force some early childhood programs to restrict special services to students with disabilities.

Although school districts enjoy some flexibility in their use of public resources for early childhood special education, federal law is precise and constant in the responsibilities for which it holds school districts accountable. Districts must evaluate every identified child to determine eligibility. They must provide appropriate services to children with disabilities. They must establish due process to ensure that families have appropriate access to services. And they must do so in the context of an increasingly diverse population of young children with multiple needs.

LOUISA IS A 3 YEAR OLD AFRICAN AMERICAN GIRL WITH CHUBBY CHEEKS and a reputation for high energy and easy laughter. She is enrolled in a program at a large urban early childhood center.
Louisa, in common with 500 other children attending her school, has a disability. She was born with a neurological disorder that affects her fine and gross motor, or physical, abilities.
Louisa's options for and access to learning opportunities could be severely narrowed by the complex administrative structure of her program. Seven major state or federal programs are housed at her school. But Lydia, the center's principal, has a breadth of vision that allows her to see through and beyond the practical and financial barriers separating the many categorical programs that she is solely responsible for directing.
One barrier that could hinder a unified program for children and families is access to funding. Lydia explains that she does not receive discretionary funds to support integration of various center activities. Realizing that this administrative barrier need not translate to a practical barrier, Lydia finds money from other sources "to make sure that everybody is on the same page."
Children with disabilities, like Louisa, receive invaluable opportunities to learn from their non-disabled peers in the context of group activities with a "buddy" classroom. Lydia tries to assure that all children and families have access to educational resources no matter what label or funding source supports their participation. She institutes several schoollevel initiatives, such as a center-wide resource room that provides materials and activities supporting school-wide learning themes. "We purchase materials out of our school-based management money and house them in the library so that Head Start or any other person in my building can check them out and use them on an ongoing basis," Lydia explains.
These seemingly small efforts exemplify one lesson from successful programs that create inclusive educational opportunities for children. Bureaucratic rules and guidelines need not translate into barriers for children, families, and educators, provided that creative administrators have the initiative and flexibility to "orchestrate" programs so that -- as Lydia explains -- everyone can "play" together successfully.

EDUCATION POLICY MAKERS and program administrators strive for policies that focus on family and child development, rather than on the requirements of categorical programs. With this approach, the needs of each child are established through assessment, then addressed through selection of the most effective components of various programs for that child. But much of school financing, staffing, and administration center on programs, not individual children.

When schools adhere strictly to discrete program requirements, they may administer a complex mix of services that "look good on paper" but do little for children.

Such approaches violate the central premise of truly inclusive policies -- to promote young children's membership and participation in their communities.

State and federal special education policies use the individual education plan (IEP) to involve parents in planning for and securing appropriate services for their children. But decisions about placement and services are often managed at the administrative anc school district level, without family involvement.

Inclusion requires program managers and administrators to create and enforce accountability mechanisms based on individual student outcomes, not program requirements.

For many young children in special education, child-centered programs and family involvement are available before they reach 3 years of age, at which point they move from early intervention programs to school-based programs.The transition usually involves a shift in services from a family and health model to a community and school model, and families are not always prepared. Increasingly, state special education policies are acknowledging the shift in programs at age 3 and working to make the transition less disruptive.

DANIEL DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A CHILD WITH A DISABILITY. He has sandy blond hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks suggesting that he is well fed and well-tended. He is tall for his age and appears older than his 5 years. But despite appearances, Daniel does have a disability. He has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and the accompanying fluctuations in activity level, attentiveness, and heedfulness that accompany this neurological condition.
Although Daniel lives with his grandmother Barbara, he regularly visits his mother, who lives nearby, and his infant sister. When Daniel was born, his mother was 18 years old and single. She married a man after Daniel's birth, but the brief relationship ended after both parents were incarcerated for domestic violence. About this time, Barbara assumed responsibility for Daniel's care.
Barbara's life is complicated, and so is Daniel's. He spends most days in educational placements that are separated by time, distance, and thinking.
Despite medication and Barbara's careful monitoring, Daniel has been expelled from six child care centers during his short life. The only people who accept Daniel and stick with him -- beside his grandparents -- are the Head Start teachers who are required to by law. The program serves as Daniel's special education placement and the official answer to his diagnosis. When the part-time Head Start program is not in session, Daniel attends a second child care program. This means that Daniel spends as many hours in a car or bus -- traveling from home to Head Start to child care to home -- as he spends in his special education setting.
Daniel's Head Start teachers are competent educators, and they like Daniel. They believe the responsibility for the "special" part of Daniel's education lies with an itinerant speech-language pathologist who visits the classroom once a week and shadows Daniel or removes him from the classroom to work on his goals. His Head Start teacher is unaware of the content of Daniel's IEP.
Daniel faces a dilemma; he must try to learn the important skills of communicating, establishing friendships, negotiating and solving problems with others. But his teachers separate him from his peers. Not surprisingly, Barbara says sadly that "Daniel has no frIends."
Daniel's teacher says that "Daniel is not the worst child in the class." But nonetheless, she says she is worried that her class may become a "dumping ground " for children like Daniel.
On paper, Daniel spends his days in inclusive settings. In reality, he is isolated from peers and from meaningful interventions.

Go back to The Beginning of the Report | Next Section: Cultural Context of Education
Go to Glossary | Go to References

All the names of people, programs, and localities have been changed to protect the privacy of those involved. The photographs were taken at a variety of project sites and do not represent the children in the report.

This information is posted here with permission of
ECRII: The Early Childhood Institute for Research on Inclusion
and the project's previous principal investigator, Samuel Odom
slodom@unc.edu
by New Horizons for Learning
http://www.newhorizons.org
E-mail: info@newhorizons.org
This area of the website is made possible by a grant from the
Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Special Education
P O Box 47200
Olympia, WA 98504-7200
(360) 725-6088
Fax (360)586-1631
E-mail: dgill@ospi.wednet.edu