The Quality of Inclusion of Children with Developmental Disabilities During Transition from Early Intervention to School Programs

Céline Chatenoud1, Carmen Dionne1, Michelle Villeneuve2, Patricia Minnes2

1 University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières; 2 Queen’s University at Kingston Ontario

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Objectives Describe quality of inclusion of young children with developmental delays and disabilities as they transition into school Identify stresses and challenges of parents when promoting the social inclusion of their child

AbstractThis poster proposes to consider the transition of young children withdisabilities from early intervention services to school programs as akey moment for examining the quality of inclusion.Eleven in-depth case studies across three Canadian provinces wereconducted during one year to access information from differentsources about the transition process for children with DD.Results are presented about two participants with Down’s syndrome.Meaningful differences in terms of quality standards for successfulinclusion were found between the early intervention and the schoolcontext including: a) the amount of adaptation and modification ofmaterial and educational activities; (b) educational staff support; and(c) collaboration with specialized services. The intensity of supportfacilitating social inclusion of the child was found to diminish duringthe transition process and educational goals associated withinclusion in the group varied considerably.

“Data for this study were collected as part of the CIHR Team HELPS Inc: Health Education and Learning Partnerships Promoting Social Inclusion of Children with Developmental Delays and Disabilities. Principal Investigator: Patricia Minnes, PhD. C.Psych.

Department of Psychology, Queen’s University. Kingston (www.helpsinc.ca) This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [funding reference number 94788].”

Contact us: HELPS Inc: www.helpsinc.capatricia.minnes@queensu.ca;Celine.chatenoud@uqtr.ca

BackgroundTransition: an important but stressful time for parents and children

This period is important for sustaining gains made during preschool and for establishing future social and academic development (Kemp & Karter, 2006)

Transition generates multiple changes for the child and hisecosystem

Shift in curriculum and educational context (La Paro and al., 2003)

Discontinuity in the service delivery system (Therrien, 2008) andin the professional collaboration (Kamp & Carter, 2006,)

Variation of the relationship model between parents andprofessionals: family centered; (Dunst, 2002) vs Parentinvolvement (Epstein, 2001, Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 2005)

Strategies to promote successful transition to school

Transition program : PIST (Beaupré, Tétreault and Landry, 2008),TEEM (Conn-Powers, Ross-Allen and Holburn, 1990)

Transition practices: e.g. calendar, preparing child through skillsdevelopment, instructional support for facilitatingcommunication between teachers and parents (Goupil, 2010; Kempet Carter, 2006; Kraft-Sayre et Pianta, 2000) .

Link between the transition and the quality of inclusion is rarely included in studies

Lack of objective measures based on the educationalenvironment before and after transition and on the child outcomes(Janus and al, 2008, Rimm et Pianta, 2000)

Very few data on quality of care and quality of inclusion duringtransition (Kemp, 2003, Malone & Gallagher, 2009)

Discussion/ImplicationsPreliminary analyses show meaningful differences in thequality of inclusion in the daycare and kindergartencontext of the child.I. Physical Environment, program of activities and

special needs

Lack of communication and transmission ofknowledge between preschool and school and lack offlexibility in switching from one set of supports toanother. (Rous, et al, 2007)

Shift in curriculum (activities dedicated to academicachievement in school) has an important impact onthe quality of inclusion (Janus, 2007)

It appears more challenging for the kindergartenthan for the daycare to adapt educational programsand activities and classroom placements to meet theindividual needs of student (Kemps, 2003)

II. Educational Staff Support

Written policy, strong leadership by the director andtypes of service models are strongly influencingquality of inclusion (Rousseau, 2010)

III. Collaboration with Specialized Services

Very few or no transition practices before schoolentry (e.g. cross program visitation, preparing childthrough skill development). (Goupil, Côté and Poulin2009)

Quality and quantity of support from external healthand rehabilitation professionals is greater in daycare(Therrien, 2008)

Parents have no choice regarding the placement oftheir child (integrated or segregated class) for thetransition into elementary school (Côté, Goupil, Doré etPoulin, 2008)

Quality of inclusion should be consideredan important outcome measure duringthe transition of young children withdevelopmental delays or disabilitiesfrom daycare to kindergarten.

Major ReferencesBuysse, B. & Hollingsworth, H. L. (2009). Program Quality and Early Childhood Inclusion: Recommendation for Professional Development. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29 (2), 119-128. Guralnick, M. J. (Ed.). (2001). Early childhood inclusion: Focus on change. Baltimore: Brookes Kemp, C. (2003) Investigating the transition of young children with intellectual disabilities to mainstream classes: an Australian perspective. International journal of disability, development and education, 50(4), 403-433.Malone, D.G. & Gallagher, P. A. (2009). Transition to preschool special education: A review of the literature. Early Education and Development, 20(4), 584-602.

III. Collaboration with specialized services for Eric

Results EricBlond and sunny little boy entering school at age 6

FAMILY

REHAB. CENTER (ID,ASD)

DAYCARE

Dir.

Before school

Special Educ.

OT

ECE

PRIVATE EARLY STIMU.CENTER

HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES

S&L

EI specialist

Physical trainer

Pediatrician

FAMILY

SCHOOL

Dir.

Mam Dad

Special Educ.

Young brother

EI specialist

Teacher

Psy.

In comparison to daycare, there is a larger team of consultant professionals for Eric within the school

The ECE teacher in preschool collaborates more than the teacher in school with external therapists and parents providing activities in the class group (in the natural environment)

It appears difficult for school to embed therapeutic goals into regular routines or activities or to carry out follow-up activities within group

The external specialized therapists spend less time and collaborate less with staff in the classroom than in the daycare. Mother says: “ School staff ask for help but the private Speech Therapist we pay for is not welcomed in class !”

In school

Results FabienneVery friendly little girl entering school at age 5

II. Educational staff support for ERICDay care centre (preschool) Kindergarten (school)

Daycare known for inclusiveapproach Centre accepts and staff is used to accommodating children with different types and levels of disabilities A written inclusion policy supports inclusion Relatively large enrollment of children with disabilities (~10%)

Special educator and ECE in class facilitate inclusion

School less experienced with inclusion of disabled children Complain about lack of financial support for resources and extra staff to promote inclusionSchool has no written or verbal policy on inclusion Lack of accommodations and modifications to curriculum and limited supports to manage behavioural challenges

Young brotherDadMam

I.1. Physical Environment for Fabienne

Day care centre (preschool) Kindergarten (school)Lines on the ground and pictograms (e.g., way to the toilet)

Modifications to furniture, changing room and toilet

Visual communication system introduced in class by speech and language therapist

Visual Aids introduced by Occupational therapist about classroom rules

Very few adaptations or special equipment

More structured areas for learning activities (symbolic play, group, learning table, etc.)

No visual cue system

Classroom computers but no assistive technology

Measure: Description of the quality of the environment related to inclusion Observation protocol based on the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scales Revised/ECERS-R, (Harms, Clifford & Cryer, 2005) and the SpeciaLink Child Care Inclusion Practices Profile and Principles Scale (Irwin, 2005)

I. Physical Environment, program of activities andspecial needs

I.1. Access and furnitureI.2. Program of activities and social interactionI.3. Schedule

II. Educational Staff supportII. 1. Policy and leadershipII. 2. Staff support ( model of services delivery and staff training)

III. Collaboration with specialized servicesIII.1. Within the educational centerIII.2. By the directionIII.3. Between partners

I.2. Program of activities for FabienneDay care centre (preschool) Kindergarten (school) 2 days in rehabilitation centre or individual instruction at home with educator

1 ECE with 8 children and special educator, PT, OT available

General goals in the preschool curriculum are similar to those in the school curriculum

Focus on social skills: cooperative learning, peer tutoring , sharing , imitation.

healthcare and rehabilitation therapists facilitate adaptation of materiel or activities to promote inclusion

Needs met within the regular group activities and routines (5 days/wk)School teacher, one permanent special educator in the class .4 of 22 children have disabilities . Number and diversity of activities more than in daycare

Focus on cognitive abilities: communication, one-to-one rather than group tasks, negative consequences for notfollowing the group

Extra adult in the class important but very few accommodations to facilitate inclusion.

Method Multiple perspective case studies (n=11) Data include interview, observation and document review Emphasis on needs and expectations of family and professionals for each focal child

Audiologist

Social assistant

HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES

REHAB. CENTER (ID,ASD)

Social assistant

Pediatrician

Private S&L

Private OT

Educ.Assist.

Psycho-educator

Teachingcounselor