Riding the Wave Navigating the Tide of Change Early Childhood Intervention Australia 11th Biennial National Conference Brisbane, August 2014 One vision: Building consensus about inclusion across multiple stakeholders John Forster, Noah’s Ark Inc., Victoria

My background CEO Noah’s Ark Past National President ECIA ECIA lead on Joint Statement on Inclusion Co convened the Reimagining Inclusion Conference

Who are the stakeholders? Parents Educators Disability specialists (ECI) Inclusion specialists Training organisation Universities Government policy makers and administrators

Structure Context - children with a disability and ECEC Reimagining Inclusion Conference What stakeholders were talking about? Conclusion - opportunities to ride the wave

Context ECEC - EYLF established common framework - outcomes for all children Disability - increasing interest in everyday learning opportunities

Position Statement on Inclusion between ECIA and ECIA first agreement between stakeholders (2012)

Context History of institutionalisation ECEC establishment - children with a disability segregated ECEC and ECI developed in parallel Early models of inclusion - unskilled staff and low expectations

Context Discrimination against students with disabilities takes different forms. However, in many cases, discrimination is grounded in negative attitudes to disabilities and the failure to set high expectations for these students. This can significantly limit the potential of these young people both now and in the future. Victorian Equal Opportunities and Human Rights Commission (2012)

Context Fragmented development of Early Childhood Intervention - different approaches by states and territories Australian Government Inclusion and Professional Support Programs separate Other inclusion support professionals roles

Service fragmentation The current disability support system is underfunded, unfair, fragmented, and inefficient. It gives people with a disability little choice, no certainty of access to appropriate supports and little scope to participate in the community. Productivity Commission (2011)

Reimagining Inclusion Conference Purpose More people working for the same goal Development of better and stronger policy Collaboration and coordination at the local level Keep inclusion on the agenda

Reimagining Inclusion Conference Risks Different understandings of inclusion and practices Different language Potential competition Inability to find common ground

Reimagining Inclusion Conference Melbourne November st National meeting of stakeholders: parents, educators, disability specialists, inclusion specialists, training organisations, universities and government policy makers and administrators.

What were stakeholders invited to? 3 day program (67 ‘partners’) Combined two styles 3 day approach borrowed from Search Conference methodology 2 day conventional program of speakers on research perspectives and panels

What were stakeholders invited to? Conventional program built a shared knowledge base Search Process: ‘Where are we now?’ and ‘What do we imagine a desirable and feasible future to be?’ What are the goals and priorities, constraints and blockages and future actions to achieving this. Cross sector working groups

What did stakeholders talk about? Quality of ECEC Attitudes and beliefs Services fragmentation Service design

Quality of ECEC Inclusion requires high quality services Is the workforce suitably recognised? Is the workforce suitably trained? Is the workforce suitably stable?

Attitudes and beliefs - Reimagining Inclusion The future - the importance of greater belonging, families welcomed, understood, listen to, supported emotionally. Community attitudes were not seen as generally supportive Parents need more information and more power Role for strong advocacy by governments, at all levels, peak bodies and leaders

Attitudes and beliefs - Joint statement on inclusion Positive attitudes were important - aspirational Focused moved on from ‘access’, but ‘participation’ and ‘engagement’ more complex EYLF a watershed - expectation that all children can attend and benefit from ECEC programs Poor implemented risks creating negative attitudes and reverse

Service fragmentation - Reimagining inclusion Variable opportunities, inconsistent understandings and different perceptions Lack of coordination and integration across services - silos, separate funding systems duplication of services, the concept of ‘experts’, role defensiveness and wait times

Service fragmentation - Reimagining inclusion Poor channels of information flow between sectors, lack of clarity about roles Lack of evaluation frameworks, data collection and research or systematic rewards / penalties

Service fragmentation – Joint Statement EYLF has potential to provide a shared guide for planning and practice, strengthen communication between families, educators and early childhood intervention practitioners but needs to be resourced Inconsistency in what children are offered different levels of participation and engagement

Service fragmentation – Joint Statement Clustering of children with a disability in more welcoming services Educators and early childhood intervention staff can struggle to work together Little indication of a coordinated roll out of a policy of inclusion or systematic approaches to reducing the gap

Services design - Reimagining Inclusion Aspiration that children with a disability feel safe and have a sense of agency identity and belonging Are educators or allied health professionals well prepared and supported in inclusion? Importance of cross professional integration and collaboration, transdisciplinary approaches and multidisciplinary teams. The complexity of responding to the needs of some families

Services design - Joint statement on inclusion The employment of untrained staff as an additional educator (also known as aide/assistant/learning support assistants) is challenging The ‘velcro’ additional educator was no longer regarded as a useful role Additional educators were seen to be more effective when they proved more general support Training of both the additional educator and the early childhood educator in this changed role was seen as critical

Conclusion Inclusion will be shaped by: Parents Educators Disability specialists (ECI) Inclusion specialists Training organisation Universities Government policy makers and administrators

Conclusion Policy directions are emerging: Attitudes and belief Building community support Clearly articulated policy directions and accountability – legislation, data and consequences – and leadership

Conclusion Services fragmentation Clarification of purpose - achieving EYLF outcomes Clarity of roles Support for professional development and collaboration

Conclusion Service design Preparation of staff Pedagogy, curriculum, assistive and adaptive technology, universal design Ongoing professional support

Conclusion Service design Requires involvement of vocational education and Universities Requires educators taking a lead role in adopting new practices Requires support from ECIS and other forms of professional support

Conclusion Riding the wave National Disability Insurance Scheme Review of Childcare and Early Childhood Learning

Conclusion What action can we take:  at the individual level  groups of stakeholders acting together  collective action

Thank you