When working as a practitioner within early years it is important to remember the individual responsibility as a practitioner concerning equality of opportunities for children. It is therefore my responsibility as the provider to ensure that the setting has an effective equal opportunities and inclusion policy (see appendix 2), ensuring staff have the appropriate training to ascertain the equality of opportunities that are made available and support is in place for children with additional needs to include learning difficulties and disabilities. ‘The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 amended the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to make unjustified discrimination by education providers against disable pupil, students and adult learners unlawful. The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 took things further, giving most public authorities a positive duty to promote disability equality’. (Direct Government UK, 2010). From the research and documentation I have examined the word ‘special’ continues to be used when mentioning children with disabilities. In our society today there is a vast range of learning difficulties and disabilities amongst children, young people and adults. I regard the children within our setting as having ‘additional’ needs and think this is an enhanced language to be using in our current environment. When working as a practitioner within early years it is important to remember the individual responsibility concerning equality of opportunities for children as well as forming relationships between the child’s parents, I believe it is imperative and essential for the development and progress of every child to enable all children are included within the setting. ‘Inclusion is the practice of inclu... ... middle of paper ... ...ty to ensure positive attitudes to diversity and difference – not only so that every child is included and not disadvantaged, but also so that they learn from the earliest age to value diversity in others and grow up making a positive contribution to society.’ (Great Britain. Department for children, schools and families, 2007, p.9). On-going training and development within my setting has supported practitioners to enable them to demonstrate an effective practice by using their knowledge and skills to guarantee the principles are met and the families are supported for their individual needs. Raising the profile of children and recognising how important the early year’s are within our setting has shown outstanding qualities throughout the team, this has been shown through the children outcomes in which we have been praised from all of our parents over the years.
This report aims to recognize the contemporary statutory framework for identifying and working with children with Special Education Needs and Disability in England (The SEND Code Of Practice). The report will pay particular interest in discussing the key elements which derives from the 2014 Children and Families Act practiced in relation to the Department for Education (DfE). The report will pry into the current changes of the SEND code of practice, its assessment framework, why these have been introduced and who these changes makes a difference to. To discuss this the report will be looking at a variety of sources to better understand the most important details also includes but not limited to newspaper report, recent research papers,
UK Centre for Legal Education (UKCLE). (2010). SENDA: Special Education Needs and Disability Act 2001 [Online]. York: The Higher Education Academy. [Accessed: 17/11/13]. [Available: http://ww.ukcle.ac.uk/resources/directions/previous/issue4/senda/].
These children were now being seen as a group in which society had obligations to provide “normalisation” (Bowe, 2007, p.45) and would lead to a revolutionary law being introduced in America. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act was passed in 1975, of which Australia became a signatory. (AIHW, 2004). This Act mandated “that all school-age children with disabilities must receive a free appropriate public education” (Bowe, 2007, p. 101) “in the least restrictive environment” (Bowe, 2007, p. 5). For the first time in a century, Australia no longer segregated these children into an isolated “special facility” (Allen & Cowdery, 2012, p. 8). State governments established special education units within mainstream schools (AIHW, 2004). This is referred to as Integrated education and is described by Talay-Ongan & Cooke (2005), as an environment “where children with similar disabilities in special classes share the normal school environment, and utilise some classes (e.g., art or physical education) or the playground that all children enjoy.” In 1992, the Disability Discrimination Act was introduced in Australia which specifically covered the topic of Education and in 2005 a set of supplementary standards was passed which specifies the support schools are required to provide to students with a
It is noticeable that in the UK for parents who have children with “Special Educational Needs” have been made nearly all necessary conditions that pupils need to. For instance, parents may apply for their children on the Government website which conducts to the UK’s citizenship many services including “Special Educational Needs”. People whose children have disability might choose any school in turns schools must publish information on their website regarding Government’s rules of teaching special educational needs children. Turning now to the question of database which shows that in England amount of the children with special educational needs lessened from 1.62 million pupils in 2011-2012 and 1.55 million in 2012-2013, though the number of learners with statements of special educational needs increased slightly from 226.125 pupils in 2011-2012 to 229.390 pupils in 2012-2013 the database relating to the Government’s website. It means, each of fifth pupils in England are said to have special educational needs (21%). As an example British Broadcasting Company (BBC) observes “the greater classes are "decelerate learning difficulty" (24.2%), societal difficulties and behavioural, emotive (22.7%) and language, speech and relations needs (16.3%). A less ratio of pupils have physical disabilities (3.8%), visual or hearing impairments (3.4%), and autism spectrum (8.1%). Furthermore, children from any segments of society can have special educational needs, but indeed it is commonly among some section of the society. For example, at secondary school, girls are three times less likely to have a statement than boys. Chinese children are most likely not to have special educational needs, while Black children are the greatest likely. Learners with special educational needs are mostly to be appropriate for free school meals than those without them. All state schools are under the control of UK’s law to guarantee that special help is provided for children with special educational needs. It is correctly to mention that there is a program called “school action” under which more than half of pupils with special educational needs are listed. If other support is needed, the child is listed as "school action plus", which may involve the school bringing in specialist help from outside”.
The author of this reflective log is currently working as a Senior Early Years Practitioner (S.E.Y.P) within the Maintained nursery school. Through this role the author is also a member of the senior management team, which consists of the teacher and head teacher. It is through this management role that the author finds the importance of open communication with the team and other members of staff imperative when instigating and reflecting on new governmental proposals and guidelines laid down by both the governors and the head teacher. Daly, Byers and Taylor (2009) discuss how through consultation, support and guidance is given to the staff, helping to support the role of the individual. However O’Neill (2003) warns of how the impact is determinable only by the individuals’ commitment to the process.
It is important for teachers to understand how important the development of a child is. Teachers should show as well as teach student that diversity and inclusion is important. Showing students how important inclusion and diversity shows students and their families that you value them and their education no matter where they come from or what their circumstance, It also will help student learn about other people background just as well as their own. Inclusion will get children to participate and learn from others.
Under the 1944 Education Act children with special educational needs were defined in medical terms and categorised according to their disabilities. Many of those children were considered as ‘uneducable’ and were labelled as ‘maladjusted’ or ‘educationally sub-normal’, and they were given ‘special educational treatment’ in special schools or institutions. In these special schools (institutions) the rights of the children were not considered, as children were socially alienated from family and the society from where they lived. Though the grouping of children with similar disabilities looked positive in the past, such children were deprived their right to association with their peer...
Learning about Aboriginals and Torres Islanders and inclusion are the important part of acceptance and respect towards them. therefore, there are many ways in Early Childhood Centres do inclusion.
We should recognize the potential in every child irrespective of their learning style. We must provide environments in our schools that support inclusive practices and create equal opportunities for all children to achieve their full potential, irrespective of their background. Where, while differences are respected, the children remain focused on the learning experiences and are not made conscious of the fact that being from a different background makes any difference to their interests, abilities and growth
Special Education children are no different – they are weaker and a smaller group – probably one of the easiest targets for mistreatment. Most of them are unable to advocate for themselves which makes their situation even worse than the other groups that are discriminated against. Unless people stand up for them and advocate, they do not have a chance….
Parents entrusts their children to the teachers and staff. With children that have disabilities, educators may provide practical tools that can support developmental practices. Teachers give the best participation in the inclusion setting of the child and to work with and support the family members of the child. Additional conclusion in the case study of Kruse (2012) which has been presented earlier, identifying and encouraging parents to fulfill their roles is a help that can be extended by teachers and staff in early childhood education. Staff should be aware of the resources available to parents that can assist them in support for their child across their family’s life course. In the same way, additional support for the teachers should also not to be overlooked. Successful implementation of inclusive education, the key responsibility lies with classroom teachers. Teachers should be equipped with knowledge regarding the totality of the intervention program. In a case study of Minniss, et al (2013), 10 participants from each of the 4 centres selected which is composed of early childhood directors and staffs. In one of the results, the importance in partnership between the health promotion team and early childhood centre staff. The formed relationship between them increases the staff’s awareness of health promoting views and practices. This growing awareness among staff
The debate of mainstreaming children with a disability challenges the idea of having an enclosed environment where they can effectively learn. University of Missouri, College of Education states, “The term ‘special needs’ is used to collectively define those that require assistance due to physical, mental, behavioral, or medical disabilities or delays” ( .) Opponents who encourage mainstreaming argue that mainstreaming special needs children is beneficial. They claim children with a disability should receive equivalent access to public education and not be left behind because of an impairment. Many also dispute attempts should be made to develop tests to measure academic achievement. Aron and Loprest state “Reforming special education cannot be done in isolation; it requires integration with reforms being made in general education” (116). However, there are many problems the education system is going to face if children with a disability are integrated into standard classes.
The National Quality Area 6- Collaborative partnerships with families and communities (NQS, 2011) fosters the importance of working in strong partnership with families to support children achieve their full potential. According to the NQS (2011) ongoing collaboration supports families in developing a sense of connectivity and belonging as well as “trust and confidence in the service” (Guide to the NQS, 2011, p.148). Similarly, the Early Years Learning Framework (DEEWR, 2009) enhances the importance of working in partnership with families. As stated in the EYLF, best learning outcomes for children are achieved when educators, families and support professionals are working together to explore children’s learning potential in everyday events, routines and play (DEEWR, 2009a, p.12; Davies, 2000 cited in Garvis & Pendergast, 2014, p. 192; Rouse,
The terminology of ‘special educational needs’ was broadly welcomed in the 1970s and is dominantly used in education today. However, over the past thirty years the term ‘special educational needs’ has increasingly come to be seen as problematic. Tomlinson (1985) cited by Skidmore (2004: P5) argues that the terminology of special educational needs still 'masks a practice of stratification which continues to determine children's educational careers by assigning to them an identity defined by an administrative label'. Soan (2005) cited by Hodkinson and Vickerman (2009: P.163) believed that new terminology shoul...
Robert-Holmes, G. (2011). It’s the bread and butter of our practice’: experiencing the Early Years Foundation Stage, International Journal, 20(1), pp. 30-42.