Key Benefits And Challenges Of An Integrated Approach To Working With Children With Additional Needs And Their Families In An Early Years Setting.

IntroductionMany families who come pincerren with picky require often fear sending their pincerren to mainstream schools (Wang 2009). Such p bents often fear that their children will not be treated equ all toldy in mainstream school, and a standardized worry ab by how well their specific require kitty be met (NCSE 2011). As such they often place them in finical ambits with low student- scholarly person ratios and with finickyized belief. However, the effectiveness of circumscribed settings has recently been questioned.Placing children with spare(prenominal) inevitably in excess settings has been a subject of considerable debate over the past few years (Wall 2011). While the general public discern is that redundant inescapably students cornerstone benefit from individual and small aggroup instruction, there is no compelling evidence to support this claim. In fact, the antagonist seems true. According to a study conducted by Casey et al (1998), it was foun d that surplus schools with curricula designed specifically for special ask students did not necessarily bourneination in break improvements in childrens cognitive ability or developmental outcomes.A uniform study by Bunch & Valeo (1997) came to confusable conclusions It was claimed that special placement of children with additional needs has not demonstrated solid advantages over mainstream classes, despite specialized t separatelying and lower teacher to pupil ratio. More recent researches by Brown et al (2005) and Allen & Cowdery (2005) have do similar conclusions. In this regard, this paper examines the key benefits and challenges of an integrate preliminary to works with children with additional needs and their families in an betimes years setting.Defining the call Additional needsBefore exploring further, it is worthwhile to first define the term additional needs. This term is apply in reference to real conditions or circumstances that magnate lead to children requiring special support (Owens 2009). Children with additional needs are mainly those that have health conditions and needs think to learning and physical development (Roffey 2001). That is, children with additional needs include those who are physically handicapped, those with developmental delay or intellectual disability, communication disorders and those diagnosed with conditions such as Down syndrome, Autism or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Owens 2009). cellular cellular inclusion bodyHaving defined the term additional needs, it is important to examine the mount in which the term inclusion is used. As Connor (2006) points out, the concept of inclusion is used to describe placement of children with additional needs in mending settings instead than special facilities. It should be noted that inclusion goes beyond just teaching the child in inclusive classroom settings and includes the quality of the childs experience of school life and association with former (a) peers.Legislative framework. detect legislations governing provision of work to special needs children include the tuitional activity (NI) Order 1996 and the Special bringing up of necessity and Disability (NI) Order 2005 (DoE 2009). The former(prenominal) outlines the decentlys and duties of the following in relation to special needs students schools, parents, Health and br differently Services Boards,Education and Library BoardsDepartment of Education It similarly sets out a Code of Practice and establishes an arrangement for issuing a story and assessment of these childrens nurture needs (Porter 2003). The Special Education Needs and Disability (NI) Order 2005 resulted from amendments made to the first one to include the right of special needs children to mainstream education and introduction of new disability difference responsibilities (DoE 2009).Integrated approachIn the UK, these children with special needs are interconnected into the mainstream schools provid ed that there is adequate equipment, enough staff and the right resources to figure that they get to their full potential ( Heinemann & Vickerman 2009). However, it is not mandatory for mainstream schools to enroll children with special needs. Rather, it depends on the ability of the school itself to meet their needs. If the mainstream school setting whoremongernot provide for their needs, the child is placed under the local authority which then seeks to provide solutions (Silberfeld 2009). in that respect is a growing recognition of the benefits of including special needs students in mainstream schools as opposed to remedial settings. Now more than ever, there is an increased stress on collaborative model and joint running(a) to ensure that children with special needs are included in mainstream education (Duke & Smith 2007). mayhap this has been driven by the recognition of its benefits and increasing trend in children in need of special attention. The number of children wit h educational needs in the UK has been on the rise over the past few years. For example, their proportion as a percentage of the total school population increased from 14.6% in 2003 to 17.7% in 2007 (DoE 2009).BenefitsThere are several benefits for such an integrated approach to running(a) with children with special needs. First, such inclusive programs will help an opposite(prenominal) children to understand them, accept them, appreciate and take account their similarities and differences (Sammons et al. 2003). This will enable them to see each person as an individual as opposed to seeing them in terms of their needs. An new(prenominal) benefit to such an integrated approach is the decrease in stigma. There is compelling evidence that shows that placing children with special needs in mainstream schools in the early stages can significantly reduce stigma (Griffin 2008). comprehension programmes have the potential to facilitate a relationship that can be mutually beneficial for both groups of students. It allows children from both groups to develop awareness and to entertain their differences, thereby reducing stigmatization and labeling. An integrated approach to learning enhances neighborly integration and reduces stigmatization and prejudice against children with special needs (Griffin 2008). Inclusion too reflects the acceptance of special needs children in the society. The integrated approach makes children with special needs to feel accepted to the society and by their peers and gives them a mavin of belonging (Robinson & Jones-Diaz 2005). Such inclusive programmes can as well be of benefit to the parents. All that parents want is for their children to live typical lives like other students including being accepted by their friends and peers (Owens 2009). Families visions of having their children experience typical life like other lawful students can come true (Weston 2010)Furthermore, maintaining an inclusive setting can be more economical than running a special setting (Weston 2010). Additionally, the economic outputs can be greater when special needs students are educated in mainstream schools because of the self-sufficiency skills stressed in such settings (Mitchell 2009). Other benefits to such an integrated approach include improved schoolman process, opportunity to figure in typical experiences of puerility, and gaining confidence to pursue inclusion in other settings such as recreational groups (Jones 2004). Research seems to evoke that special need children perform better when placed together with other peers in the natural setting (Brown et al., 2005). As Allen & Cowdery (2005) points out, special need children who pay for services such as occupational therapy, language therapy and special education perform even better when provided with these services in the natural settings with their typically developing peers. Challenges While the controversys in favour of integration are valid, it should also be rememb ered that integration in itself is a two- way of life process. In more or less cases, the benefits of integration have been pleadd from the side of special needs student. What about the other group of students. Arent they going to be affected by the way services are devoted to special needs students? Such an integrated approach raises several key challenges. One particular challenge relates to the af delightful of equity. Given their inclusion in mainstream classrooms, how can fairness be determinedWhat is fair for a typical average studentAnd what is fair for a special needs student (Swartz 2005)It is questionable whether the educational needs of these students can be met in mainstream classes especially attached that they requires some sort of specialized services and special attention as well. There is a danger that the attention given to the special needs students will affect the quality of services that the regular students receive (Hoccut 1996). Given the developmental de lays that most special needs students experience, the other regular students may rate themselves with these students in terms of academic performance which eventually might lead to the decline in their creativity and critical thinking capabilities (Wang 2009). Can this be termed as fair to either groupThis carcass a major challenge to such inclusion programmes. Another challenge relates to the aggressive nature of some of these children. Coping with emotionally and behaviourally disturbed children can be particularly challenging for both the students and teachers (Cohen et al 2004). This can be seen with the recent push by some schools for responsible inclusion. somewhat of these children mental health needs are beyond what the mainstream education can deliver and as such can be disruptive to other students. Schools have move de facto mental health providers for children with special needs except they were not set up for such purposes (Heinneman & Vickerman 2009). Despite these challenges, the focus should be on promoting integration of special needs students into the mainstream education. While there are many arguments in favour of and against integrations, the benefits for such integration are significant. Those in favour of special facilities argue that these facilities are outdo for children with special needs in that it helps them maintain self-esteem and experience greater success (Cohen et al. 2004). They argue that segregation helps them with self-esteem and protects them from stigmatization. To some extent, they raise a valid argument especially given that the mainstream schools do not have enough humanity resources and adequate material for catering for the needs of such children (Hocutt 1996). However, such an approach will only further enhance stigmatization and negative labelling. Also, it might lead to social isolation from their peers and a lack of academic press, and higher(prenominal) order thinking among children with special needs. Mo reover, placing such students in special facilities conjures up images which render them as failures and this may further reinforce their low-self esteem (Cohen et al 2004). Perhaps this might be the reason why some of these students become physically aggressive or verbally abusive. They end up display aggression as the only way to be recognized (Cohen et al 2004). There are several benefits to such an intergrated approach to learning including better social adjustment and stigma reduction. Children with special needs may also benefit from inclusion programs through participating in typical experiences of childhood, gaining an understand about diversity of people in the community, and gaining the confidence to pursue inclusion in other settings such as recreational groups (Nutbrown & Clough 2010). Other regular students may benefit from the opportunity to meet and share experiences with special needs students, and developing positive attitudes towards students with varied abilitie s (Weston 2003). There is a need to ensure that these students receive as broad and balanced an entitlement curriculum as possible, similar to that received by the regular students (Cohens et al. 2004). Regardless of their condition or of the developmental delays that children with special needs may experience, they should all be allowed to learn and participate in everyday routines just like other children (Weston 2003).It should be remembered that children of all ages have the resembling intrinsic value and are entitled to the same opportunities for participation in child care.ConclusionResearch has shown that special needs students who are mixed with their peers in mainstream classrooms are more likely to grasp better outcomes academically and socially while those in segregated classes move further behind. There are, however, challenges to such an integrated approach to working with special needs children. Challenges related to coping with emotionally and behaviourally disturb ed children and the challenge of ensuring fairness have been highlighted in this paper. Despite these challenges, the paper calls for an integrated approach to working with children with special needs. Unless there is a compelling reason to put special needs children in special settings, they should be placed in the mainstream educational setting. To ensure the success of this integrated approach, it is important that all the professionals involved value and appreciate their individual roles and those of others in order to ensure that these children receive best education, care and support. Families must also show their commitment to the multi-disciplinary partnership approaches.ReferencesAllen, K. E., and Cowdery, G. E., 2004. The stupendous child Inclusion in early childhood. Albany, NY Delmar. Brown, J.G., Hemmeter, M.L. and Pretti-Frontczak, K., 2005. Blended practices for teaching new-fashioned children in inclusive settings. Baltimore Paul H. Brookes Cohen, L., Manion, L. an d Morrison, K., 2004. A guide to teaching practice. psychology press Connor, J. (2006) Redefining inclusion. Every Child. 12(3) Watson ACT ECA Department of Education (DoE), 2009. The way in advance for special educational needs and inclusion. Department of Education Dukes, C. and Smith, M., 2007. on the job(p) with parents of children with special educational needs. capital of the United Kingdom SAGE publications. Griffin, S., 2008. Inclusion, equality and diversity in working with children, Professional Development. Oxford Heinemann, A. and Vickerman, P., 2009. Key issues in special educational needs and inclusion. capital of the United Kingdom Sage Hocutt, A.M., 1996.Effectiveness of special education is placement the critical constituent? The Future of Children Special Education For Students With Disabilities, Vol.6 (1) Jones, C.A., 2004. Supporting inclusion in the early years. Supporting early learning. McGraw-Hill Mitchell, D. (ed) 2009, Contextualizing inclusive educatio n. London Routledge National Council for Special Education (NCSE), 2011. Children with special educational needs, National Council for Special Education Nutbrown, C. and Clough, P., 2010. Inclusion in the early years. London Sage Owens, A., 2009. Including children with additional needs in child care. National Childcare Accreditation Council Inc. Porter, L., 2003. Young childrens behaviour. Practical approaches for caregivers and teachers. 2nd edition. London Paul Chapman Publishing Robinson, K.H. and Jones-Diaz, C., 2005. Diversity and difference in early childhood education. Issues for Theory and Practice. Maidenhead Open University Press Roffey, S., 2001. Special needs in the early years London. David Fulton Sammons, P., Taggart, B., Smees, R., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Siraj-Blatchford and Elliot, K., 2003.The early years transition and special educational needs (EyTSEN) project. London University of Oxford Silberfeld, C. et al., (eds), 2009, UEL early childhood studies reader. L ondon Sage publications Swartz, S.L., 2005. Working together a collaborative model for the delivery of special services in general classrooms. Wall, K., 2011. Special needs and the early years. A practictioner guide. tertiary edition. London Sage publications Wang, H.L., 2009. Should all students with special educational needs (SEN) be included in mainstream education provision a critical depth psychology. International Education Studies, vol. 2(4) Weston, C (ed), 2010. UEL special needs and inclusive education reader. London. Sage publications Weston, C., 2003. Educating all inclusive classroom practice. In Alfrey, C., judgement Childrens learning. London. David Fulton.