D April 2009

E
naeyc

Early Childhood
Inclusion

T
oday an ever-increasing wide variety of factors, questions persist
A Joint Position number of infants and young about the precise meaning of inclusion
Statement children with and without and its implications for policy, practice,
disabilities play, develop, and potential outcomes for children and
of the
and learn together in a families.
Division for
variety of places – homes, early child-
Early Childhood hood programs, neighborhoods, and other The lack of a shared national definition
(DEC) and community-based settings. The notion has contributed to misunderstandings
the National that young children with disabilities1 and about inclusion. DEC and NAEYC recog-
their families are full members of the nize that having a common understand-
Association for
community reflects societal values about ing of what inclusion means is funda-
the Education
promoting opportunities for development mentally important for determining what
of Young types of practices and supports are neces-
and learning, and a sense of belonging
Children sary to achieve high quality inclusion.
for every child. It also reflects a reaction
(NAEYC) against previous educational practices of This DEC/NAEYC joint position state-
separating and isolating children with ment offers a definition of early childhood
disabilities. Over time, in combination inclusion. The definition was designed not
with certain regulations and protections as a litmus test for determining whether
under the law, these values and societal a program can be considered inclusive,
views regarding children birth to 8 with but rather, as a blueprint for identifying
disabilities and their families have come the key components of high quality inclu-
to be known as early childhood inclusion.2 sive programs. In addition, this document
The most far-reaching effect of federal offers recommendations for how the posi-
legislation on inclusion enacted over the tion statement should be used by families,
past three decades has been to funda- practitioners, administrators, policy mak-
mentally change the way in which early ers, and others to improve early childhood
childhood services ideally can be orga- services.
nized and delivered.3 However, because
inclusion takes many different forms
and implementation is influenced by a

naeyc
Division for Early Childhood of the
Council for Exceptional Children National Association for the Education of Young Children
27 Fort Missoula Road | Missoula, MT 59804 1313 L Street NW, Suite 500 | Washington, DC 20005-4101
Phone 406.543.0872 | Fax 406.543.0887 Phone 202.232.8777 Toll-Free 800.424.2460 | Fax 202.328.1846
Email [email protected] | Web www.dec-sped.org Email [email protected] | Web www.naeyc.org
 Definition of Participation. Even if environments and pro-
Early Childhood Inclusion grams are designed to facilitate access, some
Early childhood inclusion embodies the values, children will need additional individualized ac-
policies, and practices that support the right of commodations and supports to participate fully
every infant and young child and his or her fam- in play and learning activities with peers and
ily, regardless of ability, to participate in a broad adults. Adults promote belonging, participation,
range of activities and contexts as full members of and engagement of children with and without dis-
families, communities, and society. The desired re- abilities in inclusive settings in a variety of inten-
sults of inclusive experiences for children with and tional ways. Tiered models in early childhood hold
without disabilities and their families include a promise for helping adults organize assessments
sense of belonging and membership, positive social and interventions by level of intensity. Depending
relationships and friendships, and development on the individual needs and priorities of young chil-
and learning to reach their full potential. The defin- dren and families, implementing inclusion involves
ing features of inclusion that can be used to identify a range of approaches—from embedded, routines-
high quality early childhood programs and services based teaching to more explicit interventions—to
are access, participation, and supports. scaffold learning and participation for all children.
Social-emotional development and behaviors that
What is meant by facilitate participation are critical goals of high
Access, Participation, and Supports?
quality early childhood inclusion, along with learn-
Access. Providing access to a wide range of learn-
ing and development in all other domains.
ing opportunities, activities, settings, and environ-
ments is a defining feature of high quality early
Supports. In addition to provisions addressing
childhood inclusion. Inclusion can take many dif-
access and participation, an infrastructure of
ferent forms and can occur in various organization-
systems-level supports must be in place to under-
al and community contexts, such as homes, Head
gird the efforts of individuals and organizations
Start, child care, faith-based programs, recreation-
providing inclusive services to children and fami-
al programs, preschool, public and private pre-kin-
lies. For example, family members, practitioners,
dergarten through early elementary education, and
specialists, and administrators should have access
blended early childhood education/early childhood
to ongoing professional development and support
special education programs. In many cases, simple
to acquire the knowledge, skills, and dispositions
modifications can facilitate access for individual
required to implement effective inclusive prac-
children. Universal design is a concept that can be
tices. Because collaboration among key stakehold-
used to support access to environments in many
ers (e.g., families, practitioners, specialists, and
different types of settings through the removal of
administrators) is a cornerstone for implementing
physical and structural barriers. Universal Design
high quality early childhood inclusion, resources
for Learning (udl) reflects practices that provide
and program policies are needed to promote
multiple and varied formats for instruction and
multiple opportunities for communication and
learning. udl principles and practices help to
collaboration among these groups. Specialized
ensure that every young child has access to learn-
services and therapies must be implemented in a
ing environments, to typical home or educational
coordinated fashion and integrated with general
routines and activities, and to the general educa-
early care and education services. Blended early
tion curriculum. Technology can enable children
childhood education/early childhood special educa-
with a range of functional abilities to participate in
tion programs offer one example of how this might
activities and experiences in inclusive settings.
be achieved.4 Funding policies should promote the

2 Early Childhood Inclusion

pooling of resources and the use of incentives to practitioners and staff operate under a similar
increase access to high quality inclusive opportu- set of assumptions, values, and beliefs about
nities. Quality frameworks (e.g., program quality the most effective ways to support infants
standards, early learning standards and guide- and young children with disabilities and their
lines, and professional competencies and stan- families. A program philosophy on inclusion
dards) should reflect and guide inclusive practices should be used to shape practices aimed at
to ensure that all early childhood practitioners ensuring that infants and young children with
and programs are prepared to address the needs disabilities and their families are full members
and priorities of infants and young children with of the early childhood community and that
disabilities and their families. children have multiple opportunities to learn,
develop, and form positive relationships.
Recommendations for Using this
Position Statement to Improve 3. Establish a system of services and sup-
Early Childhood Services ports. Shared understandings about the
Reaching consensus on the meaning of early child- meaning of inclusion should be the starting
hood inclusion is a necessary first step in articu- point for creating a system of services and
lating the field’s collective wisdom and values on supports for children with disabilities and
this critically important issue. In addition, an their families. Such a system must reflect
agreed-upon definition of inclusion should be used a continuum of services and supports that
to create high expectations for infants and young respond to the needs and characteristics of
children with disabilities and to shape educational children with varying types of disabilities and
policies and practices that support high quality in- levels of severity, including children who are
clusion in a wide range of early childhood programs at risk for disabilities. However, the design-
and settings. Recommendations for using this posi- ers of these systems should not lose sight of
tion statement to accomplish these goals include: inclusion as a driving principle and the foun-
dation for the range of services and supports
1. Create high expectations for every child they provide to young children and families.
to reach his or her full potential. A defi- Throughout the service and support system,
nition of early childhood inclusion should the goal should be to ensure access, partici-
help create high expectations for every child, pation, and the infrastructure of supports
regardless of ability, to reach his or her full needed to achieve the desired results related
potential. Shared expectations can, in turn, to inclusion. Ideally, the principle of natural
lead to the selection of appropriate goals and proportions should guide the design of inclu-
support the efforts of families, practitioners, sive early childhood programs. The principle
individuals, and organizations to advocate for of natural proportions means the inclusion
high quality inclusion. of children with disabilities in proportion
to their presence in the general population.
2. Develop a program philosophy on inclu- A system of supports and services should
sion. An agreed-upon definition of inclusion include incentives for inclusion, such as child
should be used by a wide variety of early care subsidies, and adjustments to staff-child
childhood programs to develop their own ratios to ensure that program staff can ad-
philosophy on inclusion. Programs need a phi- equately address the needs of every child.
losophy on inclusion as a part of their broader
program mission statement to ensure that

Early Childhood Inclusion 3

 4. Revise program and professional stan- who would benefit from professional develop-
dards. A definition of inclusion could be used ment, what practitioners need to know and be
as the basis for revising program and profes- able to do, and how learning opportunities are
sional standards to incorporate high quality organized and facilitated as part of an inte-
inclusive practices. Because existing early grated professional development system.
childhood program standards primarily reflect
the needs of the general population of young 6. Influence federal and state accountabil-
children, improving the overall quality of an ity systems. Consensus on the meaning of
early childhood classroom is necessary, but inclusion could influence federal and state
might not be sufficient, to address the individ- accountability standards related to increas-
ual needs of every child. A shared definition of ing the number of children with disabilities
inclusion could be used as the foundation for enrolled in inclusive programs. Currently,
identifying dimensions of high quality inclu- states are required to report annually to the
sive programs and the professional standards U.S. Department of Education the number of
and competencies of practitioners who work in children with disabilities who are participat-
these settings. ing in inclusive early childhood programs. But
the emphasis on the prevalence of children
5. Achieve an integrated professional devel- who receive inclusive services ignores the
opment system. An agreed-upon definition of quality and the anticipated outcomes of the
inclusion should be used by states to promote services that children experience. Further-
an integrated system of high quality profes- more, the emphasis on prevalence data raises
sional development to support the inclusion of questions about which types of programs and
young children with and without disabilities experiences can be considered inclusive in
and their families. The development of such a terms of the intensity of inclusion and the
system would require strategic planning and proportion of children with and without dis-
commitment on the part of families and other abilities within these settings and activities.
key stakeholders across various early child- A shared definition of inclusion could be used
hood sectors (e.g., higher education, child care, to revise accountability systems to address
Head Start, public pre-kindergarten, pre- both the need to increase the number of chil-
school, early intervention, health care, mental dren with disabilities who receive inclusive
health). Shared assumptions about the mean- services and the goal of improving the qual-
ing of inclusion are critical for determining ity and outcomes associated with inclusion.

4 Early Childhood Inclusion

 Endnotes
1 Phrases such as “children with special needs” and “children with exception-
alities” are sometimes used in place of “children with disabilities.”
2 The term “inclusion” can be used in a broader context relative to opportuni-
ties and access for children from culturally and linguistically diverse groups,
a critically important topic in early childhood requiring further discussion
and inquiry. It is now widely acknowledged, for example, that culture has a
profound influence on early development and learning, and that early care
and education practices must reflect this influence. Although this position
statement is more narrowly focused on inclusion as it relates to disability, it
is understood that children with disabilities and their families vary widely with
respect to their racial/ethnic, cultural, economic, and linguistic backgrounds.
3 In accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
children ages 3-21 are entitled to a free, appropriate public education (FAPE)
in the least restrictive environment (LRE). LRE requires that, to the extent
possible, children with disabilities should have access to the general educa-
tion curriculum, along with learning activities and settings that are available
to their peers without disabilities. Corresponding federal legislation ap-
plied to infants and toddlers (children birth to 3) and their families specifies
that early intervention services and supports must be provided in “natural
environments,” generally interpreted to mean a broad range of contexts and
activities that generally occur for typically developing infants and toddlers in
homes and communities. Although this document focuses on the broader
meaning and implications of early childhood inclusion for children birth to
eight, it is recognized that the basic ideas and values reflected in the term
“inclusion” are congruent with those reflected in the term “natural environ-
ments.” Furthermore, it is acknowledged that fundamental concepts related
to both inclusion and natural environments extend well beyond the early
childhood period to include older elementary school students and beyond.
4 Blended programs integrate key components (e.g., funding, eligibility criteria,
curricula) of two or more different types of early childhood programs (e.g.,
the federally funded program for preschoolers with disabilities [Part B-619] in
combination with Head Start, public pre-k, and/or child care) with the goal of
serving a broader group of children and families within a single program.

Early Childhood Inclusion 5

 APPROVED BY DEC EXECUTIVE BOARD: April 2009

APPROVED BY NAEYC GOVERNING BOARD: April 2009

Suggested citation
DEC/NAEYC. (2009). Early childhood inclusion: A joint position statement of the Division
for Early Childhood (DEC) and the National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC). Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child
Development Institute.

Permission to copy not required –– distribution encouraged.

http://community.fpg.unc.edu/resources/articles/Early_Childhood_Inclusion

Acknowledgments
Coordination of the development and validation of this joint position statement was pro-
vided by the National Professional Development Center on Inclusion (NPDCI), a project
of the FPG Child Development Institute funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs. NPDCI work group members included
Camille Catlett, who directed the validation process, Virginia Buysse, who served as the
lead writer, and Heidi Hollingsworth, who supervised the analysis of respondent com-
ments and the editorial process.

D DEC and NAEYC appreciate the work of Joint DEC-NAEYC Work Group members who
participated in the development of the initial definition and position statement: Terry

E
Harrison, NJ Department of Health and Senior Services; Helen Keith, University of
Vermont; Louise Kaczmarek, University of Pittsburgh; Robin McWilliam, Siskin Children’s
Institute and the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga; Judy Niemeyer, University of

naeyc
North Carolina at Greensboro; Cheryl Rhodes, Georgia State University; Bea Vargas, El
Papalote Inclusive Child Development Center; and Mary Wonderlick, consultant. Input
from the members of the DEC Executive Board and the NAEYC Governing Board, as
well as key staff members in both organizations, also is acknowledged.

6 Early Childhood Inclusion