Early intervention for children vulnerable to exclusion is currently focused on the child?s effective inclusion in mainstream early childhood education. There is thus a search for developing a shared understanding of what constitutes quality inclusive preschool provision. This was the aim of a qualitative 3-year (2015?17) study of inclusive settings for children from 3 years to compulsory education across European countries, conducted by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. Data consisted of practitioner descriptions of 32 example inclusive preschools from 28 European countries, and more detailed data collected during short visits to eight of the example settings. Qualitative, thematic analysis identified 25 subthemes representing the perceived constituents of inclusive early childhood education provision. These were organised within a framework that intertwined the structure-process-outcome model with the ecological systems model. The resulting adapted ecosystem model for inclusive early childhood education comprises five dimensions: (1) the inclusive education outcomes, (2) processes, and (3) structural factors within the micro environment of the preschool; and the wider (4) inclusive structural factors at community, and (5) at national levels. The framework can be useful for practitioners as well as researchers and policy makers seeking to improve inclusive early childhood education provision.

PURPOSE: This study aims to explore the role of three specific factors within the child-environment interaction process - engagement, independence and social interactions - in influencing development and learning of children with disabilities in inclusive preschool settings. The main question is whether children can be categorised in homogenous groups based on engagement, independence and social interactions (proximal variables within a biopsychosocial framework of human development). The study also examined whether children with the same diagnosis would group together or separately, when trying to identify clusters of engagement, independence and social interactions, and additionally whether such clusters vary as a function of individual child characteristics, and/or as a function of structural and process characteristics of preschool environment.

METHODS: Data was taken from an intervention study conducted in mainstream preschools in Portugal. A person-centered cluster analysis was conducted to explore group membership of children with various diagnoses, based on their engagement, independence and social interaction profiles.

RESULTS: Results show that children clustered based on similarity of engagement, independence and social interaction patterns, rather than on diagnosis. Besides, it was found that quality of peer interaction was the only predictor of cluster membership.

CONCLUSION: These findings support the argument that participation profiles may be more informative for intervention purposes than diagnostic categories, and that preschool process quality, namely peer interaction, is crucial for children's participation.

Engagement in preschool predicts children's development, learning, and wellbeing in later school years. The time children engage in activities and social interactions is conditional for preschool inclusion. Engagement is part of the construct participation, which is determined by attendance and involvement. Two suggested underlying dimensions of engagement had been identified as essential when assessing children's participation in preschool activities. As engagement is a key question in inclusion of all children, and preschool becomes a common context for them, it is increasingly important to understand the concept of engagement in those settings. In Sweden most children attend preschool but children in need of special support tend not to receive enough support for their everyday functioning. This study aimed to conceptualize child engagement in preschool with ICF-CY as a framework to clarify core and developmental engagement dimensions included in Child Engagement Questionnaire (CEQ). The content of CEQ was identified through linking processes based on ICF linking rules with some exceptions. Specific challenges and solutions were acknowledged. To identify engagement dimensions in the ICF-CY, CEQ items related to ICF-CY chapters were integrated in the two-dimensional model of engagement. Findings showed that engagement measured for preschool ages was mostly related to Learning and Applying knowledge belonging to Activities and Participation but the linkage detected missing areas. Broader perspectives of children's everyday functioning require extended assessment with consideration to mutual influences between activities, participation, body functions, and contextual factors. Related to core and developmental engagement, findings highlight the importance for preschool staff to pay attention to how children do things, not only what they do. Activities related to core engagement include basic skills; those related to developmental engagement set higher demands on the child. Linking challenges related to preschool context were not consistent with those reported for child health. Using the ICF-CY as a framework with a common language may lead to open discussions among persons around the child, clarify the different perspectives and knowledges of the persons, and facilitate decisions on how to implement support to a child in everyday life situations in preschool and at home.

The wide-ranging educational, economic and social benefits of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC), at both individual and societal levels, are increasingly acknowledged in large parts of the world. Major changes in physical, socio-emotional and cognitive areas of development occur during these years, and meaningful educational experiences have been shown to have long-lasting effects upon a child’s cognitive development, socio-emotional development and learning (Pianta, Barnett, Burchinal, & Thornburg, 2009; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000; Sylva, 2010). International and European communities (EU, 2011; OECD, 2014; UNESCO, 2015; UN, 2015) regard quality of ECEC as a foundation for later school achievement, success in the modern knowledge based economy and lifelong learning.

From Introduction:

This Self-Reflection Tool was developed as part of the Inclusive Early Childhood Education (IECE) project, conducted by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education from 2015 to 2017 (www.european-agency.org/agency-projects/inclusive-earlychildhood-education). The project’s overall goal was to identify, analyse and subsequently promote the main characteristics of quality IECE for all children. To that end, a need was detected for a tool that all professionals and staff could use to reflect on their setting’s inclusiveness, focusing on the social, learning and physical environment. This tool is intended to help improve settings’ inclusiveness.

This chapter highlights the importance of providing all children, and particularly those at risk, vulnerable children and children with disabilities, with opportunities for a quality inclusive Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). It first sets out the evidence that quality inclusive ECEC provision is essential for all children to develop their potential and lifelong learning competencies that will ensure their successful participation in school and adult life. It then describes the main international and European policies for inclusive ECEC. A more detailed account is given of the five key principles for action towards improving the quality of ECEC provision developed by the thematic working group of the European Commission (2014) ‘Quality Framework for Early Education and Care’ that are also very similar to those proposed by the OECD (2015) ‘Starting Strong IV’. The concluding section underlines the need to address more strongly the provision of enabling opportunities for accessibility to ECEC of children at risk of exclusion. More importantly, it highlights the need to research and improve not only these children’s presence in ECEC but also their level and quality of active participation and engagement in the social and learning activities of early childhood inclusive provision. The chapter reflects the research and policy development work being undertaken by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education in its (2015–2017) project on Inclusive Early Childhood Education (IECE) led by the present authors.

Purpose: The aim of this article is to examine the component of “personal factors” described as a contextual factor in the ICF and ICF-CY.

Methods: A critical examination of the construct of “personal factors” and description of the component was made with reference to conceptual and taxonomic criteria.

Results: The “personal factors” component in the ICF/ICF-CY is not defined, there is no taxonomy of codes, there is no explicit purpose stated for its use and no guidelines are provided for its application. In spite of these constraints, the component of “personal factors” is being applied as part of the classifications. Such uncontrolled applications constitute significant risks for the status of ICF/ICF-CY as the WHO reference classification in that: (a) the component is accepted for use by default simply by being applied; (b) component content is expanded with idiosyncratic exemplars by users; and (c) there is potential misuse of “personal factors” in documenting personal attributes, including “blaming the victim”.

Conclusion: In the absence of formal codes, any application of the component of “personal factors” lacks the legitimacy that documentation with a scientific taxonomy should provide. Given the growing use of the ICF/ICF-CY globally, a priority for the revision process should be to determine if there is in fact need for “personal” or any other factors in the ICF/ICF-CY.