How childcare could better include neurodiverse children

It’s time the early childhood education sector’s approach to inclusion was overhauled — and the Productivity Commission’s new recommendations are a good start.

Four-year-old Amara* loves animal figurines and can count to 1,000. At childcare, she excels in solitary tasks, such as solving complex puzzles.

Amara also becomes easily overwhelmed by the busy room and loud noises at her childcare centre. She sometimes has meltdowns when other children play with her favourite sheep toy and often clings to her mum when it’s time to part.

Amara is neurodivergent. But her educators aren’t trained in neurodiversity, so they misinterpret her behaviour as attention-seeking or a result of her different cultural upbringing. Assuming Amara’s not interested in social interaction, her teachers often exclude her from group activities.

As a result, Amara has begun to dread childcare and has become increasingly distressed at drop-off time.

Amara’s situation is not unique: Up to one in five children is neurodivergent.

But Australia’s early childhood education sector doesn’t always meet the learning needs of these children, according to a major new report into early childhood education reform.

That report, released today following the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into early childhood education and care, calls for the sector to improve inclusion support for children with disability, including neurodiversity.

Out of step

Reform of the sector to prioritise inclusion support for children with diverse learning needs is long overdue.

As researchers from the peak body, Professionals and Researchers in Early Childhood Intervention (PRECI), pointed out in a submission to the Productivity Commission inquiry, Australia has signed on to several international obligations, including the UN convention enshrining all children’s right to an inclusive education.

Research also shows the first five years are crucial in building children’s emotional development as much as other stages of development.

Participating in early childhood education with other children is not merely an “optional extra”. Instead, these services are essential learning environments and all children have a right to attend them.

Reflected clearly in the foundation of Australia’s Early Years Learning Framework is a view of all children’s lives as characterised by belonging, being and becoming.

But in reality, inclusion remains an issue due to the lack of coordination and collaboration between different levels of government and other jurisdictions.

The childcare sector remains deeply entrenched in the assumption that all children developin a neurotypical way, and it often prioritises the majority.

This approach clashes with contemporary understandings of neurodiversity, the notion that individuals experience and interact with the world in diverse ways, with no single “right” way to think, learn, or behave. This perspective views differences as variations rather than deficits.

Gaps in the current approach

Australia’s early childhood education and care sector has an Inclusion Support Program, designed to embed quality inclusive practices into the delivery of early learning programmes for all children.

However, this programme only reaches 1 percent of children in early childhood education and care settings, while at least 4 percent of children need it.

This gap is due to barriers faced by some families in accessing these services, including exclusion and a lack of adjustments to allow children to learn and participate, as the 2023 Review of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) report found.

Many early childhood services aren’t properly prepared or resourced, nor funded adequately to provide truly inclusive programs. As a result, these services sometimes discourage parents from enrolling children with disability.

At the same time, there aren’t many “foundational supports” — that is, services for children not eligible for the NDIS but still requiring early childhood intervention or less intensive support.

Workforce issues remain a problem too.

Unrealistic staff-child ratios, lack of time for training and low pay scales lead to attention being taken away from service-building and planning. Instead, many centres deliver a “just-enough” service to meet the basic quality standards to keep the system functioning.

Parents of neurodiverse children often hear: “I would love to help, but how can I? I have to manage 25 other children in the room,” or “the other children also pay fees and need to learn without our attention being split”.

Lack of training and support and inexperienced staff means some educators often forget they are equally responsible for all children in the room, including the neurodivergent ones.

What’s more, inclusion is not monitored, nor is it a quality standard for early childhood education and care services (under the National Quality Standard administered by the Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority).

The Disability Standards for Education 2005 don’t currently cover early childhood education and care services.

A combination of these factors means many children like Amara are left without supports.

What’s needed

Some of these issues could be tackled by the new report’s recommendation that by 2028, the government should develop and implement a new needs-based Early Childhood Education and Care Inclusion Fund.

This new fund could have three streams to meet different levels of support needs, as the report aptly suggests.

In the meantime, more government funding for the current Inclusion Support Program, as recommended in the Productivity Commission report, is also a good idea – provided it has an effective model of service delivery (for now, we don’t know details of the proposed program’s business model.)

The federal government should also continue its work-in-progress to amend the Disability Standards for Education 2005, which clarify the discrimination-related obligations of education providers, to include all services within the early childhood education and care sector.

This is a key reform that would compel services within the sector to take anti-discrimination seriously.

Similarly, expanding and strengthening quality standards to ensure inclusion across the sector is monitored would motivate early childhood education and care services to ensure better inclusion practices.

The new report recommends that a new commission be established to monitor and support governments’ progress towards universal access to early childhood education and care.

This is much-needed. But, depending on if and when such a commission is established, the Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority and other state regulatory bodies may also nevertheless need to develop ways of monitoring inclusion.

But the sector also needs to build in better training and ongoing capacity-building for its workforce — and not just in classrooms where a neurodivergent child is identified or enrolled.

Neurodiversity-affirming resources for managers and educators could outline the commitment to emphasise each child’s individual strengths and talents while providing support for their individual learning needs.

All early childhood education and care services could benefit from neurodiversity-specific promotional materials and practices — for staff, parents and children. These resources could help all families and children learn about respecting neurodiversity and the need to practice inclusion.

How Amara’s day might look

Imagine Amara entering the same room at her childcare — but this time, she’s welcomed by the teacher with her favourite sheep toy. An animal corner activity is intentionally set up upon entry with three other children who love animals and enjoy playing with Amara.

The teacher uses a visual aid to help Amara say goodbye to her mum. The morning routine begins with a relaxation time, including Amara’s favourite songs, helping her stay calm.

Daily activities are mapped out for Amara on a visual schedule: she engages in the planned activities, with a timer for playing with the animals.

The teacher incorporates puzzles, numbers and books related to Amara’s interests, enabling her to join group times. Amara quickly understands expectations, makes friends, and participates in five or six activities each day, learning new skills.

In this scenario, Amara’s neurodiversity has been respected by her educators — who have increased acceptance and inclusion of all children while embracing neurological differences.

This approach is not only ideal — it’s possible, if meaningful reforms are made and supported by sufficient funding.

*Amara is a fictional composite case study based on countless real-life experiences documented in research.

Dr Anoo Bhopti is the course director of the Masters of Occupational Therapy Course in the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences at Monash University, a PRECI Board Director, and an occupational therapy clinician in paediatrics. Dr Bhopti’s research is embedded within early childhood intervention, childhood disability sector, family quality of life, and higher education.

Additional reporting and contributions by Megan Fox, Bachelor of Early Childhood Education and a Master of Special Education, working in the early Childhood Intervention field, and a PRECI Board Director

This paper was reviewed and endorsed by the PRECI Board.

Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.

Editors Note: In the story “Neurodiversity in schools” sent at: 12/08/2024 11:17.

This is a corrected repeat.