Foreman, P., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (Eds.). (2017). Inclusion in action. (5th ed.). South Melbourne: Cengage. This 5th edition (2017) is the latest edition, meaning it is up to date in terms of the relevant policies, legislation and research findings. As such it is expected that you will access this edition and copies are available through the COOP bookshop. However, if you cannot acquire a copy in time you may use the 2014 (4th edition) – which is available through the CSU library as an e-book: Foreman, P., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (Eds.). (2014). Inclusion in action. (4th ed.). South Melbourne: Cengage.TaskComplete details of Assessment 3 tasks are contained within the module: Please refer to these in tandem with this description. There are three (3) components to Assessment 3: A, B, & C. You will complete components A, B, & C as you work through Module 2, but you will submit them all together as one word document by the due date. Component A: Perspective of working in partnership with families (5%) For this task, you are required to write 500 words (plus or minus 10%) where you make clear your perspective on working in partnership with families. In Module 2, Unit 1, Readings 2.1 – 2.4gave you a clear sense of what working in partnership with families in a family-centred way entails. Draw on what you have learnt in the literature (as well as from your own experience) and write a 500-word perspective on working in partnership with families. Component B: Inclusion checklist Choose one (1) of the Five Inclusion Checklists presented to you in Module 2, Unit 1, Task 4: Readings 2.6 – 2.10 Transitions Individualised Programs Physical Environment Equipment & Toys Children’s Relationships 1. Provide a description of your Centre. DO NOT identify your centre. 2. Complete one program practice checklist of your choosing that will enable you to reflect on your Centre’s inclusivity in the program practice that you have chosen. 3. As you complete every item within the checklist if you tick the YES box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of how your centre does this. 4. If you tick the No box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of actions that you will take in your centre to become more inclusive in this program practice area. 5. Write a conclusion that reflects your view of your centre’s inclusion practices in relation to the program area that you have chosen. Component C: Understanding and preparing for an IFSP Choose one (1) of the case study examples presented to you in Module 2, Unit 2. After reading the case study through carefully respond to these questions /instructions: 1. Who might attend the IFSP meeting, and why? 2. Briefly describe the IFSP process. 3. What might be two realistic goals that the parents have for their child in the EC setting, as well as one realistic goal that they might have for their family in general? 4. What will you do as the early childhood educator to help the family achieve these goals? For each goal describe what you will do, when and for how long. 5. What information and support might the parents need prior to their transition to your centre? Link your responses to the relevant readings in Module 2, Units 1 and 2. Rationale Assessment 3, Components A, B, & C are collectively designed to help focus your understanding of what it means to be an inclusive, family-centred early childhood educator. Specifically : working in partnership with families developing an understanding of inclusive early childhood program practices the process involved in the development of an Individual Family Service Plan; early intervention programming options to enhance holistic development of the child, including goal setting; and communication modalities and professional practices with children, families, educators, other professionals and government organisations.Assessment 3: Components A, B & C: Family-centred practices Weighting: 50% Student name: Student number: CRITERIA STANDARDS Component A: 5 marks Perspective of working in partnership with families: The written reflection explains your perspective of working in partnership with families; and incorporates and references readings 2.1 – 2.4(where relevant) and your own experiences. APA style referencing (500 words) Pass (5 marks) The reflection is written in narrative form and clearly describes your perspective of working in partnership with families; and it incorporates and references readings 2.1 – 2.4; and the reflection is grammatically correct, uses APA referencing style – see separate referencing criteria below and meets the 500-word length indicated. Fail (0 marks) The reflection is not written in narrative form and does not clearly describe your perspective of working in partnership with families; and /or does not incorporate or reference readings 2.1 – 2.4; and/or the reflection is not grammatically correct, does not use APA referencing style – see separate referencing criteria below; and/or does not meets the 500-word length indicated;CRITERIA High Distinction (85% +) Distinction (75 – 84%) Credit (65 – 74%) Pass (50 – 64%) Fail (less than 50%) Component B: 20 marks Inclusion checklist: A written description of your EC centre; A completed inclusion checklist; A written conclusion; and APA style referencing (1400 words) The description of the EC setting is clear and detailed. The checklist is complete with relevant and appropriate practice examples. The conclusion provides a clear and concise reflection of the EC setting’s inclusive practices. See separate APA referencing criteria below The description of the EC setting is detailed. The checklist is complete with clear and appropriate practice examples. The conclusion summarises the EC setting’s inclusive practices. See separate APA referencing criteria below The description of the EC setting is clear. The checklist is complete and the practice examples are clear. The conclusion summarises the checklist. See separate APA referencing criteria below The description of the EC setting is basic. The checklist is complete and the practice examples are somewhat clear. A conclusion has been provided. See separate APA referencing criteria below The EC setting is not described; and/or the EC setting is named; and/or the checklist is not completed as instructed; and/or there is no APA style referencing; and/or the word count has not been adhered to (+/- 10%). See separate APA referencing criteria below CRITERIA High Distinction (85% +) Distinction (75 – 84%) Credit (65 – 74%) Pass (50 – 64%) Fail (less than 50%) Component C: 25 marks Understanding and preparing for an IFSP Choose one (1) case study example; Written responses to the five questions; Responses are linked to readings in Module 2 (Units 1 & 2); APA style referencing. (1500 words) Demonstrates an insightful and considerate understanding of the IFSP process. Selection of empathetic child and family goals and of relevant resources highlights synthesis of key issues of inclusive education practices. Answers reflect a thorough engagement with the Module readings. See separate APA referencing criteria below. IFSP processes and child and family goals are described in detail. The appropriate selection of information and support resources demonstrates key issues of inclusive education practices. Answers integrate Module readings. See separate APA referencing criteria below. All questions have been answered. IFSP processes and child and family goals are clearly described. The selection of information and support resources are mostly appropriate. Answers clearly link to Module readings. See separate APA referencing criteria below. All questions have been answered. A basic description of the IFSP process is presented. The required number of goals have been suggested and parental needs have been proposed. Answers show some evidence of Module readings. See separate APA referencing criteria below. Minimal evidence of understanding the IFSP process; And/or the five questions are not addressed; And/or responses are not linked to the readings in Module 2; And/or there is no APA style referencing; And/or the word count has not been adhered to (+/- 10%). See separate APA referencing criteria below. APA style referencing criteria Referencing is comprehensive, demonstrates academic integrity, and conforms exactly to APA style conventions. Referencing is comprehensive and mostly accurate according to APA style conventions and demonstrates academic integrity. Fewer than three minor errors or omissions. Referencing is comprehensive and mostly accurate according to APA style conventions and demonstrates academic integrity. Up to eight minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining). Referencing is comprehensive and mostly accurate according to APA style conventions and demonstrates academic integrity. More than eight minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining). Referencing is not comprehensive; and /or not accurate according to APA style conventions; and/ or does not demonstrate academic integrity. Task one:( 500 words) Assessment 3, Component A Title: Perspective of working in partnership with families Length: 500 words Value: 5% Rationale: Working in partnership with families constitutes a fundamental component of family-centred practice. In order to be inclusive early childhood professionals it is important to understand and be able to articulate the value of collaborative partnerships with families. Task: For this task, you are required to write 500 words (plus or minus 10%) where you make clear your perspective on working in partnership with families. Content of your response: The response should represent your analysis of the readings and your own personal experience in the field. Submission: Assessment 3 will be submitted as one word document via EASTS when you have completed components A, B, & C. See subject outline for due date. Task one References: Task 1 references 2.1Cologon, K. (2014). “Not just being accepted but embraced”: Family perspectives on inclusion. In K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 91-114). Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. 2.2 Kennedy, A. (2017). Re-imagining family partnerships: Shifting practice from a focus on disadvantage to engagement and empowerment. In H. Sukkar, C. J., Dunst & J. Kirkby (eds). Early Childhood Intervention: Working with families of young children with special needs. (pp. 96-109). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Task 2 references 2.3 Fordham, L., & Johnston, C. (2014). Family-centred practice for inclusive early years education. In K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 171-188). Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. 2.4 Pearson, E., Mohamad, H., & Zainal, Z. (2014). Cultural and linguistic diversity in the early years. Implications for inclusion and inclusive practice. In K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 115-132). Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. ECIA QUALITY AREA 2: INCLUSION i) Inclusive and Participatory Practice ii) Engaging the Child in Natural Environments Before you focus in on some specific inclusive practices for your EC settings, read through the joint position statement put out by ECA and ECIA. Read Read Reading 2.5 Early Childhood Australia & Early Childhood Intervention Australia. (2012). Joint Position Statement on the Inclusion of Children with a Disability in Early Childhood Education and Care. Reading 2.5 is available to you in the Resources Folder. What are your thoughts after reading this document? Does your centre adhere to its principles? The following five short readings describe Program Practices to Support Inclusion in early childhood settings. They form part of Assessment 3, Component B so please read them all as you will need to choose one that is relevant for your centre and that you can write about! They are taken from: Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and Belonging: Inclusion in Practice. Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. This is an excellent resource developed by Noah’s Ark Inc. Here is their website if you would like to learn more about them or purchase this resource for your centre. https://noahsarkinc.org.au/ Each short section defines in detail what is meant by each program practice, relates each one to the Australian context, provides some excellent examples and presents a very easy to use checklist – whereby you can assess your EC centre’s inclusivity on each of the practices. Read Read Reading 2.6 Transitions (pp. 91-97) Available as Reading 2.6Transitions in the Resources Folder. Read Read Reading 2.7Individualised Programs (pp. 98-105) Available as Reading 2.7Individualised Programs in the Resources Folder. Read Read Reading 2.8 Physical Environment (pp. 106-111) Available as Reading 2.8 Physical Environment in the Resources Folder. Read Read Reading 2.9 Equipment & Toys (pp. 112-119) Available as Reading 2.9 Equipment & Toys in the Resources Folder. Read Read Reading 2.10 Children’s Relationships (pp. 120-127) Available as Reading 2.10 Children’s Relationships in the Resources Folder. Task 4 references 2.5 ECA & ECIA (2012). Joint position statement on the inclusion of children with a disability in early childhood education and care. 2.6 Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and belonging: Inclusion in practice. (pp. 91-97, Transitions). Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. 2.7 Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and belonging: Inclusion in practice. (pp. 98-105, Individualised Programs). Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. 2.8 Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and belonging: Inclusion in practice. (pp. 106-111, Physical Environment). Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. 2.9 Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and belonging: Inclusion in practice. (pp. 112-119, Equipment + Toys). Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia.2.10 Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and belonging: Inclusion in practice. (pp. 120-127, Children’s Relationships). Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. Now that you have completed all the readings in Module 2, Unit 1, you are ready to undertake Assessment 3 Component B. Choose one (1) of the Five Inclusion Checklists presented to you in Task 4: Readings 2.6 – 2.10Transitions: (checklist on p. 97); Individualised Programs (checklist on p. 105); Physical Environment (checklist on p. 111); Equipment & Toys (checklist on p. 119); Children’s Relationships (checklist on p. 127). Assessment 3, Component B: 1. Provide a brief description of your Centre. DO NOT identify your centre. 2. Complete a program practice checklist of your choosing that will enable you to reflect on your Centre’s inclusivity in this program practice. 3. As you complete every item within the checklist if you tick the YES box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of how your centre does this. 4. If you tick the No box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of actions that you will take in your centre to become more inclusive in this program practice. 5. Write a conclusion that reflects your view of your centre’s inclusion practices in relation to the program area that you have chosen. Assessment 3, Component B Title: Inclusion checklist Length: 1) Description of Centre – 200 words 2) Completion of checklist – word length not specified as this will depend on your centre’s practices, but it is expected to be no more than 1000 words. 3) Conclusion – 200 words Value: 20% Rationale: Students will have the opportunity to reflect on one of their centre’s program practices, using the checklist template in: Webster, A., & Forster, J. (2012). Participating and Belonging: Inclusion in Practice. Malvern, Victoria: ECII, Australia. Task 1. Provide a description of your Centre. DO NOT identify your centre. 2. Complete a program practice checklist of your choosing that will enable you to reflect on your Centre’s inclusivity in this program practice. 3. As you complete every item within the checklist if you tick the YES box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of how your centre does this. 4. If you tick the No box for a practice – provide two (2) examples of actions that you will take in your centre to become more inclusive in this program practice. 5. Write a conclusion that reflects your view of your centre’s inclusion practices in relation to the program area that you have chosen. Content of your response: Compile the description of your EC Centre and one completed checklist (with 2 examples or actions for each checklist item) and your conclusion, as one document: Assessment 3, Component B. Submission: Assessment 3 will be submitted as one document via EASTS when you have completed Assessment 3, Components A, B, & C. See Subject Outline for due date. Unit 2 Understanding the Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP) Previous item Page 22 of 26 Next item In this unit you will focus more specifically on the nuts and bolts of family-centred practices. You will: learn how collaboration with other EC colleagues and EC professionals is fundamental to support inclusion; deepen your understanding of the Individualised Family Service Plan (IFSP) and how this contrasts with an Individualised Education Plan (IEP); read about what is meant by an evidence base as well as what constitutes positive child and family outcomes; and create Assessment 3 Component C. This requires you to select one (1) of the case study examples and answer the five questions in relation to the case study you have selected, drawing on all your readings for Module 2, Units 1 & 2. While for the purpose of clarity the tasks for this unit have been broken down into steps, it is most important that you establish the full scope of work in this unit before beginning work on any of the parts. As such, please ensure that you read all of the unit before engaging with any single task. This will ensure that you make the connections necessary to complete all of the tasks in an integrated fashion. In this unit there are four tasks. You will Read, get Input, Read and Create. ESS424 Advance Organiser: Module 2, Unit 2 Task 1 Read Reading 2.11 Wong, (2014). Inter-professional practice to support inclusion. Reading 2.12 Cologon & Cocksedge (2014). The A- Z of IFSPs, IEPs, and SSPs Task 2 Input Read the module material provided on Evidence Base, Standards, Accountability & Practice Task 3 Read Reading 2.13 Centre for Community Child Health. (2010). DEECD Early Childhood Intervention Reform Project_ A revised literature review. (pp. 46 – 52). Task 4 Create Assessment 3, Component C. Understanding and preparing for an IFSP Submit Assessment 3: Components A, B, & C as one document via EASTS. See Subject outline for due date. In this task we will continue with our focus on the ECIA quality areas: ECIA QUALITY AREA 3: TEAMWORK Collaborative Teamwork Practice and Capacity-Building Practices First we will look at what is meant by Collaborative Teamwork Practice Read Read Reading 2.11 Wong, S. (2014). Inter-professional practice to support inclusion. Chapter 10 in K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 189-209). Available to you as a chapter in an e-book via CSU Library. You can search for this yourself using the title of the book in CSU library or you can copy and paste this link (see below) into your browser. You can choose to read the chapter online or download it.https://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/lib/csuau/reader.action?docID=4191369&ppg=221 Please always remember to sign out of the e-book (top right hand corner of the screen) when you have made your choice so that other students can access the reading. In Reading 2.11 Wong (2014) describes the various types of collaborative relationships that exist between early childhood professionals. As you reflect on this reading how would you describe the types of relationships that exist between the various professionals in your setting? Now we will turn our focus to Capacity-Building Practices The Individualised Family Service Plan (IFSP) refers to the implementation of early intervention services for children from birth to prior-to-school age and their families. It is often the first point at which an extended discussion takes place regarding the specific needs of a child with a disability and their family. The IFSP team will typically include: parents/caregivers, other family members, key worker or service coordinator, professionals directly involved in working with the child and family (e.g., providing therapy) and service providers. The key purpose of the IFSP is to gather, share and exchange information so that families can make informed choices about what they want and need in the way of Early Intervention Services for their children and themselves. A clear and concise definition for an IFSP comes from Early Childhood Intervention Australia. There is a clear delineation between the purpose of the IFSP process and the resultant IFSP document. The IFSP process is a capacity building process. Read Read Reading 2.12 Cologon, K., & Cocksedge, D. (2014). The A-Z of IFSPs, IEPs, and SSPs!: Positive planning for inclusion. Chapter 11 in K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 210-241). Available to you as a chapter in an e-book via CSU Library. You can search for this yourself using the title of the book in CSU library or you can copy and paste this link (see below) into your browser. You can choose to read the chapter online or download it.https://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/lib/csuau/reader.action?docID=4191369&ppg=242 Please always remember to sign out of the e-book (top right hand corner of the screen) when you have made your choice so that other students can access the reading. In this chapter Cologon & Cocksedge (2014) describe these capacity-building tools in clear and meaningful ways that will certainly deepen your understanding of both the IFSP and the IEP. Practical examples are provided along with case histories which are designed to enhance your learning about strengths-based approaches. Task 1 references 2.11 Wong, S. (2014). Inter-professional practice to support inclusion. In K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 189-209). Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. 2.12 Cologon, K., & Cocksedge, D. (2014). The A-Z of IFSPs, IEPs, and SSPs!: Positive planning for inclusion. In K. Cologon (ed.). Inclusive education in the early years. Right from the start. (pp. 210-241). Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. ask 2: Input Previous item Page 24 of 26 Next item ECIA Quality Area 4: UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES There are two parts to this quality area: 1) Evidence Base, Standards, Accountability & Practice and 2) Outcome Based Approaches In this task we are provide you with input on Evidence Base, Standards, Accountability & Practice Please read the following excerpts which are taken from the ECIA National Guidelines: Best practice in early childhood intervention. References cited are all available to you at the end of the ECIA National Guidelines (Reading 1.10 in the Resources Folder). Evidence-Based Practice ‘Evidence-based practice is a decision-making process that integrates the best available research evidence with family and professional wisdom’ (Buysse & Wesley, 2006). In other words, evidence-based practice involves a balance of empirically supported interventions, clinical expertise or practice wisdom, and client or family values, preferences and circumstances (CCCH, 2014). To ensure that they are working from a base of evidence informed by the latest research and practice, ECI practitioners should maintain knowledge and skills through lifelong continuing professional development. ECI also requires ongoing review and monitoring to ensure that practices are achieving the desired outcomes. ECI practitioners become more effective through critical reflection and a strong culture of professional enquiry (DEECD, 2011). Ongoing self-reflection, self-assessment and monitoring of practices are at the centre of the proposed development of practice standards. The role of direct intervention by specific professionals In addition to the body of evidence for the ECI sector there are also other bodies of evidence that suggest specific intervention for children with specific needs, such as cerebral palsy and autism spectrum disorder that lead to improvement in childhood development and skill development. This is particularly evident in disability-specific evidence. This evidence should be taken into account when providing services to young children. However, any specific intervention with young children should always be provided through the context of family-centred principles, inclusive of coaching, and incorporated into everyday routines and settings. Therefore, providing ECI does not exclude the provision of specific targeted interventions, it is the way in which these interventions are provided and supported which is critical (ECIA, NSW Chapter, 2014). Legislation Legislation underpins all the Best Practice Principles of Early Childhood Intervention. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNICEF, 1990) states that children with disability share universal rights with all people, and additional rights accorded to all children. The specific rights of children with disability are expressed in the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (UN, 2006). Among other international statements, the UNESCO Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) on inclusive education recognises the importance of inclusion of children with disability in mainstream education. Australia has its own legislation, at both national and state and territory levels, which supports both the rights of children with disability and the inclusion of children with disability (HREOC, 1986?2004). Quality and accountability safeguards A national consultation process to inform development of the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework was recently completed. The proposed Quality and Safeguarding Framework aims to make sure the NDIS scheme will provide good quality supports and will maximise the choice and control of participants (NDIS, 2015). Under the NDIS, Governments will no longer be purchasing specialist disability services and therefore the current quality assurance arrangements and some of the safeguards will no longer apply (NDIS, 2015). This dictates a greater need for national consistency and a quality and safeguarding framework –that is mandating participation in an external quality assurance system. Feedback received from the ECI sector and stakeholders during the consultation phase of the ECI National Guidelines project overwhelmingly supported the need for an external quality assurance system as proposed in the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding framework. This option would require ECI service providers to undertake a rigorous quality assurance and improvement process to meet recognised industry governance and management standards and achieve certification/registration with a recognised certification/accreditation body. Timely, accessible and equitable services The following four system problems were found to impact upon children with disability and/or developmental delay access to ECI services: lack of early identification; lack of easy access; lack of timely access and lack of full access (CCCH, 2011). These system problems are linked to delays and waiting lists for assessments; lack of universal assessments; eligibility requirements; availability of services and practitioners and, in some cases, of culturally sensitive services and practitioners. The effectiveness of ECI is impacted both by the timeliness of identification and the timeliness of accessing an ECI service (CCCH, 2011; CCCH, 2004). Early identification leads to more benefits from ECI strategies targeted towards their needs (Bruder, 2010; KPMG, 2014). Research has shown that due to the nature of human brain plasticity, the earlier the intervention, the larger the impact on outcomes (Hadders-Algra, 2011). Equity requires that each child, regardless of ethnic and cultural background, receives the support and resources needed to participate, engage and succeed. Families of children with the highest need for services are less likely to use them (CCCH, 2011). Soft entry points through non-targeted and non-stigmatised services, such as playgroups, provide a non-threatening setting for vulnerable and marginalised families to begin to engage with ECI services (CCCH, 2011). Families with children with disability and/or developmental delay living in rural and remote areas lack information about the types of support that they need and are more likely to have difficulty accessing disability supports (Dew et al,. 2013). There is a shortage of therapists living and working in rural and remote areas of Australia (Dew et al., 2012; Dew et al., 2013; Fordham et al., 2012). This shortage means that families are significantly disadvantaged in accessing ECI compared with families living in urban areas (Dew et al., 2012). Further disadvantage is experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as 46% live in outer regional, remote or very remote areas in Australia, and are twice as likely as non-Indigenous Australians to experience profound or severe restriction in activity and participation (Dew et al., 2012). Further challenges for families include: irregular outreach; distance to services; families’ access to transport; and child care or respite care (Dew et al., 2012; Fordham et al., 2012). One of the most significant challenges for delivering ECI services in rural and remote areas in Australia is recruiting and retaining practitioners (Dew et al., 2012). The lack of training, support, supervision, opportunities to work in a team, opportunities for career advancement and the amount of travel often required are difficulties faced by rural and regionally based practitioners (Dew et al., 2012). Access to continuing professional development and supervision and mentoring from experienced Allied Health practitioners can assist in retention of these practitioners and attract and retain new graduates (Lincoln et al., 2014). Research also suggests an increase in the use of technology and locally-based trained therapy assistants may improve access to services for families in rural and remote areas (Dew et al., 2012). Reflection: As you read through these excerpts did anything resonate for you in terms of where your EC service is located and your families’ ability to access the information, resources and supports that they need for their children? ECIA QUALITY AREA 4: UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES (continued) In this task we provide you with a reading that should help you understand what is meant by the term Outcomes Based Approach, with a focus on child and family outcomes in early childhood intervention. ii) Outcome Based Approach Read Read Reading 2.13 Centre for Community Child Health. (2010). DEECD Early Childhood Intervention Reform Project: A revised literature review. Murdoch Children’s Institute, Melbourne: CCCH. The whole document is available to you in the Resources Folder, but for the purposes of this task you are only required to read pages 46-52. i.e., the section that is called: Outcomes-based approaches for child and family services. This reading provides a thorough overview of what is meant by outcomes based approaches. Child outcomes are identified as: Children have positive social relationships Children acquire and use knowledge and skills Children take appropriate action to meet their needs and family outcomes are identified as: Families understand their children’s strengths, abilities and additional needs Families know their rights and advocate effectively for their children Families help their children develop and learn Families have support systems Families are able to gain access to desired services, programs, and activities What do you think of these outcomes? Task 3 reference2.13 Centre for Community Child Health. (2010). DEECD Early Childhood Intervention Reform Project: A revised literature review. Murdoch Children’s Institute, Melbourne: CCCH. Task 4: Create Previous item Page 26 of 26 In light of the readings in Module 2 units 1 and 2, you are required to …. Read Create Component C: Understanding and preparing for an IFSP (25%) This assessment task require you to choose one (1) of the case studies presented and answer the following questions: 1. Who might attend the IFSP meeting, and why? 2. Briefly describe the IFSP process. 3. What might be two realistic goals that the parents have for their child in the EC setting, as well as one realistic goal that they might have for their family in general? 4. What will you do as the early childhood educator to help the family achieve these goals? For each goal describe what you will do, when and for how long. 5. What information and support might the parents need prior to their transition to your centre? Link your responses to the relevant readings in Module 2, Units 1 and 2. Choose one (1) of the case study examples presented here. CASE STUDY 1: MARYAM Maryam is 3½ years old and has a diagnosis of cerebral palsy (diplegia). She has attended a family day care setting for the past year and will start at your early childhood centre in six months time. Maryam walks using a Kaye Walker but when she is at home she prefers to crawl or cruise using the furniture. Maryam can communicate her needs very well. She speaks appropriately for her age and the home language is English. She has difficulty with some of her fine motor skills. Maryam has a twin sister Heda who does not have cerebral palsy who is is also coming to your centre. They have a younger brother Karim who is just 12 months. The children’s father is an accountant who works full time in the city. Their mother is currently a stay-at-home mother but she trained as a dental nurse and hopes to return to this work part time when Karim starts preschool. Both sets of grandparents live in the same suburb and the family have a large network of extended family members and friends. Maryam and her family have been involved with their local early childhood intervention service since she was a baby. She has regular appointments with a physiotherapist, an occupational therapist, an early childhood special educator, and a paediatrician. In order to prepare for Maryam and Heda’s transition to your centre the early intervention service are scheduling an Individual Family Service Plan meeting. You have been invited to attend. Checklist example: Hello , I have attached an example of the check list I replicated from the readings. The only difference is that I have made the “action” column “action/ example” depending on yes no or sometimes being checked. The other part of my question is if we tick sometimes (which is part of the check lists in the readings) can we class that as needing action therefore treat it as a no answer or would you prefer just have yes or no columns. Bronwyn Practice Yes No Sometimes Action /Example The entrance to the service is welcoming and visibly reflects the services philosophy of inclusion Children are able to move around freely and independently within the indoor and outdoor spaces. Physical barriers that limit the participation of children are removed, eg. There is space between activities for a wheel chair or walking frame The children are involved in decisions about the set-up of the physical environment, to promote independent exploration and learning through play. Children access quiet spaces when needed Indoor/outdoor spaces provide quality-learning experiences with a range of natural and processes materials.

 

"Is this question part of your assignment? We Can Help!"

Essay Writing Service