LOYD: Boston Inclusion Roundtable

The BOSTnet Inclusion Roundtable brought together a small number of program directors, direct care staff, and Inclusion specialists. The presentation initiated a great deal of conversation around the sorts of supports that Out-of-School Time can offer children and youth with disabilities and the need for increased funding of staff development to ensure that programs can provide a quality environment.

What was interesting was that unlike the last roundtable, this group did not say that they lacked the same supports as the school day because they questioned the supports of the school day itself. One support was the "one-to-one aide." It is common to hear many Out-of-School professionals mention that children they include in their programs are done so without the support of these aides and this reduces the quality of their program both for the individual who requires the support by day and for the other program participants. At the Roundtable, many questioned whether the aide model was good for the child in school or whether it set that child apart and allowed teachers and students to remove themselves from care-giving. One OST program staff said that it was a good thing that they did not have aides and that these children who were provided aides or sent to special programs within the school for the majority of the academic day were included in an authentic way during their program time (some mentioned that severe mobility impairment or intense mental or cognitive disabilities that lead to aggressive behavior may need additional supports). This was an interesting to hear since it is very common to hear lists of program challenges around Inclusion rather than a confident point of view that said "schools should learn from us about what we do" rather than "we are deficient in this area without funding."

There was a great deal of talk about how many schools continue to exclude children and youth with disabilities - and that these programs while they may not take place during the entire day are often in re-purposed areas of the school facility; basements, former bathrooms, former closets, former mechanical rooms. While many said that their programs operated in less-than-optimal facility environments, many programs felt that their program did a better job of including children or youth with special needs so that the physical space did not move these members of the community "out of sight." Some of the attendees had personal experiences with the Special Education system and spoke directly of being in a "closet classroom." One staff member said that he was diagnosed with a learning disability while the school support staff never questioned why he had missed so much school in the previous years. So the issue treated was the inability to read "on grade level" not the social issue of truancy. He claimed that this experience of being in Special Education classes increased his difficulties with school rather than elevating them - the primary reason being social/emotional not whether the mechanics of reading were being taught in a different way. His ability to be excepted by peers was impacted as well as self esteem. Another attendee picked up this thread and asked how it was that schools seem to teach exclusion during the day and then leave it to programs to "un-teach" what they have done. "We have to much to do in just a few short hours... We got to show them a different point of view than their school... maybe their family... has on children with special needs" a staff from an arts program exclaimed. "Well, all children have special needs" another staff chimed in. "We have to see that the modifications we make benefit all the children in the program.... I mean, we do this for everyone, not to accommodate only a few."

In all, the Roundtable only briefly touched on the formal presentation. One highlight of the presentation was a short discussion of Dr. Gary Siperstein's work on Inclusion and his thoughts that Out-of-School Time programs actually are bridging the social barriers between children of different abilities and do so because the environments of these programs are focused on relationships first, activities second, and have a flexibility that many formal settings do not have (one example was a program that was in an old building so that mobility impaired children could only attend the basement. The program did not have money to get in an elevator, so they moved the most popular activities - media and computers - to the basement. This created a situation where youth who wanted to access the resources needed to confront the Inclusive nature of the program. One girl was so unfamiliar with interacting with others in wheelchairs that she refused to come in but would stand at the door. By having discussions and allowing interactions to grow organically, this child finally entered the room and got rid of her fears while the program developed a culture of Inclusion that remains to today).

It appears that while there remain challenges (especially around having funding for quality professional development) there is perhaps an emerging attitude of many program staff that they are able to provide a very high quality of service - even if that service does not look like solutions provided during the school-day. While research and the voices from the field tell us that Out-of-School Time is providing Inclusive environments, these programs in the room felt that they were not recognized for the work that they did or the successes they were having.

LOYD: Inclusion Roundtable

"There seems to be a growing number of kids with special needs" one program coordinator says. "In the [years] I have worked here, I don't know what it is... they just seem to need more and more." What do you do when all your kids have special needs? One site director reported that in the same program were children presenting ADD, OCD, PTSD, and Spectrum Disorders. Another program director asked whether how to practice inclusion when what seems to work is to remove the child from time to time. "If they're not included in gym, then what? If they are just put on the computer because that's the only way not to cause trouble... are we doing a service just babysitting?" What if the funding has remained flat (or vanished) while the needs increased as well as higher standards of quality. These questions are far above the old format of Inclusion that were challenges are posed and then strategies are employed. When people know several strategies but are overwhelmed, what then? "How do typical kids fit in when many children have challenges"

It appears from comments at the Roundtable that Inclusion is still part of the wealth of services that Out-of-School Time programs can provide and researchers such as Gary Siperstein of the Center for Social Development and Education claim that many school environments can learn from the success of Inclusion in Out-of-School. This is in keeping with the strong relationship-base within many programs and the flexibility that programs have in creating activities that instruct about life as well as socialize. Out-of-School staff want an open environment. They want to make accommodations as well as many at the Roundtable knew the basics about most disabilities and some had worked in therapeutic Out-of-School programs for years. There was a healthy feeling of "try and try again" in letting kids come to the program as who they were and to move them into forming new relationships with their peers as well as push out into new experiences. Nevertheless, there was frustration as it seems that many directors are beyond the "basics" of inclusion and are ready for the next level - a level of complexity that no longer allows for solutions on the cheep but a more thoughtful approach and consistent high-level supports to staff and understand the limits of Inclusion.

One limit would be over-representation of children and youth with special needs within a program. The other limit may be resources. A program that takes in a child or youth who otherwise has a one-on-one during the day may not be able to absorb that child or youth. Programs themselves need to have policies in place that structure how program directors can communicate to families the benefits of including their child in the program as well as some of the limitations. However, if there is a language barrier or family members are opposed to discussing a perceived condition, what then? When a parent demands that their child is included but not with a realistic timeframe or perhaps without taking into consideration the needs of other children or youth at the program, what then? A child with Autism may not be able to run into the program and be included in the first day, or three weeks, but may need time as well as the right amounts of inputs from staff. Too much and the staff forces relationships - too little and there is risk of a benign neglect. This time to negotiate with one family or parent may be available, but what if there are a majority of parents and families with similar demands but divergent issues. Again, the "all or nothing" approach to Inclusion may put ideology over practicality.

One interesting observation from this discussion and the many questions was that the majority of issues were with emotional or emotional disabilities. In an on-line survey of participants 82% wanted assistance on children and youth with ADD/ADHD. Emotional disabilities came in second at 73% and trailing that was working with children with undiagnosed disabilities at 55%. Amongst the "traditional" disabilities such as mobility, cognitive only 9% felt they needed support in those areas.

Programs are asking for increased assistance in providing quality training to staff (78%) and assistance in funding to pay for additional services (82%). This later one is such a complex subject it will be addressed in another posting at a later date.

There is good news and many free resources on-line. BOSTnet has some resources available on Inclusion that may help in training staff and funding opportunities are always included in the BUZZ and the website. Resources on the website are divided into different areas, the most predominant being sports and arts inclusion. These areas were central to a series of BOSTnet events in previous years under the LOYD initiative. The idea that sports (physical activity) and arts can serve as a way to include more children and youth with special needs and that these not form the basis of the program but can be engaged as needed. These areas are useful no matter what the program's own content is - such as academics, because with the flexibility that programs have, setting up time to work on an arts project or engage in physical activity may serve to get children to work together. BOSTnet is also working on the 5th All Means All Conference for 2009 which will be shaped in part by conversations in the field.

While there was a good deal of information covered in the presentation, this Roundtable seems to have raised more complex questions than answered them. We hope that we can work on these issues and find solutions that reinvigorate the field to reach out to children and youth with special needs and not be overwhelmed.

LOYD: Building Our Community

Many people in the field of out-of-school time programs are grappling with the realities of working with an expanding definition of "disability" and with fewer and fewer resources. At a recent training on Inclusion, the staff were aware of what strategies they needed, but did not have the time to provide these supports. They asked, if children with special needs are included in our programs without supports, is this a service to any of us?

For many programs, this is not a theoretical issue. Many programs are identifying larger percentages of children and youth with what they consider emotional or cognitive disabilities. Many of these children are on vouchers as DSS prioritizes children in the system, many of whom OST practitioners feel have untreated or undiagnosed disabilities. As we work on the BOSTnet All Means All Conference, we have to consider what solutions are there in front of us. A leading lawyer said it best about teachers that "[teaching] is not about being brilliant, it is about being a human being" and we so often are told to follow procedures rather than our own common sense. Are there some approaches to inclusion that do not take additional resources (time+money)?

The LOYD community is starting to grapple with large questions as the field goes through a transformation in stressful times. We are not only asking how we do inclusion, we are perhaps having to examine what it means to have an out-of-school community and what is the identity of the field.

LOYD: What is Inclusion?

What is inclusion? In the classroom, inclusion means to put disabled students in typical classrooms rather than special education settings. Broadly speaking, Inclusion means to provide access to all people no matter what their ability. The issues is then, what is Inclusion when it comes to Out-of-School Time? Is it the "inclusion" of the classroom, or the "inclusion" of the wider disability rights movement?

There remains a controversy to Inclusion - there are many camps in this issue. There are those who claim that inclusion strips services and does not provide the needed supports. There are those who argue that inclusion can be more effective in certain environments. Then, there are those who look at inclusion as more than just traditional disabled and view inclusion as expanding to all needs and abilities in attitude and support. As we discuss inclusion, perhaps we will think more about the division on the issue as well as ways that programs can come together and provide quality supports.

If we look at inclusion as a fundamental aspect of a quality Out-of-School Time program, we then have to tackle what this inclusion means. More people are seeing inclusion as that of including the "traditional disabilities" (e.g. physical impairment, mobility, physical trauma, developmental), and the "new" disabilities (e.g. emotional, social, cognitive). Researchers, such as Dr. Siperstein, director of the Center for Social Development and Education at the University of Massachusetts Boston, Out of School programs may be able to offer a version of inclusion that is broad in definition as it is flexible in getting children and youth with disabilities not only to be next to typical children and youth but to become friends and develop meaningful long-term social interactions with their peers.

This growing evidence demonstrates that Out-of-School practitioners are on to something in seeing their programs as a space that is more fitted to using inclusion as a strategy than more formal settings. It may be that Out-of-School Time programs can adapt to the needs of children and youth and offer a wide range of activities for a version of inclusion - that itself is broad and inclusive.

These are, but the first words in what looks like a longer conversation.

Lead to Opportunities for Youth with Disabilities Advisory Committee, 2009

Lead to Opportunities for Youth with Disabilities (LOYD) is an initiative entering its fifth year. In marking this point in the initiative, we have to spend some time considering where the field of Out-of-School time has come, where the disability movement is, and where these two distinct areas fit together or where there are new advances and learning that need to be reconciled.

Over the next few months, the LOYD Advisory Committee will be posting to BOSTnet Quality Environments for Youth discussing informally the issues of inclusion, disability rights, and developments in the field of Out-of-School Time.

Many of these discussions will help guide the fifth All Means All Conference as well as inform the work BOSTnet is currently doing with its cohort of programs receiving on-site support from BOSTnet. LOYD Advisory Committee will also inform the coming BOSTnet Roundtable event on Inclusion.

Our discussions will also include comments from members of the field and interested parties. Often committee work and the important conversations that lead to setting directions or assisting with actionable plans are held between the confines of whatever meeting spaces these committees convene.

Here, the LOYD committee will meet in the public green of the virtual world, where anyone, anywhere, can enter into the informal discussion or be appraised of the latest thoughts as we move ahead refining our ideas or just thinking aloud. We look forward to this work and the impact on children in Massachusetts, Boston, and wherever children of all abilities require quality places to grow and thrive.