Impact of inclusive programming on Head Start children and families

Sixty-seven Head Start children and their families participated in the investigation of the impact of inclusive programming on Head Start children, Head Start children with speech language impairments, and their families. Specifically, the study analyzed the impact ratio (i.e., Head Start children with speech language impairments to typically developing Head Start children) had on children\u27s receptive language and basic concept knowledge and parent attitude toward inclusion. Receptive language was measured using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised (PPVT-R). Basic concepts were measured using the Bracken Basic Concept Scale (BBCS). Parent attitude was measured using the Adapted Parent Perspectives on Integration Questionnaire (APPIO). Fifty-nine parents responded to the parent attitude questionnaire. Twenty-two typically developing children and 13 children with speech language impairments were designated as high ratio and 22 typically developing children and ten children with speech language impairments were designated as low ratio students. Overall, measures of children\u27s receptive language and basic concepts were related. The PPVT-R was a good predictor of children\u27s BBCS subtest scores. The school readiness subtest of the BBCS was a good predictor of the PPVT-R. Children in high ratio classrooms had higher school readiness scores than children in low ratio classrooms. Ratio did not affect receptive language and basic concept knowledge of Head Start typically developing children and Head Start speech language impaired children. However, all means for these total scores were consistently higher for children in Head Start classrooms that contained a higher percentage of children with special needs. Parent attitude toward inclusion was highly positive. There was consistently more highly positive views toward inclusion by parents whose children were in high ratio classrooms. This was true for both the parents of typically developing children and children with speech language impairments. Limitations of the study and implications for future research were discussed