Kingston university at the West Thames College campus
INCLUSIVE EDUCATION AND INTERPROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVES
MODULE CODE: QF4030
In this assignment I will be critiquing a peer reviewed research article which explores an aspect of interprofessional practice. I will reflect on my practice and identify how the research discussed with in the article impacts and challenges my thinking and approach. By critiquing the journal – Early Years: An International Research Journal, I will show knowledge and understanding of other professional roles in early years under pinned by theory I have researched. My own understanding of inclusive practice in early years is that - "All children, irrespective of ethnicity, culture or religion, home language, family background, learning difficulties or disabilities, gender or ability should have the opportunity to experience a challenging and enjoyable programme of learning and development." (Early Years Statutory Framework, 2014, 1.15)
The journal focuses on 52 early years practitioners from England, their experience of interprofessional working, woven together and their level of confidence and competence also different settings such as children’s centres, preschool settings and private settings as well as community preschool as it has been the fore front of government policy in UK since the inquiry into Victoria Climbie I have focused on three prime aspects from the journal: training, communication with multiagencies and support which I think is key regarding my own reflection of my practice as well as the impact on my thinking approach. The writers of the journal are Jane Payler and Jan Georgeson (2009) but nowhere in the journal are their qualifications and backgrounds cited. It is unclear that the writers are professional s or have had any practical experience in early years. It does not tell you where the settings are located and which back ground the children and families are from. I believe if all this information was given it may have been clear to the readers why we believe that research done in the deprived area has a huge impact on their achieving when it comes to budget training and skills. If it was a deprived area they might be struggling with the funds, resources and support. On page b385 it states that they sent the questionnaires out but I believe all the methods used had weaknesses as it does not say anywhere what language they were using and what sort of questions were asked. Throughout the journal the writers praise the efforts that are made from the children’s centre in terms of working with inter professionals. As a reader I felt they were biased towards the children centre as throughout their article they have mentioned several times about how well children centres are doing, in comparison to preschool and private nurseries. Even the tables indicate that the children’s centres are performing at the top and preschool and private settings are nowhere near their achievement and successes. On page 387 of the journal it states that during her research it clearly showed that the children’s centres showed a secure understanding of procedure as well as confidence in approaching other agencies.
The first aspect explored was training needs. The Journal article states that “the survey done was completed by 52 early years practitioners who were either undergoing, or had recently completed training for early years professional status.” Due to the level of education, it is clear to me why most of them were confident when working with outer agencies and writing reports according to the NutBrown review of early education and childcare qualifications interim report (March 2012) - “Getting qualifications right will help to ensure that women and men enter the profession with the skills and experiences they need to do the best work with young children and their families. Well taught courses and learning routes that lead to reliable...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document