Early childhood education and 'school readiness are considered to be significant phases of growth and development which influence outcomes across an individual’s entire life and provides an important period of opportunity and a foundation for lifelong learning and participation (World Health Organisation 2012). Over the past 15 years, global interest in promoting school readiness has increased significantly with emerging evidence for the effectiveness of combined sector programmes particularly if provided in the first 1000 days of life (Black et al. 2017). The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations 1989) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations 2006) affirm that all children have the right to develop to their full potential and that governments should guarantee that young children with disabilities receive high-quality education.

In this presentation, drawing on a systematic literature review, I will highlight the importance of the sociocultural context of development when researching children with disabilities drawing on sociocultural theorists to conceptualise the development of  the young child with a disability (Skinner and Weisner (2007), Rogoff (2003), Artiles and Kozleski (2016). I will then draw on bioecological systems theory of human development (Bronfenbrenner, 2005) to help unpack the different complexities that can arise when assessing the specific learning and care needs of a child with disability. ) Results from the systematic review  will be used to compare some of the tensions that exisit on the use of the construct of 'school readiness'[ in relation to early childhood disability in UK, European and international countries.

The review comprised a list of search terms, eligibility criteria, appraisal of included studies, data extraction and data analysis. A data extraction form was used to record key background information about each study, including the location of the study, the sample size, duration of intervention as well as key findings and limitations. A thematic matrix was developed to ensure that all interpretations were thorough and consistent across the papers. This process ensured that the specific delineation of the categories was consistent and congruent with full agreement on the themes identified. We then carried out a thematic analysis to identify the main outcomes and contributions of the articles that made the final list for this paper on. The general framework for the review used the following procedures (Boland, Cherry, and Dickson 2017).

The review revealed that there are few papers that capture the contextual aspects of children’s early learning and development, such as their cultural background, linguistic diversity, impairment or disability (Lynch, et al. 2021). The influence of children’s culture and background are not always considered within instruments despite wide variation in global cultural values, practices and experiences. In addition, there are limited assessment instruments that examine the quality of the environment despite research (Yoshikawa et al. 2013; Ngoun et al. 2020) in many respects, the assessments did not take into account important individual and group differences in patterns of child development or allow for progression and continuity within and across different educational settings. I will make some recommendations on how to design inclusive early childhood education and school readiness through a bioecological systems model that places an emphasis on the importance of engaging with different levels of support to ensure appropriate solutions are offered to families who have children with disabilities within a complex ecology.

Artiles, A. J., & Kozleski, E. B. (2016). Inclusive education’s promises and trajectories: Critical notes about future research on a venerable idea. Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10. 14507/epaa.24.1919. Black, M. M., Walker, S. P., Fernald, L. C. H., Andersen, C. T., Di Girolamo, A. M., Lu, C., et al. (2017). Advancing early childhood development: From science to scale. The Lancet, 389(10064), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31389-7. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513–531. Boland, A., M. G. Cherry, and R. Dickson. 2017. Doing a Systematic Review. London: Sage. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lynch, P. & Soni. A. (2021): Widening the focus of school readiness for children with disabilities in Malawi: a critical review of the literature, International Journal of Inclusive Education, DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2021.1965801 Ngoun, C., P. De Meyer, K. Baesel, R. Khoeun Khanna, and L. S. Stoey. 2020. “Cambodian Developmental Milestone Assessment Tool (cDMAT): Performance Reference Charts and Reliability Check of a Tool to Assess Early Childhood Development in Cambodian Children.” Early Human Development 141: 104934. Skinner, D., & Weisner, T. (2007). Sociocultural studies of families of children with intellectual `disabilities. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 302–312. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York: UN. Retrieved from www.un.org/disabilities. World Health Organisation (WHO). (2012). Early childhood development and disability: A discussion paper. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/75355/1/9789241504065_eng.pdf Yoshikawa, H., C. Weiland, J. Brooks-Gunn, M. Burchinal, L. M. Espinosa, W. T. Gormley, and M. J. Maslow. 2013. Investing in our Future: The Evidence Base on Preschool Education. New York: Foundation for Child Development.