This presentation reports the development of CRISI (Collaborative Reflective Interactions Supporting Inclusion), a conceptual framework designed to enhance how early childhood educators and consultants collaborate to support inclusion in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings.

Collaboration is integral to supporting the inclusion of children with disabilities in ECEC settings (Äikäs et al., 2022; Cameron & Tveit, 2019; Odom et al., 2011). Yet research and anecdotal reports suggest that systematic and systemic factors both facilitate and hinder the collaborative process. The need to improve interprofessional collaborative practices is a global concern, with challenges documented across the international literature (Alisauskiene et al., 2023; Anastasiou & Hajisoteriou, 2022; Irwin, 2009; Paju et al., 2022; Soukakou et al., 2024). This Australian mixed methods study investigated the mediating factors influencing collaboration and provides insights relevant to European practitioners who share similar practices and concerns.

Four research questions guided the study.

1. What are the historical, social and cultural factors that mediate the relationship between early childhood educators and consultants?
2. What are the characteristics of the relationship between early childhood educators and consultants that result in early childhood educators taking action to support inclusion?
3. In what ways does the relationship between early childhood educators and consultants contribute to the perceived engagement of children with disabilities in early childhood education and care settings?
4. What are the families’ perspectives on their child’s inclusion and on the professionals’ practices supporting that inclusion?

There were two sequential phases of this mixed methods study, a questionnaire and five case studies. The first phase provided a general understanding of the professionals’ perspectives, whilst the second phase helped to explain the intricacies of how collaboration influences inclusion; a rationale supported by mixed methods researchers Creswell and Plano Clark (2011). Using Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) the work of Edwards (2009a, 2009b, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015) and Engeström (2001) the data was analysed.

Results from this study suggest that whilst professionals have the best of intentions to collaborate in a way that enhances inclusion, collaborative practices do not consistently lead to the educator taking action to support the child’s inclusion.  It is for this reason that CRISI was developed. CRISI focuses on developing both educators’ and consultants’ relational expertise to promote practices that move collaboration beyond just developing positive relationships to focusing on strategies that support the implementation of inclusive practices. It is acknowledged that this is not easy, and focused attention, not just on policy and professional learning, but also on individual’s aspirations, knowledge and skills to enhance inclusion is required. CRISI embeds an iterative cycle of inquiry that encourages professionals to first identify what matters to the family and collaborative partners and then work together to analyse the data and refine strategies at critical moments of interaction. This requires professionals to not only take account of their familiar professional expertise but also cross professional boundaries into a shared space for problem-solving with their professional partner so as to develop shared outcomes, common priorities and agreed strategies. Within this shared space professionals interact to analyse data, share expertise and develop strategies together. However, when returning to their familiar space they must reflect on how this information is translated into their context so actions can be embedded into everyday experiences. Therefore, there are ongoing reflective cycles of data analysis and development of strategies within the boundary space that require professionals to document the process of implementing the data so as to inform the next cycle. In order to do this effectively Edwards’ concepts of common knowledge, relational agency and relational expertise are critical.

The development of the CRISI framework was informed by a mixed methods study using what Creswell (2018) refers to as an explanatory sequential design. This study explored how educators and consultants work together to support inclusion in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings. The study had two distinct phases with phase one informing phase two. Phase one of the study, an online questionnaire the Supporting Inclusion Survey, developed for this study, gathered the perspectives of Australian professionals (N=858) supporting inclusion in ECEC. Phase two, employed a case study approach to further interrogate the collaborative practices of the professional partners, understand parents’ perspectives of the process and the implications for the child. The case studies explored five unique relationships between an educator and consultant supporting a child with a disability in an ECEC setting. Data collection included interviews with the stakeholders (educators, consultants and parents), observation of the child in the ECEC environment and assessment of the setting using The SpeciaLink Early Childhood Inclusion Quality Scale (Irwin, 2009). A cyclical and iterative approach to the data analysis, including both statistical and thematic analysis was undertaken. The approach allowed the mediating factors such as professional synchrony and consultants’ practices to be identified.

This study has international implications for practitioners supporting inclusion of children with disabilities in ECEC. The benefits and challenges of supporting inclusion young children with disabilities in ECEC is recognised internationally (Alisauskiene et al., 2023). Enhancing the practices of professionals supporting inclusion will lead to better outcomes for children, families and communities. This study explored what happens at the intersection of practice, and how this influences inclusion of children with disabilities in ECEC in all its complexity. CHAT and more specifically, Edwards’ concepts of common knowledge, relational agency and relational expertise were used to explore the collaborative process and how it supports inclusion. It is argued that more attention must be paid to how professionals work together so inclusion of children with disabilities in ECEC settings has the best chance of success. The intention of this presentation is to unpack how CRISI was developed and how it might enhance greater alignment between what matters to each stakeholder and how they respond to the challenges and opportunities of inclusion.

Äikäs, A., Pesonen, H., Heiskanen, N., Syrjämäki, M., Aavikko, L., & Viljamaa, E. (2022). Approaches to collaboration and support in early childhood education and care in Finland: Professionals’ narratives. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 38(4), 528-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2022.2127081 Alisauskiene, S., Bahdanovich Hanssen, N., & Kairienė, D. (2023). Interprofessional and family-professional collaboration for inclusive early childhood education and care (1st ed.). Springer. Anastasiou, E., & Hajisoteriou, C. (2022). Enhancing inclusion through the collective activity of collaboration: A cultural historical activity theory perspective. Research Papers in Education, 37(2), 275-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1849368 Cameron, D. L., & Tveit, A. D. (2019). ‘You know that collaboration works when … ’ identifying the features of successful collaboration on behalf of children with disabilities in early childhood education and care. Early Child Development and Care, 189(7), 1189-1202. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1371703 Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE. Edwards, A. (2009a). Relational agency in collaborations for the well‐being of children and young people. Journal of Children's Services, 4(1), 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1108/17466660200900004 Edwards, A. (2009b). Understanding boundaries in inter-professional work. Scottish Educational Review, 41(1), 5-21. Edwards, A. (2010). Being an expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise. Springer. Edwards, A. (2011). Building common knowledge at the boundaries between professional practices: Relational agency and relational expertise in systems of distributed expertise. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.007 Edwards, A. (2012). The role of common knowledge in achieving collaboration across practices. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 22-32. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.003 Edwards, A. (2015). Recognising and realising teachers’ professional agency. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 779-784. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044333 Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747 Irwin, S. H. (2009). The SpeciaLink early childhood inclusion quality scale. Breton Books. Odom, S. L., Buysse, V., & Soukakou, E. (2011). Inclusion for young children with disabilities: A quarter century of research perspectives. Journal of Early Intervention, 33(4), 344-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815111430094 Paju, B., Kajamaa, A., Pirttimaa, R., & Kontu, E. (2022). Collaboration for inclusive practices: Teaching staff perspectives from Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(3), 427-440. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1869087 Soukakou, E., Dionne, C., & Palikara, O. (2024). Promoting quality inclusion in early childhood care and education: Inclusive practices for each and every child commissioned for the World Conference on Early Childhood Care and Education. UNESCO.