The morning mist still clung to the canals as I crossed the Ponte delle Guglie, making my way toward Cannaregio. Venice awakens differently than Rome—my adopted city—with a quieter reverence, as if the stones themselves remember centuries of whispered prayers and muffled conversations. I had come to the Ghetto Nuovo, that small island of memory where humanity first institutionalized separation, where in 1516 the Venetian Republic decreed that all Jews must live within designated boundaries, locked in at night, their movements controlled by day.

As a sociologist of religion who has spent years studying the intersections of faith, culture, and social structure, I recognized in these narrow streets something profound about human nature: our capacity to create both physical and metaphysical boundaries. The Venetian ghetto—from which we derive our modern word—was revolutionary in its systematic approach to segregation. Here was born the first formalized model of urban exclusion that would spread across Europe like a viral architectural concept, appearing in Rome, Prague, Frankfurt, and countless other cities where Jewish communities would be confined until the mid-19th century.

Yet what struck me most forcefully was not the historical weight of these stones, but their contemporary lightness. The gates are gone. The walls have crumbled or been absorbed into the city’s organic growth. Jewish residents are free to live anywhere in Venice—or anywhere in the world. The ghetto as a physical institution has been relegated to history books and tourist brochures.

But have we truly dismantled the ghetto? Or have we simply learned to build more sophisticated versions, invisible to the eye but no less real in their effects?

The architecture of mental separation

Walking through the narrow calli that connect the Ghetto Nuovo to the Ghetto Vecchio, I was confronted by a troubling realization: while we have torn down the physical walls that once confined Jewish communities, we have perhaps become more adept at constructing mental ghettos—invisible barriers that separate communities just as effectively as any medieval decree.

These new ghettos are not built of brick and mortar but of prejudice and assumption, of media narratives and social algorithms that create echo chambers more insidious than any walled enclave. In our contemporary cities—whether Rome, Paris, London, or New York—we witness the emergence of what I call “glass wall communities”: groups that can see each other, that exist in proximity yet rarely engage in meaningful dialogue.

Consider how we live today. Immigrants cluster in certain neighborhoods not by legal mandate but by economic necessity and social comfort. Religious minorities often self-segregate, creating informal ghettos of familiarity. Even our digital lives reflect this pattern—we follow, befriend, and engage with those who confirm our existing beliefs, creating virtual ghettos of the mind that can be more restrictive than any physical boundary.

The challenge is more complex than the original Venetian model because these modern ghettos wear the mask of choice. We tell ourselves that segregation is voluntary, that birds of a feather naturally flock together. But this narrative obscures the structural forces—economic inequality, educational disparities, cultural xenophobia—that make such “choices” inevitable for many.

Lessons from European ghettos

The history of Jewish ghettos across Europe offers sobering insights into how physical separation becomes internalized. In Rome’s ghetto, established in 1555, generations lived within papal-imposed boundaries that created not just physical isolation but psychological adaptation to marginalization. The Frankfurt Judengasse, the Prague Josefov—each represented a different experiment in controlled coexistence, where dominant societies sought to benefit from Jewish commercial skills while maintaining social and religious distance.

What fascinates me as a scholar is how these communities developed remarkable resilience and internal solidarity precisely because of their forced separation. Synagogues, schools, mutual aid societies, and cultural institutions flourished within confined spaces, creating rich micro-societies that preserved and innovated Jewish life even under oppressive conditions.

But this historical pattern raises uncomfortable questions about our contemporary moment. Are we creating conditions where different communities develop in parallel rather than in dialogue? When Muslims, Christians, Jews, and secular populations live in separate social spheres—attending different schools, consuming different media, socializing within homogeneous networks—do we risk reproducing the isolation that physical ghettos once imposed?

Venice as a model of possibility

Yet standing again in the campo of the former ghetto, observing the steady stream of visitors—Jewish and non-Jewish, local and international—I was reminded of Venice’s unique capacity for transformation. The city that invented the ghetto has also, perhaps, pointed toward its transcendence.

Today, the Ghetto Nuovo and Ghetto Vecchio host five active synagogues representing different Jewish traditions—Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Italian, Levantine, and German. The Museo Ebraico tells the story not just of Jewish Venice but of the complex relationships between communities across centuries. Kosher restaurants and bakeries serve both observant Jews and curious visitors. The workshops of contemporary Jewish artists open their doors to dialogue about identity, memory, and creativity.

This transformation speaks to something essential about Venice itself—a city that has always been, by geographical and commercial necessity, a place of encounter. Built on trade routes between East and West, between Christian Europe and the Islamic world, Venice learned early that diversity could be economically profitable even when socially challenging.

Toward dialogue and understanding

As an activist for interfaith dialogue, I see in Venice’s former ghetto a powerful metaphor for our contemporary challenge. The physical walls are gone, but the work of building bridges across the mental barriers that divide us has only just begun. The experience of integration—or experience of community building in a diverse society—requires more than the absence of legal segregation; it demands the presence of intentional encounter.

What would our cities look like if we designed them for dialogue rather than division? If our schools, our neighborhoods, our public spaces were conceived as laboratories for cross-cultural understanding rather than comfort zones for homogeneous groups?

The Venice ghetto suggests that such transformation is possible. A place born from exclusion can become a space of inclusion. Walls built to separate can be transformed into bridges that connect. But this requires conscious effort—the kind of patient, persistent work that turns strangers into neighbors, neighbors into friends, and friends into collaborators in building more just and inclusive communities.

Conclusion: The ongoing journey

As I prepared to leave the ghetto that morning, crossing back over the bridge toward the broader city, I carried with me a sense of both hope and urgency. Venice, this impossible city built on water and sustained by centuries of calculated risk-taking, reminds us that human communities are not fixed entities but ongoing projects, constantly under construction.

The ghetto walls may have fallen, but the work they represented—the work of learning to live together across differences—continues in every generation. Whether in Rome, where I make my home among the seven hills and countless communities, or in Venice, where water and stone create spaces for both separation and connection, we face the same fundamental choice: Will we build walls or bridges? Will we create ghettos of the mind or communities of the heart?

The answer lies not in grand gestures but in daily acts of encounter—in the decision to cross the bridge, to enter an unfamiliar neighborhood, to listen to a story different from our own. In these small acts of courage, we honor both the memory of those who were confined by walls and the possibility of those who will be freed by our choices.

Venice teaches us that even the most entrenched systems of separation can be transformed. The question is whether we have the wisdom and will to continue that transformation in our own time and place.

Historically, people with disabilities have been prey to society’s misconceptions, stereotypes, labeling, and prejudices in many different ways. Such attitudes have led to exclusion, mistreatment, and deprivation of their rights to equal opportunities for education, jobs, and essential services. It is also a fact that the low participation rate of people with disabilities in society and the workforce is linked to their exclusion from the educational system. Many positive measures have been taken and research carried out in various countries recently to develop methods and strategies for welcoming and including people with disabilities into schools and communities. These concepts accord with Islamic principles of inclusion. To illustrate Islamic attitudes towards people with disabilities, we will refer to the Qur’an, and the life example of Prophet Muhammad and his sayings, which are called hadith.

In the dictionary, the term “inclusion” is defined as “the act of including or the state of being included.” (1) Miller and Katz (2002) presents a common definition: “Inclusion is a sense of belonging: feeling respected, valued for who you are; feeling a level of supportive energy and commitment from others so that you can do your best work.” In special education, inclusion is the practice of placing children with disabilities (be these physical, emotional or other) into the general classrooms either all or most of the time and educating them with their non-disabled peers by using special teaching approaches, equipment, and care. In a broader sense, inclusion means being included in life and participating using one’s abilities in day to day activities as a member of the community. It is being a part of what everyone else is, and being welcomed and embraced as a member who belongs. Inclusion can occur in schools, communities, religious activities, playgrounds, work, and recreation.

Islam opposes prejudice against and exclusion of any group of people. The Qur’an addresses all of humanity in this way: “O mankind, We created you from a single [pair] of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other [not that you may despise each other]. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is [he who is] the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted [with all things]” (49:13). In this revelation God is telling us that He created us from one man and one woman meaning then that we are all equal and that all human beings are created through the same process, not in a manner in which some are created better than others.

The scholar Fethullah Gulen says, “Islam promotes equality as the will of God Almighty and requires mutual respect of fellow human beings. Islam embraces every individual and every group with the same equality and warmth. It responds to the expectations and the needs of everyone in the same way. As if shouting at the top of its lungs that no one is superior to another human being, it frequently emphasizes equality and equal opportunities.”(2) Islam teaches us that everyone deserves love, care, and respect, and this fact does not change when a person is impaired. What really matters is his or her heart and conduct. We are enjoined to be accepting of all people regardless of their disability and include them amongst us and support them by addressing their needs. In one of the hadith, our Prophet said, “God the Merciful shows mercy to merciful people. Show mercy to those on earth so that God shows mercy on you” (Abu Dawud). It is the duty and responsibility of everyone to serve the needs of others, and Divine mercy and blessings will be showered on us.

Islamic history has a shining record of many examples of people who, while having some kind of disability, were included and had prominent status in society. Abdullah ibn umm Maktum, who was blind, was among the first to accept Islam. He was devoted to the Prophet and extremely eager to memorize the Qur’an. When the Prophet arrived in Medina, he appointed Abdullah to be one of the muezzins (calling the Muslims to prayer five times a day). On several occasions, the Prophet placed Abdullah in charge of Medina in his absence. This is a remarkable example of inclusion that shows how people with disabilities are looked upon and treated in Islam. What we learn from this outstanding act of our prophet is that we should not belittle disabled people or make superficial judgments because although people have certain disabilities they might be capable of doing great deeds, and it is also important to delegate leadership responsibilities to disabled people when they are capable of such duties.

The story of Julaybib, one of the contemporaries of the Prophet, is another vivid example of inclusion. In addition to being poor, Julaybib had an unpleasant physical appearance and nobody wished to let their daughter marry him. Upon the Prophet’s request, a noble family gave him their daughter in marriage. Later on, when Julaybib was martyred in a battle, the Prophet put his hand on his knee and said: “This one is of me and I am of him.” This humane gesture of the Prophet was a powerful demonstration of the principle of inclusion. It was a dramatic act of advocacy, in word and action, on the part of a community leader to educate his people about the importance of accepting others for what they are. (3)

On another occasion, God’s Messenger met a woman who complained that she suffered from epileptic fits. She expressed concern that her body would become exposed during such episodes. Prophet Muhammad offered the woman two choices. He could either pray to God that she could have access to paradise if she patiently resigned herself to her condition, or he could ask God to heal her. She opted to continue to bear her condition with patience but also asked the Prophet to pray that her body might no longer become exposed to the view of strangers. This story brings out three important points. First, it illustrates the value of forbearance on the part of the person with the disability. More importantly, it affirms the right of individuals to draw attention to their special needs and to speak out for their rights as a matter of social justice. Finally, the story points to the important role of advocacy and the support which the wider community is expected to provide to the individual. (4)

Also, during the high centuries of Islamic civilization a significant number of blind, deaf or physically disabled people played notable roles as philologists, transmitters of the law, teachers, poets, and social commentators, outstanding among whom were Abu’l Ala al-Ma’arri, Abu Uthman Amr bin Bahr (Al-Jahiz), Bashshar ibn Burd, Ibn-Sirin, Qatada ibn Di’ama al-Sadusi, Muwaffaq al-Din Muzaffar, and Thalab. Atta Ibn Abi Rabah, who was black, lame and partially paralyzed, was known as the greatest Mufti in Mecca.

Later, at the Ottoman court in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, deaf servants taught their sign language to courtiers and sultans when it became a recognized means of communication; this was during a period when Western Europeans were still debating whether deaf people were capable of learning anything or thinking as rational beings. (5)

Contemporary attitudes to people with disabilities

It is very pleasing to see global efforts and mobilization to protect the rights of people with disabilities nowadays. In many developed nations, where the concept of inclusion is almost new, many efforts are being made to ensure that disabled people have full access in education and other life activities. A lot of research and practices which accord with Islamic teachings have been carried out in recent years to provide an inclusive education and environment for children with different special needs. In response to the ongoing disability rights and parents’ movements through which disabled people have claimed their human rights, many economically strong governments have taken great steps to promote social and educational inclusion with legislation to protect the rights of the disabled, development agencies, health organizations, and service providers. In Western Europe, North America, Canada, and Australia extensive educational systems are in place for most individuals with disabilities. Some nations integrate these students in general classrooms and others provide specialized classrooms or schools. In the USA, for instance, due to the continuous demand of people with disabilities and their advocates for equal access to education, federal legislators enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142) in 1975. This law was to make sure that all children with disabilities had the opportunity to receive a free appropriate public education in the “least restrictive environment.” (6) The law has since been revised many times over the years and the most recent amendments were passed by Congress in December 2004, with final regulations published in August 2006.

The following is one of the findings of the American Congress held in 2004: “Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society. Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities.”(7) To sum up the other findings of this Congress, education of children with disabilities can be done more effectively by providing special education and other necessary services for such children in the regular classroom by using assistive technology, training parents and teachers about disabilities, implementing adaptations and modifications to support them in the regular classrooms, and writing individual education plans to meet their needs in the “least restrictive environment,” (8) defined by the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004) as “to the maximum extent appropriate, handicapped children are educated with children who are not handicapped, and, that special classes, separate schooling or other removal of handicapped children from the regular education environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the handicap is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services can not be achieved satisfactorily.” (9)

Conclusion

Islam gives guidance and knowledge to mankind in all aspects of life, and research-based findings in different fields of life are proving this day by day. According to the Islamic teachings which have their source in the Qur’an and life examples of Prophet Muhammad, we are to respect and support all human life, however it presents itself and to value the potential of every individual. Centuries ago God’s Messenger showed us how to deal with this important social issue. People with disabilities are part of our society and have their rights to participate fully and equally in all kinds of activities. Education is the best place we can start because children who have been separated at school tend to be kept separate as adults through work and all fields of life. Through an inclusive education children with disabilities remain on a route that leads to an adult life as an active member of society. Meeting all their needs together increases their ability to achieve academic and physical growth to their potential, and it improves their overall quality of life and social status.

Hurisa Guvecin is a Special Education and ESL teacher in Dallas, Texas.

References

1. http://dictionary.reference.com/

2. http://www.fethullahgulen.org/content/view/1983/14/ (Fethullah Gulen, Theme: Islam and dialogue, a message addressed to International conference of Islam April,29–30, 2005)

3. http://www.icv.org.au/news.shtml (Disability and Islamic Insight by Sheikh Isse A. Musse)

4. Ibid.

5. http://www.independentliving.org/docs7/miles200701.html#c25

6. Anne M. Beninghof, Ideas for Inclusion, pg 3 (“What’s happening?”) 1993.

7. http://www.nichcy.org/reauth/PL108-446.pdf

8. Ibid.

9. Anne M. Beninghof, Ideas for Inclusion, pg 8. 1993

“Any people who would like to secure their futures should apply as much energy to the upbringing of children as they devote to other problems. The energy devoted to many other things may go in vain, but whatever is spent for the upbringing of young generations to elevate them to the rank of humanity will be like an inexhaustible source of income.”
M. Fethullah GULEN

In thousands of American classrooms, early childhood educators and caregivers are faced with the dilemma of meeting the needs of an ever-changing population. As the population becomes more diverse, classrooms are beginning to reflect the larger population. In response to the expanding needs of young students, instructors and caregivers increasingly are trying to incorporate multiculturalism into their class curricula. This article will explore how diversity, inclusion, and multiculturalism have impacted the early childhood classroom.

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

The concept of early childhood education, which originated in the 1800s with the formation of kindergartens, focuses upon children between 3 and 8 years of age. In many arenas, early childhood education theories center on encouraging and supporting the educational needs of young children.

The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL) position statement on “Critical Issue : Promoting Children’s Readiness to Learn” states: “In most instances, children come to school ready to learn but with different cultural, educational, and environmental experiences to draw from. It is the responsibility of the educational system to meet children where they are and encourage and support their development from that point” (1999, p. 1).

The Educational Excellence for All Children Act of 1999 echoes NCREL’s position: “Consistently poor early education programs hinder children’s cognitive and language development. As a result, some children are unprepared to attend school and learn to read, the foundation of nearly all later learning” (Title II, Part C, “Early Childhood Educator Professional Development,” 1999, p. 1). Both NCREL and The Educational Excellence for All Children Act of 1999 touch upon the concepts of cognitive development and school readiness.

School readiness, as defined by Kagen et al., encompasses two points: readiness to learn, and readiness for school. Specifically, “… readiness to learn … involves a level of development at which the child has the capacity to learn specific materials…” (Kagen, 1990; Crnic & Lamberty, 1994; Lewit & Baker, 1995). On the other hand, readiness for school is defined as “… a specific set of cognitive, linguistic, social and motor skills that enables a child to assimilate the school’s curriculum” (Kagen, 1990; Crnic & Lamberty, 1994; Lewit & Baker, 1995). Hence, there is a possibility that a child may have a readiness to learn but lack a readiness for school. For example, a 3-year-old girl could have the ability to recognize colors; however, she may not have the ability to participate appropriately in a school setting.

On June 8, 1999, U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley gave an address to the National Press Club. Entitled “Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes’ Study,” it emphasized the following points: “What we know can be summarized this way: the quality of experiences in the years matters, and there appear to be critical periods in the first few years of life for acquiring certain language and cognitive skills. Therefore, the stakes are highest in the earliest years-the stage in life when children are their most vulnerable, and a stage when it has been proven difficult to build support for public investment” (1999).

The preceding excerpt alludes to a connection between language and cognitive skills. The emphasis on developing language and decision-making skills has resonated among early childhood educators for decades. Language development and cognitive development is important, because if children learn how to express themselves effectively, their cognitive abilities may grow exponentially. Furthermore, if children’s cognitive abilities become sharp, they may develop a better understanding of those who are different and make decisions accordingly.

It is well documented that many children become aware of differences among people before they enter a kindergarten classroom. Maritza Macdonald, contributing author of “Explorations with Young Children: A Curriculum Guide from the Bank Street College of Education” writes that children “… between the ages of 2 and 5 … become aware of gender, race, ethnicity, disabilities and other differences among people” (1999, p. 5). In “‘Do You See What I See?’ Appreciating Diversity in Early Childhood Settings” by Dr. Barbara Kupetz, it is stated that “children are around two or three when they begin to notice physical differences among people-some are short and others tall, some have blue eyes and others brown, and some have dark skin while others have light skin.” Both Macdonald and Kupetz point out that most children can discern differences among individuals at an early age. Hence, early childhood educators are not simply charged with teaching “empty vessels.” On the contrary, many educators are faced with the task of educating individuals who already may have formed negative perceptions of people who look different.

DIVERSITY AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION CLASROOM

Diversity means different things to different people. Webster’s New World Dictionary defines it as: “1. Quality, state, fact, or instance of being diverse; difference 2. Variety.”(2) While this definition touches upon the point of difference, it does not convey various perspectives that make up the concept of diversity.

Macdonald states: “The concept of diversity includes the perspectives of multiculturalism and nonsexist and antibias education. Diversity encompasses children’s individual interests and capabilities, racial and cultural differences, age and gender difference and language differences” (1999, p. 5). Her definition incorporates the range of differences that teachers and caregivers face everyday. Macdonald completes her definition by adding: “It also includes the social realities that affect children and communities, including availability of economic resources, access to technology, health and safety concerns, demographic make-up and locale” (1999, p. 5), Here she addresses social factors that can make a child seem different. Thus this definition can be applied to a child who is part of a racial minority, has a learning disability, does not share the majority’s native language, is homeless, or has a chronic illness. In other words’ the needs of a multitude of children are included.

Inclusion, which falls under the umbrella of diversity, is becoming another growing concern of early childhood educators. The Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion (ECRI) released the following statement on inclusion: “Early childhood inclusion, formerly known as ‘mainstreaming’ or ‘integration,’ refers to the full and active participation of young children with disabilities in programs with typically developing children. In principle, including children with disabilities in early childhood classes and community settings is a well-accepted practice”(1998, p. 4). This position adds an all-too-often ignored segment of an already diverse population: children with disabilities.

Deanna Jordon’s “Inclusion in the Preschool Setting” illustrates the challenges of seeing to the needs of special children in the early childhood classroom: “In many preschools and daycares today you can find a growing number of special needs children. These children have disabilities ranging from hyperactivity, attention deficit disorder, speech and language difficulties, blindness, deafness, mental retardation, and physical impairments. Thanks to the Americans with Disabilities Act, our society is becoming better equipped to meet the needs and challenges of these special children. Unfortunately, many daycare providers have little to no special training to deal with these children.”

Although the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990, many school districts remain ill-prepared to educate this special population.(3) Part of the challenge of implementing change within the early childhood school setting lies in the fact that many school administrators and teachers encounter financial, cultural, and social obstacles that prevent a fully inclusive atmosphere. ECRI supports the concern of inclusion by stating: “… family members, teachers, and administrators often encounter practical problems and policy barriers when they try to include young children with disabilities. Such barriers may prevent inclusion from occurring or may affect the quality of the experience for all children.”

When a person looks at all the problems faced by early childhood educators, it is not difficult to see why many teachers feel overwhelmed. Alison Levy, author of “Culture in the Classroom,” succinctly puts the point of view of early childhood educators into perspective: “In a field where burnout is common and salaries are low, there is not sufficient respect and appreciation for what teachers accomplish. It is often hard to accept this added challenge of continued learning” (p. 10). Although Levy acknowledges that educators face a number of barriers, she goes on to say that children who participate in multicultural settings gain valuable experiences. Hence, despite the obstacles that come with diversity and inclusion, both concepts are worth pursuing in multicultural classrooms.

MULTICULTURAL CLASSROOMS

Very few individuals can deny the importance of building strong communities within classrooms. Many teachers “… have become more interested in multicultural education, with the assumption that such approaches help children feel more welcomed, validated, integrated, and able to cooperate with others in their classroom” (Allen, McNeill, & Schmidt 1992; Brendenkamp, 1986; Byrnes & Kiger, 1992, Gollnick & Chin, 1994).

Levy concurs with the preceding statement by speaking to educators directly: “… if your class includes a variety of cultures or abilities, the group spends more time learning about and cultivating an understanding of those unique features.” Validation, integration, cooperation, and cultivation of ideas and experiences are of vital importance. Consequently, if educators ease this process for young students, they will impact the futures of their students. Macdonald emphasizes the impact of diversity on decision making: “… when you include diversity in your work with children, you are preparing them for citizenship in a society where people speak different languages, practice different customs and embrace different values. By starting in early childhood, you will be helping individuals learn to work together, communicate across differences, and value just and fair treatment for all” (1999, p. 10). Both Levy and Macdonald encourage educators to remain aware the impact teachers have on the well-being of future societies and generations.

M. Fethullah Gulen, a noted scholar who has been molding the minds of students for close to four decades, maintains that there is a direct relationship between a community and its young people. In his Towards the Lost Paradise, Gulen explains: “A community maintains its liveliness through the spirit of its young, and flourishes through it. When a community loses this spirit, it fades and withers away, like a flower whose veins have been cut, and it is finally crushed under foot.”(4) His comparison of a flower to a child is all the more poignant when we look at the loss of innocence thousands of children have experienced due to violence in schools.

CONCLUSION

Diversity and multiculturalism may seem like concepts that are not age-appropriate for young children. However, I contend that issues of diversity must have a place in the early childhood curriculum. Although children may have difficulties articulating the differences they see around them, they are aware of the concept of difference. Just as classroom populations are changing, the face of early childhood curriculum also must expand and grow to meet the needs of the twenty-first century.

FOOTNOTES

1. M. Fethullah Giilen, Criteria or The Lights of the Way -1 (Izmir, Turkey: Kaynak A.S., 1998), 55.
2. Webster’s New World Collegiate Dictionary, 3d ed., (N.p., n.d.)
3. Americans with Disabilities Web site: www.usdoj.gov/crt/ ada/adahoml.htm.
4. M. Fethullah Giilen, Towards the Lost Paradise (London: Truestai, 1996), 25.

REFERENCES

• Americans with Disabilities Act. www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/adahoml.htm.
• Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion. “What is Inclusion?” www.inform.umd.edu/EDUC/Depts/ecrii/inclu.html
• The Educational Excellence for All Children Act of 1999. “Title II, Part C, Early Childhood Educator Professional Development.” (4 pp.). www.ed.gov. offices/OESE/ESEA/prospectus/title2-c.html
• Gulen, Fethullah M. Criteria or the Lights of the Way -1 (Izmir, Turkey: Kaynak A.S., 1998)
• . Towards the Lost Paradise. London: Truestar, 1996.
• Jordon, Deanna. “Inclusion in the Preschool Setting.” www.earlychildhood.com.” Informative Articles from earlychildhood.com.
• Kupetz, Barbara. ‘”Do You See What I See?’ Appreciating Diversity in Early Childhood Settings.” Early Childhood News (Jul.-Aug. 1998): 1-5.
• Levy, Alison. “Culture in the Classroom.” Early Childhood News (Jan.-Feb. 1997): 1-9.
• Macdonald, Maritza. “Valuing Diversity: An Excerpt from Explorations with Young Children, A Curriculum Guide from the Banks Street College of Education.” www.early-childhood.com.
• North Central Regional Educational Labor. “Critical Issues: Promoting Children’s Readiness to Learn.” www.ncrel.org/ncrel/sdrs/areas/issues/students/earlycld/ea700.htm.
• Riley, Richard W. “‘Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes’ Study.”8 June 1999. (Speech).