Don’t We Already Do Inclusion?: A Conversation with Paula Kluth ~ 202

Tim Villegas
I’m recording from my living room in beautiful Marietta, Georgia. You are listening to the Think Inclusive Podcast, Episode Five. I’m your host, Tim Villegas. Today, I’ll be speaking with Paula Kluth, an internationally renowned author and speaker on inclusive education. Her books are some of my favorite resources, and I’m constantly recommending her work to my colleagues.

A little confession about this recording—it was recorded in May, and I’m finally getting around to editing it now that it’s August. It’s been a very busy summer with vacations, visiting family, and being home with the kids. My littlest one, one of three, just turned one, and my wife and I are coming up on our 10th wedding anniversary. So things have been pretty busy and moving fast this summer. But I’m really excited to bring this conversation to you.

Paula and I discuss whether reverse inclusion can be a stepping stone to authentic inclusion. We also talk about ways educators can promote inclusion at their local schools, and whether technology in the classroom is all it’s cracked up to be.

So, without further ado, let’s get to the podcast. Thanks for listening.

Joining us today on the Think Inclusive Podcast is Dr. Paula Kluth, an internationally renowned consultant, author, advocate, and independent scholar who works with teachers and families to provide inclusive opportunities for students with disabilities and to create more responsive and engaging schooling experiences for all learners. Paula is a former special educator who has served as a classroom teacher and inclusion facilitator. She is the author or co-author of many books, including Don’t We Already Do Inclusion? 100 Ways to Improve Inclusive Schools and You’re Going to Love This Kid: Teaching Students with Autism in Inclusive Classrooms.

Paula, I’m honored that you took some time out of your day to speak with us. Welcome to the podcast.

Paula Kluth
Thank you so much, Tim. I’m really thrilled to be here. I’ve listened to other podcasts you’ve put out over the last couple of months, so thank you for doing that work. I’m really excited to be included.

Tim Villegas
Well, thank you. I think that you and my mom are about the only ones who are listening.

Paula Kluth
I know that’s not true.

Tim Villegas
Let’s get right into it. The reason I asked you to be on the podcast is to talk about your book. Of course, we have a lot of other things we can talk about, but first, I’d like to say I love the title of the book, Don’t We Already Do Inclusion? Do you find that in your trainings or conversations you’re answering this question a lot? What was the impetus for writing this book?

Paula Kluth
First of all, I do love clever or memorable titles, but a lot of them come out of conversations I’ve had. This one came up a lot while working with teachers and administrators, especially in schools that were seen as already having inclusive models. I spent a lot of my career helping folks move from segregated or self-contained settings into inclusive environments. But I realized that even in schools with a reputation for inclusion, there were still students with certain labels who had never been brought back from private placements or were never considered candidates for inclusion.

Sometimes schools had great co-teaching models and support systems, but they also had a room called the “inclusion room.” I used to joke that if you have a room called the inclusion room, you’re probably not an inclusive school. The book is really about being reflective—no matter where you are on the journey, there’s always more work to do.

Tim Villegas
That’s good. The examples you give are very concrete, and I love your conversational writing style. It’s easy to read and a great conversation starter. I’d love to have this as a resource for our school district—though I don’t think that’s going to happen. What I find interesting is that schools or districts with a history of being “inclusive” often have their own definition of what inclusion means. I remember during my teacher training in California, we visited a model inclusion school that didn’t have any students with significant disabilities. At the time, I didn’t think that was strange because I had never worked with students with significant disabilities. But now, it’s clear that inclusion was defined in a very narrow way.

Do you have a definition of inclusion?

Paula Kluth
I think about inclusion with what I call the “big I.” Originally, inclusion meant bringing students with disabilities out of segregated environments into common, welcoming environments. But now, many of us think about inclusion more broadly—around race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, ability, gender. It’s about making schools appropriately challenging, safe, and welcoming for every student.

Part of that is educating students side by side with their neighbors and classmates in common environments. It doesn’t mean we can’t have small group instruction or personalized learning, but we shouldn’t have classrooms designated only for certain learners. If a student needs a quiet space, everyone should have access to that. If some students need small group instruction, all students should have access to that. Inclusion means all kids get access to all the different ways of being in school.

Tim Villegas
Here in Georgia, we have Exceptional Children’s Week, which I moved to Inclusive Schools Week this year. It was a good shift, but it’s hard to change the mindset that inclusion is only about disability. We still ended up doing a lot of disability-related activities, but I want us to keep moving toward that “big I” inclusion.

What you said about having spaces in schools that aren’t just for particular students—that groupings can be more fluid and creative—do you think that’s difficult because of the constraints of public education, like Common Core?

Paula Kluth
It’s interesting you mention Common Core. When I first looked at it, I thought it could actually be helpful. One of its underlying goals is to bring appropriate levels of challenge to all kids. It doesn’t tell us how to teach, just where we want kids to be. That leaves room for flexibility and creativity.

Some constraints are real—like budget cuts or rigid policies—but others are imagined. Sometimes it’s just a matter of asking, “Have we ever tried this?” For example, I talk in the book about “radical role sharing.” If paraprofessionals, teachers, special educators, and therapists behave a little differently—have different conversations—they can create new ways of teaching.

One school I worked with had a traditional special ed classroom that was no longer going to be used that way. They renamed it the “Learning Lab” and made it accessible to everyone. One side had sensory tools, the other had tables for project-based learning. It was open to all students. Sometimes, it’s just a paint job and a new name on the door.

Tim Villegas
I’ve had many conversations with special educators in my county and in other districts. A lot of them believe in the philosophy of inclusion—or at least lean toward it—but have a hard time seeing how it plays out practically, especially in self-contained classrooms. As a self-contained teacher myself, I’ve tried to break that mold, but I’m having a hard time too. Teachers and paraprofessionals are being cut due to budget reductions, and I keep running into philosophical differences. No one’s going to want to work at it harder than I am—or whoever else really believes in it.

So what would be your suggestion to me or to other educators in self-contained classrooms who want to pursue inclusion for their students?

Paula Kluth
It’s almost the same situation that parents find themselves in. They have great desire and not enough power to make an immediate switch. Parents have a ton of desire and knowledge, but they don’t have the power to go in and make something happen overnight. The same is true for a lot of teachers.

Tim, I’m sure you know teachers like this—I know teachers who have been written up for pursuing inclusive agendas. I know teachers who have been fired for it. I know teachers who’ve had reprimands or marks in their records. So it’s not easy at all, as families can tell you from their own struggles.

One of the things I always tell families is: remember that song, “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover”? Well, there are at least 50—maybe 500—ways to get inclusion if you’re a parent. Not all of them are easy, but there are many different paths. Some parents are quiet and chip away. Some are fierce. Some sue. Some move. Some run for PTO and become school board presidents. I know one mom who opened her own school. That’s unique, of course, but it shows the range.

I think the same is true for teachers. I doubt there’s one way for any teacher to make this happen, but there are lots of things teachers have done to be effective—even if they don’t get all the way there.

I’ve known teachers who pursued inclusion through a single co-teaching relationship. They found a great partner and created a formal proposal. A lot of administrators are open to that if you come with a plan. My administrator used to say, “Don’t come to me with problems unless you have three solutions.”

Some folks use action research. They say, “Look, here’s what I found. My students who were out for this language arts period had better outcomes than those who stayed in the self-contained room.” That kind of data can be powerful.

Some teachers subversively educate parents about inclusion. That’s not for everyone, but I love it. They get families involved. In my district, we have a parent group called the Oak Park Inclusion Network. Teachers come to events and work with parents to see what else can be done.

Others try to educate their principals. I used to argue inclusion morally and ethically, but now I just say, “Look at the research.” It’s clear as day. Some principals respond to data. For example, I often cite George and Julie Theoharis’s “Schools of Promise” study from Syracuse University. It shows strong outcomes for inclusive schools.

Some teachers get politically active. They form study teams, book clubs, or summer think tanks. They ask, “What’s one step we can take in the right direction?”

None of this is easy. I know teachers who’ve moved to other schools or districts because they couldn’t make it happen where they were. But there’s nothing more exciting to me than an inclusion-minded teacher in a self-contained classroom. That’s exactly who I want there—someone who will fight to make changes and be creative when they see an opening.

So I would tell teachers: don’t give up. Over, under, around, or through—find a way or make a way. If you run into a dead end, try a different method. Use parents as your models. They are clever.

Tim Villegas
Yes, they are. I know plenty of parents who know exactly how to get what they want for their kids. It may take a while, but a lot of them get there.

Along those lines—of going over, under, or through—I’m curious about your opinion on the concept of reverse inclusion. I think there was a study in Exceptional Children maybe six or seven years ago that talked about the social benefits of reverse inclusion. But I’m more interested in the academic benefits. Do you feel that reverse inclusion can be a stepping stone to creating a more inclusive school?

Paula Kluth
That’s a great question, and it’s actually one of the items I addressed in the book because it comes up so often. I kind of have a two-part answer.

First, I agree with you that there are great social benefits to bringing students with and without disabilities together. I hear this a lot from teachers who feel very much alone. They’ll say, “There are really great social benefits. The kids are doing better.” And I don’t doubt that. But what you’re seeing are the benefits we’d also see in an inclusive classroom—if we could get there.

I was talking to a teacher last year who said, “You should see the kids together, Paula. I know you don’t like this, but it’s working.” I said, “I do see them together—in inclusive classrooms. That’s where I want it to be.”

So practically, I understand why teachers do it. They’re doing everything they can from their end. But from a systems or administrative point of view, I don’t think reverse inclusion is a stepping stone. In fact, I think it often becomes a stopgap. It gives administrators a reason not to take the next step. They say, “We’re already doing something.”

But when you look at the law, we’re supposed to bring students with and without disabilities together in meaningful ways. Reverse inclusion often fails to challenge the system. It doesn’t lead to broader structural changes. I’ve rarely seen it lead to full inclusion. More often, it becomes the reason we never get there.

Students in reverse inclusion settings usually don’t get access to the full general education curriculum, a broad range of peers, or general education teachers. And we know that collaboration with general educators is a powerful part of inclusion.

So while I respect what hardworking teachers are trying to do—because they’re stuck—I don’t endorse reverse inclusion as a long-term solution. It lets districts off the hook from making real changes.

Tim Villegas
Yeah, I definitely agree. It’s not ideal. In my own practice, I’ve done some version of reverse inclusion since I started teaching almost ten years ago. I’ve also had students go out into general education settings, depending on the support available.

This year, I have a third grader who is fully included in a general education classroom with a paraprofessional. But because he’s still on my caseload, that paraprofessional is counted as being in my room for allotment purposes. I know you know all about that.

So what I’ve been doing is taking advantage of the days when third, fourth, and fifth grade students go to gifted education. A portion of the class is gone, so the remaining students join my classroom for academic activities. That’s been really nice because it’s the first time I’ve been able to collaborate with a general education teacher. We do co-teaching lessons, which is different from what I’ve done before.

Usually, reverse inclusion meant three or four kids from a general education class would come into my room for an activity. This is different. It’s not what I’d love to see long-term, but it’s a step.

At the core of all this are the assumptions of our administrators and central office staff—superintendents, special education directors, school board members. They often see special education as a separate thing. They assume special education teachers do something fundamentally different than general educators. That’s why we educate students with disabilities in a particular way, with a particular curriculum, and everyone else in another way.

I don’t agree with that. I assume you don’t either. We want to increase learning for all learners. So if our kids aren’t fundamentally different—they all learn—how do we create systems so that everyone can learn together? Is it universal design? Is it something else?

Paula Kluth
First, I want to go back to what you’re doing with your colleague. That co-teaching example is really interesting. It sounds more like you’re targeting a specific colleague and trying to get something going together. That’s a little different from what most people think of as reverse inclusion. You’re involving someone else and saying, “We’ve got this common time—let’s try something.” That’s a really positive example. It’s one of those early behaviors I talked about—collaborating, co-teaching, engaging in joint lessons with appropriately challenging, standards-based content. I think that’s a great example of someone who feels powerless but has found a sneaky way to start making change.

And I love sneaky.

Tim Villegas
Well, thanks.

Paula Kluth
So, to your second point—you bring up such an important issue. The research has been remarkably consistent for 20 years: we need leadership. Can you make inclusion happen on your own? I have no doubt that if anyone can, you can. But why should you have to? On top of everything else you’re doing as a teacher, it’s exhausting—for both you and your students.

We really do need leaders. We’ve seen examples where teachers have been the shepherds of inclusion, but it’s so much harder. When we see schools that are robust and healthy and doing the good work of inclusion, it’s because of leadership—building leadership and, most of the time, district leadership.

So yes, educating our leaders and holding them accountable is one of the ways we create inclusive schools. That’s why I always say: who hires your superintendent? Your school board. And parents can run for school board. I say this again and again—if that’s for you, really think about running.

As for what inclusion looks like in schools, yes, I think Universal Design for Learning (UDL) will be a big part of it. I also think technology will play a huge role. People call the iPad the “quiet revolution.” So many kids on the spectrum are now showing up in different ways—communicating differently, learning differently. Technology is helping us see that kids are far more competent than we ever imagined.

We’re going to see more personalized ways of learning. People have said, “Wouldn’t it be great if every student had an IEP?” Some schools are already adopting that idea in different ways. Technology is leading the way. In schools with one-to-one tech, it’s amazing. Everyone’s reading in different ways—on Kindles, tablets, computers. We’re getting closer to that “IEP for everyone” model.

Some schools are using flipped classrooms, especially in math. Students watch the lesson at home and engage in individualized instruction in class. That has huge potential. You can even have students watching different videos in the same classroom, working on individual goals.

It’s not that students won’t come together on common goals—that’s why we have standards—but the ways they learn and show what they know will become more varied. Tech-rich, universally designed schools will give us those opportunities.

The good news is, we’re only finding out more and more that inclusion is better for kids—socially, academically, in every way. And the way schools are evolving will benefit our students even more. If we can tap into that and bring those discussions to stakeholders—school boards, parents, teachers, administrators—we can make real change.

Tim Villegas
That’s all very encouraging. I have to keep that in mind. I do think eventually we’ll move toward an inclusive model. I don’t know how long it’ll take, but we’ll be fighting tooth and nail with some administrators and teachers who still believe in the traditional model—one teacher, 30 kids, 30 desks. That industrial model from the 1920s and ’30s. We’re so far beyond that, but our public school system is still stuck in that rut.

Paula Kluth
The good news is, the teachers coming out now have always had cell phones, the internet, YouTube. They’ve grown up differently. And soon, the faculty we hire will have been educated in new ways. Hopefully, teacher education will change too.

If you don’t like the act of teaching—or learning—it’ll be hard to be a teacher. Things are changing too fast. You used to be able to get by if you just loved English or liked kids. Now, you have to love learning and collaboration. The pace of change demands it.

We’re also moving toward more collaborative models. The idea of having one tech person in the district is outdated. We’ll all need tech expertise. That’s already changing.

I was reading a Harvard alumni magazine recently, and there was an article about the “swan song of the lecture.” Professors are realizing that if they just read the book and reiterate it, students will be ahead of them. There’s too much information available. So they’re shifting to experiential and project-based learning.

If Harvard is saying, “We can’t talk at students anymore,” that gives me hope that other institutions will change too.

Tim Villegas
That’s interesting. I work with a mix of ages, and I hear a lot of philosophical differences. Some people see the changes in kids and families due to technology as negative. But people in my generation and younger don’t necessarily see it that way. We see the benefits of differentiating with technology. Things don’t always have to be lecture-based. It’s a cultural shift. In the U.S., it’s a changing of the guard—a new way of doing what we’ve always done. I hope younger teachers are attracted to that.

One more question. This has been a great conversation. In your opinion, can special schools—private schools for kids with ADHD or autism, homeschool programs, even religious education—can those be truly inclusive systems? Or are they missing out because they’re not in public schools?

Paula Kluth
I see homeschooling a little differently than the other examples. Families often choose it because they couldn’t get inclusion or the services they needed. But many choose it simply because they want to be their child’s teacher.

In my community, there’s a lot of homeschooling. It’s very arts-based and progressive. Families find inclusion through music classes, extracurriculars, and community activities. They come together to do that work. So I think homeschooling is different. Families have chosen to be the teacher, and they find inclusion within the family. Doug Biklen says the most inclusive institution in the world is the family—and I agree.

As for the other examples, I understand what those schools are trying to do—provide specialized instruction and support. But like with reverse inclusion, what worries me is that we never challenge our public schools—the schools we all pay for—to be better.

Take deaf and hard-of-hearing students. I get that they need to be with peers they can communicate with fluently. But why can’t that happen in public schools? In Chicago, there’s a dual bilingual program where everyone learns sign language from a young age. It’s like how some schools teach Spanish to everyone. Wouldn’t you want your child to be fluent in sign language by the time they leave elementary school?

That’s the dream of a truly inclusive school or district. The same goes for autism. If a student needs a sensory-safe space, why can’t we bring that into public schools? If it’s effective, let’s make schools more sensory-safe for everyone.

So I’m not saying those other schools are bad. But I want to challenge public schools to be as close to all things for all people as possible. That’s the promise of inclusion. We’ve seen enough great stories to know it’s possible. If I’m going to do this work, I want to keep pushing forward and asking, “What is possible?”

Tim Villegas
I feel like there are certain schools in the country—particularly private schools—like the IDEAL School in Manhattan, the Hope Technology School in the Bay Area, and one more I’m forgetting. There was a documentary featured in Education Week. These schools are trying to educate children together. Are there public school districts doing this successfully? And if so, where are they? Is it just one school or a few, or is it broader?

Paula Kluth
I can answer that to some extent, but it makes me a little uncomfortable. Families do listen to this podcast—and I know you think it’s just your mom!—but I’d hate to say, “This is the best district ever,” and then the superintendent leaves and everything changes.

I did a study called “Going Away to School” about parents who moved to get inclusion. Many said they’d do it again, even though it was hard. But sometimes it was only good for two years—until middle school, or until graduation when there were no community services.

So asking “Where can I go to get inclusion?” is tricky. But we do know it varies drastically by state. Vermont and New Hampshire often get high marks. Illinois, where I live, is usually at the bottom. Madison, Wisconsin, where I went to school, has won national awards for inclusion.

That said, even within a district, experiences can vary. I’ve had people come up to me and say, “That district you mentioned? My nephew went there and was completely excluded.”

You mentioned some great schools. I was just at an inclusion conference where Bill Henderson spoke. He was the principal of the O’Hearn School in Boston, now named after him. They did a lot of innovative work. He has a new book out called The Blind Advantage—I highly recommend it.

There’s also the Jowonio School in Syracuse, New York. It has a fantastic reputation for inclusion and community engagement.

If families are looking for inclusive schools, parent training centers are a great resource. Ask other parents. They’re having these conversations online, in Facebook groups, in chat rooms. They know the stories.

And remember: passionate people working together can create schools like Hope Technology, the Henderson School, and Jowonio. That’s how these schools got started—with a small group of committed people. Sometimes it’s worth looking outside. Sometimes it’s worth starting something right where you are.

Tim Villegas
I think that’s a perfect ending to our conversation. I can’t thank you enough. This has been fabulous. I hope everyone gets something out of this—we covered a lot of ground. Once again, thank you to Paula Kluth for joining us on the Think Inclusive Podcast. Good luck with everything. I know you’re doing amazing work—more trainings, more books, and hopefully changing the world for the better. Thank you so, so much.

Paula Kluth
You’re very welcome.

Tim Villegas
That concludes this edition of the Think Inclusive Podcast. For more information about Paula Kluth, you can follow her on Twitter @PaulaKluth and visit her websites: paulakluth.com and differentiationdaily.com.

Remember, you can always find us on Twitter @think_inclusive or on the web at thinkinclusive.us.

Today’s show was produced by me, talking into USB headphones using a newly refurbished MacBook Pro, GarageBand, and a Skype account. Bumper music by Jose Galvez with the song “Press”—you can find it on iTunes.

You can also subscribe to the podcast via the iTunes Music Store or podomatic.com, the largest community of independent podcasters on the planet.

From Marietta, Georgia, please join us again on the Think Inclusive Podcast. Thank you for your time and attention.