Rebuilding Education: Navigating Policy Changes and Their Impact on Schools ~ Think Inclusive Now

Tim Villegas: Alright, we’re gonna get started. I think that’s long enough. Hey everyone, my name is Tim Villegas with the Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education, and I’m here with some of my closest podcasting pals.

A few weeks ago, we were talking about how we could support the broader educational community. We have a little group called the Inclusive Pod Network. It’s pretty informal, and anyone can join. We’ve been meeting for over a year now, right, Diana?

Diana: Yes, over a year.

Tim Villegas: It started with us trying to find other podcasters to support in the space of inclusive education. We thought, “Hey, what do you think about doing a live stream with everyone?” We thought it was an awesome idea, and we’ve never done a live stream with this many people before. So here we are. If you’re watching live, great! We want to know that you’re watching. Give us a like, send in a comment, let us know. If you’re not watching live, just watch the recording and let us know what you think.

Here’s our agenda. We have a number of podcasters, and I’m going to list them off and name the podcast or the organization they’re affiliated with. Each of us has a topic that is near and dear to our hearts related to supporting the educational community and students with disabilities. Everyone’s gonna have a chance to talk. If you have a question for one of us, please feel free to send it in the comments, and we will try to answer it. There will be time at the end of our live stream to answer all of your questions.

Let’s get started with Ashley Barlow. Ashley, you not only have a consulting company, but you also have the Collaborative IEP Podcast, is that correct?

Ashley Barlow: Yes, that is correct. I’m a special education attorney and advocate, and I have the Collaborative IEP Podcast as well.

Tim Villegas: Great. So Ashley is gonna start us off. Next, we have Janet Roche. Am I saying that right, Janet?

Janet Roche: Yes, you pronounced it perfectly.

Tim Villegas: And Janet, you have the Inclusive Designers Podcast, is that correct?

Janet Roche: That is correct. Both myself and Carolyn Robbins co-produce the Inclusive Designers Podcast. I’m the host, and she does some editing. We both try to do some writing, although she’s clearly the better writer. We got involved with you because of Judy Mann’s group.

Tim Villegas: Awesome. Next, we have Sam Drazin. Sam is the CEO of Changing Perspectives. You have the Sip and Sam Podcast, right?

Sam Drazin: Oh, thanks. I always do that. Thanks, Tim. Happy to be here. I’m the executive director and founder of an educational nonprofit that supports inclusive education in schools called Changing Perspectives. I’ve also collaborated with the Supporting Inclusive Practices Project out of California. Our podcast, Sip and Sam Inclusion Coffee Talk, is still building momentum with only a few episodes out there.

Tim Villegas: Great. Next, we have Savitha Sundar, who will be presenting as part of this live stream. She has the Inclusive Occupations Podcast, which is fantastic. We featured her podcast in our Think Inclusive Feed. Then, Lori Boll of SENIA, you have the SENIA Happy Hour Podcast.

Lori Boll: Yes, SENIA Happy Hour Podcast.

Tim Villegas: And then Diana Pastora Carson of the Beyond Awareness: Disability Awareness That Matters Podcast.

Diana Pastora Carson: Yes, Beyond Awareness.

Tim Villegas: Thank you. And then there’s me, the host of Think Inclusive and the director of communications for the Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education.

Alright, let’s get started. If anyone’s put any comments in the live stream, please let us know you’re watching. Give us a like, a thumbs up, an emoji in the comments, just so we know you’re watching and supporting the work as we support students with disabilities.

Ashley, wanna get us started? What are the latest updates from your world of educational advocacy that we should know about?

Ashley Barlow: Sure. I’m happy to do it and will try to get through a fairly large update in a short amount of time. We have this slated for 15 to 20 minutes. I’ll cover a lot of these policy changes or anticipated policy changes quickly. A little more about my history: I’m a special education attorney licensed in Kentucky. I only represent families and work as a special education advocate in almost all 49 other states. I have a business with the podcast called the Collaborative IEP, where I provide additional resources for IEP team members on collaborative advocacy. I’m also a parent of a child with Down Syndrome, which is why I care about this so much.

We’ll talk about these policy changes and anticipated policy changes, focusing on potential impact. If we have time, we can discuss what parents and people can do, or we can cover that in the Q&A. The first big anticipated policy change is the idea that the Department of Education might go away. There are two different ways this could happen. The first is HR 899, a bill filed by my representative, Thomas Massie of Kentucky. He introduced this bill during President Trump’s first administration, but it didn’t get much traction. The bill is literally one sentence long and aims to abolish the Department of Education by December 26, 2026.

Ashley Barlow: So, you know, about 18 to 20 months from now. Can this happen? That’s the first question. The answer is no, because, well, it can, but is it likely? Probably not. When he introduced this bill the first time, it did not gain much traction. There seems to be a little more interest in it now, but it doesn’t seem like he would get the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate.

To abolish the Department of Education, there must be an act of Congress, and it would need a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate. The first time, it did not get that traction. A similar bill made it through the House in the last administration but was voted against by every Democrat and several Republicans. So, it does not seem likely.

Let’s talk about the potential impact of eliminating the Department of Education and the potential of an executive order with the same goal. It’s important to understand what the Department of Education does. Generally, they administer funding, including grants and loans like Title One funding. They enforce and oversee the implementation of federal laws, including federal education laws and civil rights protections. For example, the Office of Civil Rights protects students from bullying and discrimination based on disability.

The Department of Education conducts research and collects data required by law, using it to drive outcomes and develop and revise laws. They support states and local school districts to implement effective educational programs. If the Department of Education is moved, eliminated, or reduced in size and impact, all these functions could be threatened.

Specifically for the disability community, the Department of Education administers special education laws like IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. They also house offices like the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), which are crucial for implementing special education laws.

These offices have significant control over administrative regulations, which can change with each administration’s policy. The threat to change right now is significant and overarching. Funding for special education comes through the Department of Education, providing technical assistance, training for parents and teachers, and monitoring and enforcement of laws.

The next threat is that President Trump has alluded to preparing an executive order to eliminate the Department of Education. However, the Department of Education cannot be eliminated by executive orders. The executive branch can impact the Department of Education significantly through funding and staffing changes. For example, last Monday, the Department of Education reduced its staff by 50%.

We’ve also seen funding changes, particularly in the research branch of the Department of Education. Many grants and contracts have been withheld or withdrawn, especially those tied to DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives. These changes can lead to a loss of data-driven decision-making, reduced early intervention services, decreased accountability and oversight, and a limited understanding of the return on investment.

Ashley Barlow: We won’t know as much about workforce trends that impact students with disabilities who are transition-aged, and outcomes after transition. We won’t know as much about innovation, which could impact our ability to compete against other countries like Finland, Singapore, and Canada, which have better educational outcomes.

We won’t be able to fill those gaps in research because we won’t be researching as much. Additionally, the way funding works, states that are traditionally underfunded are most likely to get less funding. In essence, the poor are going to get poorer. Many states don’t get nearly as much as they need and rely on federal funds. Some districts rely on up to 30%, even up to 50%, of federal funds to operate their departments of education. If that money is significantly reduced, that’s a large chunk of their budget.

Policy changes can have big impacts. We’re also seeing significant changes in the Office of Civil Rights (OCR). The OCR is designed to provide protections against discrimination based on disability, including bullying and retaliation. OCR complaints have been a popular tool for special education attorneys and advocates to ensure kids get what they deserve at school.

Since President Trump took office, the OCR has done a complete 180 and is promoting anti-DEI initiatives from executive orders signed early in his presidency. We’re seeing complaints against state high school athletic associations that allow students to play sports associated with their gender identity, investigations against schools with gender-neutral bathrooms, and firing people at the federal level who attended DEI trainings.

A common question is, if we don’t have a Department of Education, where does it go? On my podcast, we’re walking through IDEA section by section, summarizing paragraph by paragraph. There’s a lot of communication between states, local education agencies, and the federal government. The Trump administration’s idea, outlined in Project 2025, suggests moving the OCR to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

This could have detrimental impacts on students with disabilities. The DOJ is traditionally focused on litigation, while the OCR focuses on investigation and oversight. Moving the OCR to the DOJ could make parents have to file lawsuits to complain, which is costly and stressful. We would have fewer school compliance reviews and reprioritization of disability issues in schools.

Project 2025 also suggests moving the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and its sub-offices like the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to the Health and Human Services (HHS). This shift could focus education more on a medical model. Funding could be shifted to a no-strings block grant idea, meaning states wouldn’t be required to use federal money for special education, and money could go to private schools.

This could lead to less funding for special education, weaker enforcement of IDEA, and a reduction in inclusivity. If neurotypical students take their federal dollars to privatized schools, what’s left in public schools accessible to students on IEPs won’t mirror real life. The purpose of IDEA is to promote further education, employment, and independent living, but the environment won’t look like the future community.

Ashley Barlow: So that was a little bit more than 15 minutes, but I really tried to cram it in. I hope that was helpful.

Tim Villegas: No, we really appreciate you taking the time, Ashley, to summarize. That was a lot of information. If anyone has any questions, make sure to put those in the comments on Facebook, or you can wait until the end of our session, and we can get back to you with more questions. I know I have some questions.

Alright, our next podcaster is Janet from the Inclusive Designers Podcast. What is it like in your world, Janet? I know you talk about trauma-informed design. How can we use this knowledge in this discussion?

Janet Roche: Absolutely. Ashley, I just wanted to let you know, thank you for a very quick but informative summary. I think we should talk at some point because I feel like I’m out of a job. My Inclusive Designers podcast is great, and it’s part of launching Trauma-Informed Design. I’m one of the co-founders of the Trauma-Informed Design Society.

I had a whole bunch of stuff to say, but when you were talking, I got a bit out of whack, so bear with me. Inclusive Designers podcast is really about DEI. We did an episode with Judy Mann, and we’ve covered crisis centers, behavioral centers, and Pottery Barn’s new inclusive bedroom and bathroom sets. We also talked to the CEO of Michael Graves Design about their beautiful pieces.

We did an episode on the Trauma-Informed Design Society’s TID eval, K through 12 tool, which we created with funding from the American Society of Interior Designers. We did it all through the pandemic, which was challenging with schools closed, but we managed. We received a CORE award from the Environmental Research Design Association for our work.

You can find the tool on the TID Society website. It’s all electronic now, and we’re always trying to do more research to further the cause. Trauma is very common, especially among kids with disabilities. Trauma-informed design integrates principles of trauma-informed care, as established by SAMHSA. We’re continuing to evolve and understand the science better.

I just got my new book out, “Trauma-Informed Design,” available on Amazon or the TID Society website. We’re trying to understand how the built environment and people’s minds interact, especially for those who have been traumatized. It’s important to create calming environments, like a spa, and avoid places that don’t work well, like the DMV.

To answer your question, Tim, both IDP and TID are about inclusivity and leveling the playing field. As an inclusive designer, I focus on making playgrounds and other spaces accessible to everyone. If we don’t, people will fall behind, become less wealthy, and it will lead to chaos. We need to ensure equal access to education and opportunities.

I hope I’ve answered your question. I wanted to make sure that we project the idea that we’re here for the people listening. We want to include you in the conversation and give you dignity and empathy.

Tim Villegas: I have a follow-up question. On the TID Society website, there’s research and practice guides, and it looks like there’s a research poster.

Janet Roche: Yes, we did that for the American Society of Interior Designers Foundation. That was the impetus for the TID evaluation, K through 12 tool.

Tim Villegas: I want to share this because I’ve never seen this connection between design and regulation or dysregulation for students. I find this really fascinating. This is literally the first time I’ve seen this.

Tim Villegas: Um, so I just want to mention a few things. There’s this great graph in front of me about which areas of schools were students most dysregulated. I’m not sure where you got this data, so maybe you can…

Janet Roche: We did it all ourselves.

Tim Villegas: Okay. So, it looks like the highest areas of dysregulation are hallways, classrooms, and cafeterias. Those are areas with a lot of transitions. What elements of school design were determined most crucial? There’s a word wall of important design elements. This is really helpful, and I think our audience interested in inclusive education would find this fascinating. I put the TID Society link in the Facebook comments, and when we produce this as an episode, you can include that.

Janet Roche: Yes, we usually include all the resources and references.

Tim Villegas: Fantastic. Janet, really appreciate it. Anything else before we kick it over?

Janet Roche: Schools can help reduce dysregulation with trauma-informed design. Understanding where to put your money, like hallways, can make a big difference. We knew kids were dysregulated in hallways, gyms, and cafeterias. Using this information, we can mitigate some factors. Longitudinal studies will help. Trauma-informed design is being used for Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, to reduce stress. This leads to greater productivity, less dropout rates, less pregnancy rates, and overall health and wellbeing.

Tim Villegas: Janet, thank you so much for contributing to the live stream with this information. If you have a question for Janet or any of our other podcasters, put it in the comment section of the live stream and follow up with us after if you’re watching the recording.

Tim Villegas: Sam, I’ve got a question for you. With your work with Changing Perspectives, how concerned are you about the administration’s anti-DEI stance? Where do you think this will impact learners with disabilities?

Sam Drazin: Thanks for your question. I could probably go on for an hour just on this question. Ashley and Janet have already alluded to this. I am very concerned. It’s easy to get confused by policies and white noise, but at the end of the day, this will hurt our students. As someone who had an IEP, supported students with disabilities, and works with hundreds of schools annually, this is going to hurt our students.

The administration is hesitant to say the words diversity, equity, and inclusion. It’s easier to be anti-something if you’re not saying what it is. We need to recognize and define diversity. Our country, schools, and workplaces are diverse. To set up our students for success, our schools must be a microcosm of society, which is diverse.

Diversity is the presence of differences, like disability, race, gender, socioeconomic status, religion, and ethnicity. No one person identifies as just one component. We’re all made up of an identity puzzle. For students with disabilities, one piece of their identity is their disability. The anti-DEI initiative and the witch hunt for DEI programs are saying we don’t care about your identity. Stripping people of their identity dissolves who we are as people.

Equity is about actions to ensure just, impartial, and fair opportunities for all. The administration wants to take that away by launching an anti-DEI portal where people can report DEI programs.

Sam Drazin: So then when we get to equity, we’re saying we’re not going to make things equitable anymore. Ashley hit the nail on the head earlier when she said a lot of these policies are moving us from a social model of disability back 50, 60 years to a medical model of disability.

When we think about inclusion, inclusion is the outcome. Laurie just heard me talk about this quote at the SEIA conference last week, but I love this quote by Verna Meyers: “Diversity is being invited to the party. Inclusion is being asked to dance.” We’re stripping you of your identity, making disability something viewed as a medical model, and eliminating opportunities to create equity, which is key in IDEA with least restrictive environment and IEP.

We’re not creating a welcoming environment, like the teacher in Iowa who had a “You Are All Welcome” sign in her classroom and was asked to take it down because it was perceived as an opinion. This isn’t a political issue anymore; it’s human rights and civil rights. DEI helps everyone, not just those with disabilities or the LGBTQ+ community. It’s universal at its core.

We all have an identity puzzle and need different things to be successful in terms of equity and inclusion. I encourage folks to define diversity, equity, and inclusion and understand why we need them in schools, neighborhoods, churches, sports teams, etc. Moving away from DEI takes us back to a medical model and an ableistic mindset, viewing disability as a deficit.

Instead of giving kids an option to leave “bad” schools for “good” schools, we should invest in lifting up struggling schools. Private schools aren’t required to follow special education law, so students with extensive support needs won’t go there. This creates segregation, with public schools serving lower-income students and students with disabilities while others go elsewhere. The impacts are huge: economically, academically, emotionally, and socially.

Tim Villegas: Thank you, Sam. I’m having a great time with all of you, talking about important issues for our community. For anyone watching live on Facebook, give us a like, share, and comment. We love to know you’re listening and watching.

Our next podcaster is Savitha Sundar. How are you doing, Savitha? We didn’t do a formal introduction earlier because you were working on your tech stuff.

Savitha Sundar: I know. I’m sorry. I hope I wasn’t too much of a distraction.

Tim Villegas: No, not at all. We see and hear you loud and clear. Savitha, your background is in occupational therapy. What is the top concern for you and other related service providers given this anti-DEI stance?

Savitha Sundar: Honestly, the biggest concern for me and many of my colleagues is ensuring that all our students, especially those with disabilities, still have access to the supports and services they need for the best quality education. It’s about creating school climates that are places of belonging and safety for all students, where everyone can thrive.

DEI initiatives play a big role in the day-to-day realities of interpreting the law. When a school has an inclusive culture, the interpretation is different. This impacts access to technology, availability of resources, funding for adaptive equipment, seating, and communication systems, and training for teachers. The funding for all these is impacted right now.

The least restrictive environment (LRE) is subjectively interpreted in different parts, and the same goes for related services. Without DEI initiatives, we lose intentionality and the push to ask if we are being equitable. The culture, district priorities, and therapist perspectives are based on awareness of inclusion and its benefits. If we don’t ask these questions, the status quo tends to favor what’s easiest, not what’s best for kids.

Savitha Sundar: Finally, the biggest concern for me is the backsliding. Educators, researchers, and advocates have spent years pushing for inclusion and evidence-based practices to become policies that help all students. Right now, we are at risk of undoing that progress. Without the intentional push for equity, the system doesn’t just stay the same; it gets worse. That’s what worries me the most.

At the same time, I want to stay hopeful. Service deliveries are not always equitable, but we need to uphold the spirit of equity and stay hopeful. Related service providers, educators, and families must keep fighting the battle. It’s about our kids, and we have to keep speaking up and pushing forward to make schools better for everyone.

Tim Villegas: Can I jump in here? I think Ashley had a point she wanted to clarify about anti-DEI and IDEA implementation. Did you want to say something, Ashley?

Ashley Barlow: Yes, I think what you said at the end, Savitha, is really important. It’s about the spirit of it. To be super clear, these anti-DEI initiatives impact the work of the Office of Civil Rights right now, but funding for IDEA is staying the same. Experts have anticipated that IDEA funding will remain status quo for at least Part B. Inclusion in schools, which is really about the least restrictive environment, is funded and implemented by IDEA. These two things are not currently being threatened.

This discussion is more about the spirit of the policies and the other funds that promote inclusive practice. There are funds from grants, projects, and research that promote inclusion, but actual IDEA funding and implementation should stay the same. Mentalities are undoubtedly changing, and that’s where we see regression.

Savitha Sundar: Thanks, Ashley. I know this hasn’t materialized yet, and IDEA funding hasn’t changed. It’s going to be a different department taking over the implementation of the law. My concern is that parents often feel they have to fight for related services and what’s fair for their kids. Will their voices be heard anymore? Is the Office of Civil Rights open to looking into their grievances?

Prioritizing inclusion might be seen as a bad thing by communities that don’t have a personal relationship with someone with a disability. There’s a misconception that a lot of funding goes into special education, and it’s not fair when the majority of students are suffering. But funding for special education supports the whole community.

As related service providers, our model is very medical, and we’re still working on remediating deficits. We’re trying to move into the social model, where inclusion efforts come in. We want our students to thrive in the best learning environments. Providing supports in classrooms and school communities is more efficient and equitable. Special education services benefit everyone in the school community.

Tim Villegas: That’s a great point, Savitha. Special education funds are often seen as only for students with disabilities, leading to segregation. But it goes both ways, and general and special education should not be siloed. Thanks for the reminder.

If you liked what Savitha had to say, let us know in the comments section of the Facebook live stream. Give us a like and share. Our next podcaster is Lori Boll. Lori, so glad you’re here with us. What are you hearing from our educational colleagues around the world regarding what’s happening in the United States at the federal level?

Lori Boll: Of course. I’m sorry about that.

Tim Villegas: No worries.

Lori Boll: That’s a great question. Thank you for asking it. I’m the executive director of SENIA International, and we champion inclusion worldwide. It’s important to know that people around the world are also being affected by what’s happening here. According to ISC Research, there are 14,833 international schools around the world that are English-speaking. Many of those are American schools, but students from the US attend international schools, whether they’re American international schools or just international schools.

One of the main issues recently was the cut to USAID. Many international school students are children of parents who work for USAID, and they were given 48 hours to pack up and leave the country.

Lori Boll: This had a huge impact on our students, many of them being seniors in their senior year, suddenly having to transition back to the United States and try to graduate. Many IB students were unable to take their assessments. Besides that, it has a domino effect. For instance, one school lost 52 students out of less than 300. Losing a large number of students led to teachers being cut, and people are losing their livelihoods. Besides the USAID workers, teachers are losing their jobs and having to return to the US or elsewhere.

One of the bigger impacts has been on the Life Centered Education Programs, the higher support needs programs. When schools lose funding due to lost tuition, these programs are often the first to go. It’s a real shame because international schools have recently become more inclusive of individuals with developmental disabilities. Losing these programs is heart-wrenching for the communities.

There’s also the impact on grant funding from the US government. As a parent of a 25-year-old son with a developmental disability, my worry is his future in terms of Medicaid cuts and such.

Tim Villegas: Thanks, Lori. I really appreciate that perspective. I knew USAID had an impact on other sectors, but I didn’t think about the impact on international schools. That’s eye-opening.

Lori Boll: A lot of our friends have lost their jobs for next year, or they’ve signed contracts to go to a new school, and that new school has had to call them and say, “Sorry, you can’t come.” It’s been devastating.

Tim Villegas: I just want to point out that the narrative around USAID is that it was bloated, a waste of taxpayer money, fraud, and abuse. Yet, so many stories have come out about lives being completely upended because of these drastic funding cuts. It’s absolutely cruel what’s happening. The more we hear about the impact, the more important it is.

Savitha Sundar: Lori, you mentioned your son who is a young adult. DEI initiatives in different workforces help adults with disabilities find a place of belonging. If we don’t intentionally create those work opportunities, people don’t understand the benefits. For example, SAP mandated 1% of their workforce to be individuals with autism. They initially did it with a charity mindset but realized their workforce morale and efficiency improved. When people understand that, they support DEI initiatives.

Lori Boll: Something that really hit me hard was when Trump called out the FAA for hiring individuals with developmental delays or disabilities. It’s crushing to demonize and blame a plane crash disaster on individuals with disabilities. It’s just so wrong.

Tim Villegas: That feels like a million years ago at this point.

Janet Roche: Some of the most brilliant minds that have ever roamed the earth are people with disabilities. I’m sure we would all feel fine with Stephen Hawking flying our plane or being in the control tower. FDR had polio and was in a wheelchair. There are many people with learning disabilities who have risen to the top.

Sam Drazin: Lori’s story reminds us that disability is the largest minority in the world. It’s not isolated to the United States or K-12 schools. Disability affects all ages, states, and countries. Awareness is the foundation for empathy. Eliminating opportunities to build awareness of differences leads to a decrease in empathy. Ignorance is not bliss; it’s scary. When we don’t understand why someone acts or communicates a certain way, we see politicians acting in ableistic and disrespectful ways. For our humanity and empathy, it’s imperative to provide opportunities to build awareness of differences globally.

Janet Roche: I just want to let our listeners know that Musk recently called empathy a disease. It’s hard to keep up these days.

Tim Villegas: No, I appreciate your thoughts, Janet and Sam.

Let’s turn to Diana. Diana, I hope I got this right. You are involved with teacher prep, is that right?

Diana Pastora Carson: Not so specifically anymore, but I have a background in that, yes. I can speak to that a little bit.

Tim Villegas: Okay. Feel free to adjust the answer. We’ve all been talking about how the changes in focus with the Trump administration have affected our world. How has it affected your work, especially with this anti-DEI stance?

Diana Pastora Carson: I am an educator at a university level. I co-teach a course called Disability and Society, and I am a retired elementary educator. I’ll speak from those perspectives. Has it changed what I do at the university or elementary level? No, not really. Other than looking over my shoulder to wonder if someone will turn me into that website Sam mentioned, no. Inclusionists will always be inclusive. It’s who we are, not something we do. It’s not performative; it’s at our core.

In my role as a college educator, I haven’t seen us doing anything different from an administrative level. Nobody’s given us orders to stop what we’re doing. We’re still creating safe spaces where everyone belongs and has their access needs met. Just last week, we had a disability pride celebration on campus, and I posted pictures on social media. We’re still having other pride celebrations and teaching in universally designed ways.

As far as teacher prep, I haven’t seen or heard of any changes at my university. In California and other states, our teacher prep programs are committed to ensuring access for all students. We pass that pedagogy on to teacher prep students. It’s important to share with newer educators, especially those without tenure, to be as inclusive as possible without drawing attention to their inclusive practices if they’re in a school or district acquiescing to the administration’s DEI stance. Be strategic and careful, but don’t stop being inclusive.

In my role as an elementary educator, if I had tenure, I would still be 100% committed to inclusion. I’d treat all my students the same, ensuring an environment that facilitates belonging. I’d continue beyond awareness celebrations, which are a big deal at my previous school and others I support. The main change for educators is that we’re forced to become politically informed and involved in advocacy efforts. I personally have always disliked politics, but now I don’t have the luxury of burying my head in the sand. I have to speak out because the stakes are too high.

Some things I’m doing now that I didn’t do much before include listening to reliable, balanced news sources, calling legislators using fivecalls.org, and speaking out on social media and in person with family and friends, always amplifying disabled voices. So, have I changed anything in terms of what I do as an educator? No. Am I more cautious? Yes. Am I more involved? Absolutely.

Tim Villegas: Amazing. Thank you so much. That was brilliant.

Diana Pastora Carson: Thanks, Tim.

Tim Villegas: One of the takeaways I heard is that you are more involved in speaking out. That’s been my experience too, especially with the first Trump administration. Many people were in shock, trying to hold on. With this round, it feels different. We could talk about how strong the ripples have been across education, not just special education but public schools in general. Many aspects of our existence as educators are threatened. We don’t have the luxury of sitting on our hands and waiting to see what happens.

As a citizen, father, and family member, I’ve been told to wait and see, but that’s not okay. It’s been however many days, and look what has happened. What is our role? We’re trying to figure that out together, finding reliable information and thought partners to move inclusive practices forward and support those whose lives have been upended by this administration’s decisions. What I’m hearing from everyone involved in this work is, “Tell me what to do. Tell me where to sign up.”

Tim Villegas: Like, where are the marches? You know, where do we go? And I don’t know the answer to those questions. If you’re watching and listening to this and you have strengths in organizing and community organizing, I think you have a lot of people that will be behind you. We want to be part of the solution here. We don’t have the luxury of just waiting and seeing.

I also want to bring up something Ashley mentioned about funding. Part B in IDEA is said to be off the table, but there are other parts of IDEA, like early childhood (Part C) and discretionary grants (Part D). With the continuing resolution happening, while Part B is fine, the other parts might not be. There’s a lot of risk right now on funding being moved around. We need to contact legislatures and state governments to ensure the rights of students with disabilities if funding goes to no-strings-attached block grants.

Another thing I brought up with Diana is the idea of school choice, which really means private school vouchers. Families whose children are typically educated in public schools might face more segregation with special schools. If private schools take vouchers, there’s a danger of creating special schools for students with disabilities. This is a big red flag for me. What do you think about that, Ashley?

Ashley Barlow: I definitely think that too. I used to be licensed in Ohio and still do advocacy work there. Ohio has scholarships that are disability-specific, like an autism scholarship. Some private schools do a good job for students with disabilities, but voucher systems are a threat to inclusivity. Most schools are specialized, not inclusive. If students take their money to specialized schools, what’s left in public schools might not be inclusive. Public schools could become a dumping ground, which is terrifying.

Tim Villegas: I’m not an expert on school choice, but it’s something we need to talk about as a community. It’s a stated goal of this administration, and everything they said they’re going to do, they’re doing very quickly.

Sam Drazin: The scary thing about school choice is that it looks flashy and promising, but it’s the opposite. Kids who had the opportunity to go to private schools will still have that opportunity, whether there’s a voucher or not. It disintegrates the fabric of diversity and inclusion, creating homogeneous environments that elevate opportunity for a few and limit it for many.

Ashley Barlow: Tim, I wanted to touch on something else you mentioned. As we finished up with Diana’s comments, you talked about what to do. I have a list of things about what to do. There’s a discussion online about the Five Calls app, and it sounds like a lot of people know about it. I realized early on in the administration that I was advising clients differently. In my law practice, I have a collaborative approach, having been a teacher and a parent.

Ashley Barlow: I broke my back when I was a kid, so I would qualify for a 504 plan in school. As a mediator, I see things through the lens of many different people at the IEP table. I have a collaborative approach and don’t file due process very often. But since January, I’ve advised clients differently for various reasons.

With the OCR changing its scope significantly, I’ve had cases where I would have filed OCR complaints, but now I tell clients it might be a waste of time and money because the OCR might not take it up. State departments of education need to know what’s happening in schools. I’ve sent state complaints to school districts and plan to file more to make state departments aware and help them plan and request federal funding for anti-bullying campaigns and DEI initiatives.

From a collaborative standpoint, it’s vitally important that IEP teams have good communication and collaboration. If your IEP team has negative conflict, now’s the time to turn it around. Conflict can be ideological and yield productive change. There are resources to help with this, like the T Center and books on organizational leadership and teamwork. Dive into local relationships to protect your children and impact systemic change.

Tim Villegas: Awesome. I think we’re almost done. Let’s take a collective deep breath and end with something positive—a celebration, something you’re looking forward to, or something amazing you saw or heard. Does that sound like a good idea? I’ll start with Savitha, then Ashley.

Savitha Sundar: To end on a positive note, I feel like any trouble is a wake-up call to reassess and reevaluate. The anti-DEI initiatives are waking people up to speak up. People who didn’t know about DEI are learning about it, and those with misunderstandings are getting educated. It’s also a wake-up call to look at how we use our resources. Hopefully, we’ll come out of this crisis stronger and wiser in creating an equitable community.

Tim Villegas: Amazing. Thank you, Savitha. Ashley, then Diana.

Ashley Barlow: The thing to celebrate for me is the impact of grassroots advocacy. In the Texas vs. Becerra (now Kennedy) case, the disability community rallied, and both plaintiffs and defendants requested a pause. This shows they listen to us when we use our voices. It’s exciting and empowering to continue making calls and being public.

Tim Villegas: Thank you, Ashley. Diana, then Lori.

Diana Pastora Carson: The first thing that came to mind is my brother, Joaquin. He was institutionalized for 15 years, and our family fought in court for three years to get him out. He’s now my next-door neighbor. He was in a special school for autistic kids for 10 years and denied access to things that would have led to a higher quality of life. I’m so grateful for our journey and for all of you who are part of Team Joaquin and Team Inclusionists.

Tim Villegas: Thank you, Diana. Lori, then Janet.

Lori Boll: I’m celebrating the fact that I just got home from Cambodia, where our organization held a conference with 430 educators from 33 countries attending our Belonging and Beyond Conference.

Lori Boll: And that’s just important and exciting because our organization was grassroots for advocacy. Our early conferences consisted of eight or 10 people, and we sold out this time. If we hadn’t been short on space, we would’ve had at least a hundred more people. The drive to be inclusive internationally at international schools is high. As a bonus, we had Mr. Sam Drazin as our keynote speaker. I’m impressed because I’m super jet-lagged and can barely function, yet Sam is as eloquent as ever today.

Tim Villegas: Thank you, Lori. Okay, Janet, and then Sam.

Janet Roche: Am I on mute? Oh, that was lovely. On our Inclusive Designers podcast, we say, “Stay well and stay well informed.” We need to stay well informed by listening to the voices here, amplifying what DEI stands for. If you have your own inclusive podcast or want to be part of the inclusive community, please join us. We need more voices. We’re inclusive. We came to this as a group because the time seemed right and important. I implore our listeners to think about how they can support the inclusive community. It’s super important right now. To Ashley’s point, I think we will come out of the ashes. As an inclusive person, I’m hopeful most of the time, even though I can get pissed off at things. There’s opportunities here to rebuild the way we always wanted.

Ashley Barlow: That’s the hope.

Tim Villegas: Fantastic. Sam.

Sam Drazin: Oh boy, it’s rough being last. I was jealous of those who got to go first. I’m coming off an inspiring week in Cambodia at the SENIA conference. It was great to be on the other side of the world, celebrating belonging and inclusion with others. In times of adversity, we come together as a stronger, unified front. Over the last decade, there have been more nonprofits, podcasts, and movies about disability inclusion. The movement has taken off in the last five or six years. Many people have taken off in silos, but now, when this work is threatened, we’re coming together as a unified front. We’re seeing disability from an asset perspective and moving the needle to a social model. We’re coming together as a family, strengthening the fabric of our learning communities, even in spite of barriers.

Tim Villegas: Thanks, Sam. You nailed it.

I’m so privileged to spend time with each of you, talking about things that matter. Inclusion matters. To everyone who joined us on the livestream, thank you for your comments. Sorry we didn’t get to some questions. Before we go, I want to remind everyone that we are podcasters in a group called the Inclusive Pod Network. We’ve been around for over a year, meeting infrequently to support each other in our podcasting journey. We’d love to have you join us if you’re interested. Most of us are in the educational space, looking to make inclusive schools a reality for learners with disabilities. If you have a podcast in that vein, please let us know. We’d love for you to join us in our meetings and collaboration.

Before I let everyone go, I want to take a group picture. Can we take a group picture?

Ashley Barlow: Yeah.

Tim Villegas: Okay. Everyone look at their camera and smile. Ready? 1, 2, 3. You look great. I’ll share that on social. From everyone at the Inclusive Pod Network, Think Inclusive, and MCIE, thank you so much for joining us tonight. We really appreciate it. We’ll catch you all later.

To everyone on Riverside, stay where you are. I’m going to cut the live feed on Facebook, and then we will debrief for a few minutes. Does that sound good? Perfect. Let me know.

Download the complete and unedited version of the transcript here.