Say What You Mean: Michael McSheehan on the Five Features of Inclusion ~ 1404

Michael McSheehan: I would emphasize that it’s 2026, we’ve been doing this for decades, right? It’s time that we move beyond just saying inclusion and inclusive education. We need to start specifying what we mean. Your selection of evidence-based practices and staffing arrangements, system changes, curriculum selection, all of those are really important and should be informed by the lived experience of students with disabilities.

Do I feel like I belong here? The general stuff, right? When I come in this room, is my name on the roster? Do I have a desk? Am I affirmed as a member of this learning community? And then we go to ask the disability-specific questions. How are the interactions and materials promoting an accurate understanding of disability as a natural part of human diversity?

Tim Villegas: Hi, friends. Welcome back to Think Inclusive: Real Conversations About Building Schools Where Every Learner Belongs. I’m your host, Tim Villegas. Today’s episode is about one word, inclusion, and what happens when we keep saying it without saying what we actually mean.

My guest is Michael McSheehan. Michael is the owner and lead consultant of Evolve & Effect, where he uses implementation science to help schools and districts put multi-tiered systems of support, or MTSS, into practice. He co-developed a model that fully braids MTSS with Universal Design for Learning. Before that, he spent nearly 20 years at the University of New Hampshire. He co-led the Center on Inclusive Education at the Institute on Disability, coordinated technical assistance for the SWIFT Education Center, and co-developed the Beyond Access Model. He also serves on the Inclusive Education Community of Practice for TASH.

Michael was on the show a while back and we talked about MTSS and UDL, and he’s back with us with something new today. He and four co-authors, Jessica Apgar, Debbie Taub, Mary Schuh, and Kate MacLeod, sat down to write guidance about paraprofessionals. They ended up writing something else entirely: the Five Features of Student Experience in a Continuum of Supports for Inclusive Education. And there’s a book coming from Corwin next spring.

The five features are location, accessibility, participation, affirmation, and agency, and every one of them is measured the same way. Not by what the classroom has, but by what the student experiences compared to their classmates without disabilities.

Listen for how Michael defines affirmation. It starts with questions like, “Is my name on the roster? Do I have a desk? Do I feel like I belong here?” That is the thread that we keep pulling on this season. Belonging isn’t just a vibe. It is something that you can see in a classroom if you know where to look.

We also get into why special education and general education often run on two different theories of how learners learn, and why Michael says mixing them is like oil and vinegar. Stick around after the interview, because we are playing our micro role-playing game, Awake Among the Stars. Link to the original game is in the show notes.

Before we meet our guest, I want to tell you about our sponsor. This episode is brought to you by IXL. IXL is an all-in-one platform for K-12 that helps boost student achievement, empowers teachers, and tracks progress in one place. As students practice, IXL adapts to their individual needs so that every learner gets just-right support and challenge, and each student gets a personalized learning plan to close gaps.

Check it out at ixl.com/inclusive. Again, that’s ixl.com/inclusive.

All right, after a quick break, it’s time to Think Inclusive with Michael McSheehan. Catch you on the other side.

Tim Villegas: Michael McSheehan, welcome to the Think Inclusive podcast.

Michael McSheehan: Tim, thanks for having me. Pleasure to be here.

Tim Villegas: Again, it’s always a pleasure to talk with you, Michael. And it is always a great time to talk about a resource that you have, and this resource, actually, I don’t know the name of it. ’Cause now I’m realizing it might… So is it called the Five Features of Student Experience? Is that the set title?

Michael McSheehan: So originally when the resource was released, it was called the Continuum of Supports and Features for Inclusive Education.

Tim Villegas: Okay.

Michael McSheehan: We’ve been engaged in writing a manuscript for a book, and in that process some language has changed. So the resource, I think in its most recent version, will be Five Features of Student Experience in a Continuum of Supports for Inclusive Education.

Tim Villegas: Okay. Yeah, so hot off the press. We give the updated language. This is what we’re talking about.

I guess where I wanna start is, this was a collaborative effort, and you have shared that when you started this, the authors, the collaborators, were actually working on something else, and you stumbled into this conversation about support. So can we start there? Bring us back to that moment. What was that conversation like, and how did this happen?

Michael McSheehan: Sure. First let me name the other four co-authors.

Tim Villegas: Please.

Michael McSheehan: Jessica Apgar, Debbie Taub, Mary Schuh, and Kate MacLeod. We’ve all collaborated on things on and off over the years, and now that Jessica and Kate are both in Maine, just next door to me in New Hampshire, we’ve been collaborating even more. And we set up a meeting to talk about a resource handout, some guidance for administrators to support paraprofessionals and to think critically about paraprofessional utilization.

There’s a lot of neurodivergence in our group. We bounce ideas and then we just follow things wherever they go. And in talking about some of the barriers that get in the way for paraprofessionals, we started talking about what’s the experience that students are having, and how do we describe the big buckets of student experience in inclusive education?

And then we were off, no longer talking about paraprofessionals and really talking about what are the big buckets to capture student experience? And that landed on the five features, which, I’ll name them just to hit them out of the gate here.

Tim Villegas: Sure. Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: Location, where kids are. Accessibility: environments, materials. Participation in whatever the activities are, learning activities, social activities. Affirmation: how we’re talking about disability, and is it an affirming environment? And learner agency, right? Thinking about students having control and influence over their learning and their lives.

So we landed on these big five buckets as a way to describe what’s happening for students. How we would observe it if we were in a classroom or in a school for a day. From the student’s perspective, what’s happening, and how do we capture that perspective? We landed on the five features, and then it felt like a different resource. It didn’t feel like paraprofessional guidance anymore. It felt like something that would stand on its own that we wanted to get out there.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. Exactly. And it’s a unique resource. I don’t believe there’s anything out there like it. And the way that you have framed the student experiences, I wonder, could you share why these particular five are important? And I’ll just say, we talk about location all the time, and even accessibility and even participation. Those are talked about a lot in the field among a lot of people. So affirmation and agency are probably the ones that are a little bit more hazy. But I’ll let you explain.

Michael McSheehan: Sure. It’s not like we did a literature review. It’s not like we had a big theory of action. It was, gosh, what catches our attention most when we’re in schools and classrooms, and what are some discerning aspects of the experience that we think are important? Really, it’s quite that simple. Of course, as we have been writing the book, we’ve got all the research that supports them, but for us, I think those five are most salient.

Location, a given, right? This is where we start. Is the student in the place that they would be if they didn’t have a disability? So starting in general education settings.

Accessibility. It’s hard to get to anything else, to participation, to engagement, to the learning, if the environment, the interactions, the materials are not designed to be usable, not designed to be engaged with similar ease as is happening for non-disabled peers in that setting, in that lesson, in that activity. So accessibility seems, I think, most obvious to a lot of people in the disability arena.

Participation. And for both of these, I wanna qualify that as we define these five features, we’re comparing to what is the experience that students without disabilities are having. IDEA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, is really clear that we’re aiming for equitable educational experiences. So that equitable comparison starts with what’s happening for other classmates in this general education setting. That’s why when I talk about accessibility, I threw in the phrase “with similar ease, with similar timing, resulting in a similar opportunity.” That “similar” is the comparison point to non-disabled peers.

Same thing in the way that we define participation, right? We’re not talking about a student being in a lesson and doing something close to what other students are doing. If all students are in small group interactions and the student with the disability is doing the same content, but doing it with their paraprofessional off to the side, that doesn’t count as participation, right? The comparison point is back to what’s happening for the non-disabled peers.

That tells you a little bit about participation, and for us, participation is the key for learning. It’s the precondition for learning. If participation is reduced because supports are prioritizing learner outcomes, they’re prioritizing efficiency, they’re prioritizing risk avoidance over the shared experience, then we’re decreasing learning. So we want students to really be fully engaged in the learning opportunities, in the learning processes, as they’re happening for students without disabilities.

So now to the two that may be new for some folks, and they won’t be new once I talk them through. People will be like, “Oh yeah, now I get what they’re talking about.”

So affirmation. We’re talking about disability affirmation for the most part, right? Which begins with, do I feel like I am a member of this classroom? Do I feel like I belong here? The general stuff, right? When I come in this room, is my name on the roster? Do I have a desk? Am I affirmed as a member of this learning community?

And then we go to ask the disability-specific questions. How are the interactions and materials promoting an accurate understanding of disability as a natural part of human diversity? Showing respect and value, honoring disability identity and culture, celebrating unique strengths and needs. And this is not just marshmallows, rainbows, all the happy, funny stuff, right? If the acknowledgment of disability is coming through a lens that infantilizes, portrays the individual always as the child, reflects low expectations because of disability, then we’re out of affirmation. That feature has been weakened, has been restricted in some way.

Does that make affirmation clear enough for now?

Tim Villegas: Yeah. Yeah, I love it.

Michael McSheehan: I’m glad you love it. We do too.

Tim Villegas: Go ahead.

Michael McSheehan: And then agency. Thinking about the student, and again, the comparison point is other classmates. We’re not talking about creating unique agency, right? We’re talking about all the same opportunities to choose and direct and influence learning and their lives.

So in the disability lens, is the student choosing when and how to use the various supports that are available to them? Are they actually informing the design and delivery and utilization of those supports? Are they making choices about how they learn and what learning methods and processes work well for them? And that should be consistent with their non-disabled peers. So we’re talking developmentally appropriate, right? The choices and the conversations about learner agency we have with a first grader are different than with a ninth grader, and they should be different for the student with disabilities as well.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. This is really interesting, the way that this is framed, because I think so often frameworks are based around the environment and not student-centered. Is this classroom inclusive? Does it have a calm-down corner? Is the curriculum adapted? What’s the training of the teacher? There’s nothing of that in here.

Michael McSheehan: No. And that’s a through line in our book. When people are using words like inclusion, inclusive education, we’re calling people out and saying, “It’s time to specify what that actually is for the student.” We can talk about inclusion from evidence-based practices, high-leverage practices. We can go down the list of ways that people will talk about the structures, the systems, the staffing, the scheduling. All important and relevant things.

Tim Villegas: For sure.

Michael McSheehan: But if those don’t result in location, accessibility, participation, affirmation, and agency, then we’re missing something for the student. So we really wanna anchor it there.

Tim Villegas: Yes. I love it. I love it so much. That’s great. So with this resource, if an educator or a parent is like, “This is great. I love this philosophically. How do I use it?”

Michael McSheehan: Many ways. The upside of the packet is, I think, in total it’s 10 pages.

Tim Villegas: Yeah, it’s concise.

Michael McSheehan: It for sure is. It gets right to the punchline of what’s going on, right? Here are these five features, and then we provide an analytic tool for how you interpret what that means. We call it the continuum of supports. And that is, what’s the resulting experience for students when all five of these things are playing out? And how do I interpret whether or not I’m on track with my vision for students to have all five features in place? So we give folks four points along a continuum, and if you’re over the midline, you have an opportunity for improvement. There may be some things here that you want to tweak.

So for using the tool, it can be used by educators, school staff, to look at the five features and be reflecting, discussing. It could be an anchor for professional learning. I could imagine a grade-level team, a PLC in a school, discussing, is this how we are thinking about and critiquing our own work from the student perspective?

It can also be used for direct observation and inquiry and improvement regarding a student’s educational experience. So looking at a student in a particular moment in time, to figure out, in this moment, are the constellation of supports such that the student is getting these five features of their experience?

So it can be used for reflection, professional learning. It can be used by staff for observation and inquiry. Families can use it. We’ve actually been presenting it to different family groups around the country this past year and getting a phenomenal response. And I’d love to tell you a little side story about that in a minute if we have time.

But for families, they can use the five features. You have to play with the language. We’ve written it for the context of schools, but families can be thinking about, “Okay, we’re planning a trip to Disneyland. What are the things that we’re gonna wanna plan for and consider while we’re there?” And the five features can serve you well in that context as much as they can in school.

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: And for administrators and for educational leaders, and hopefully for leaders in our arena of inclusive education, the five features can be used to explore what do we actually mean? What’s this vision that we’re creating for inclusion? It’s frustrating to hear people use the word as a value or a vision without really specifying what happens for kids. We can leave conversations just using the word inclusion but have really different thought bubbles in our heads for what’s happening. So this could bring some specificity to those conversations.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. I don’t know if I’m overstating it, but the majority of discussions around inclusion are about location.

Michael McSheehan: Yes. Well, that’s the federal data that we collect, right?

Tim Villegas: Yeah, exactly.

After the break, a room full of parents in tears, and the conversation about disability identity most of them had never been asked to have.

Let me take a minute to tell you about our other sponsor, Inclusive Schooling. Here is something we hear from educators all over the country: “We believe in inclusion, but what about students with challenging behavior? How do we include those learners, and how do we support everybody else in the room when so much of the day is going to behavior?”

That’s a fair question, so let me tell you about Behavior 360 from Inclusive Schooling. It starts from a completely different premise than most behavior training. Behavior is not just something to manage. It’s something to understand. Behavior 360 is grounded in neuroscience, in relationships, and in inclusive education, and it gives educators practical strategies they can use before, during, and after a hard moment. Not theory, and not another framework to put in a binder.

So if you’re a teacher, a coach, or a school leader looking for professional learning that makes classrooms safer and more inclusive at the same time, take a look at inclusiveschooling.com/mcie-behavior. We’ll put that link in the show notes. Again, inclusiveschooling.com/mcie-behavior.

Tim Villegas: Why don’t you tell me that side story? I’d love to know what you were gonna bring up.

Michael McSheehan: Sure. I’ll give you some context. I was in a major West Coast city…

Tim Villegas: Okay.

Michael McSheehan: …doing a training for families around behavior. And in that context, I brought up the five features and started talking family members through them. When we got to affirmation, I started talking about what disability affirmation means, and I gave them lots of comparing and contrasting points. So if we’re talking about LGBTQ affirmation, what would be coming up? If we were talking about race affirmation, what would be coming up?

And I raised the question about the conversations that happen for children growing up when they’re marginalized around identity, and what does it mean to have the conversation with your child about their Down syndrome, their autism, whatever label you wanna pick there, and what that means in the world. In a political climate where disability is getting not only marginalized but targeted, this is a conversation that families, I think, need to be in, and I wanna support them to be in this conversation with their children.

And I had several parents in tears because they had just never entertained the idea that we would have to have a conversation about being seen as a disabled individual, leading with the identity there, and what that means in the world, and how to navigate power and conflict when you are identified as an individual with a disability. It was really powerful.

Tim Villegas: Wow.

Michael McSheehan: Humbling.

Tim Villegas: Yeah, I bet.

Michael McSheehan: And exciting. This is the conversation we wanna be in.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. It’s like your resource has an assumption, right? The assumption is that learners should be learning together whether they’re disabled or not disabled. The assumption is that the experience of school should be the same. That’s what the five features do: compare these two and ask, is there a discrepancy? And just that assumption is beyond where many people are. They’re not even there yet. Just the existence of a tool like this is powerful.

Michael McSheehan: We don’t have one yet, right? I look at my own work historically, and I had started to dip there in prior projects, but never really with this clarity. And I’m so excited to share it with the world.

Regarding a sense of belonging and actively participating in schools, two things I wanna add there. One, people really could enjoy a close read of IDEA, the purposes of supports in IDEA. It goes well with a Chardonnay. It goes well with a dark red. But pull up IDEA and just start reading through it, and there are two purposes of supports that are clearly articulated throughout the law.

First and foremost is equitable educational experiences. Supports are intended to remove barriers to opportunities, and the comparison point is the non-disabled peer. Then it also addresses, as we all know and love, individualized learning needs: IEP goals and disability-specific support needs, accommodations and modifications.

But if you pick up an IEP and you read through the accommodations and modifications section, how often do you see supports that are dedicated specifically to participating with a sense of equity, to ensuring the student has a sense of belonging in their school? Supports listed that are not related to the IEP goals per se, unless you have participation goals, which I would hope you do, but that ensure an equitable educational experience for learners. So that’s one thing I wanted to say.

The other is how people think about learning is problematic in the disability field. I’m gonna geek out on you.

Tim Villegas: Ooh, tell me more.

Michael McSheehan: Okay. I’m gonna geek out a little bit. So if you wanna cut this from the broadcast, you go ahead.

Tim Villegas: I doubt that, but go ahead.

Michael McSheehan: I got introduced to the work of Rachel Lambert. She wrote a book through Corwin on rethinking disability and mathematics. Great book. It got me to start tracing her work back historically to see how she got to this brilliant text. And one of the studies I came across that she did with a colleague of hers, Paulo Tan, back in 2020: they looked at 2,477, this is how much I love this study, nearly 2,500 studies of mathematics learning by students with disabilities and by students without disabilities.

And then they coded and sorted the different studies to see what these studies were looking at. And this is pre-K through 12th grade. What were these studies looking at, and how were they thinking about teaching and learning? What was their belief about how learning happens?

Really interesting. So they sorted the studies by a medical model of learning, a behavioral model of learning, a constructivist model of learning, a sociocultural model of learning. There were a few other theories of learning in there, but I’ll differentiate between medical, behavioral, and information processing, where either you’re starting with deficits and trying to fix a deficit in the medical model, or you’re looking at learning as something that happens inside the child.

Tim Villegas: Okay.

Michael McSheehan: In a behavioral approach, what the child is thinking about, the schema that they’re bringing to the content, doesn’t matter. We’re looking at the relationship between external reinforcers and feedback within a moment in time, and then again over time. So the disability studies showed up heavily applying the medical and behavioral theories of learning.

Tim Villegas: Sure.

Michael McSheehan: The general ed studies fell in constructivist and sociocultural perspectives of learning. And in those perspectives, students are seen as active constructors of knowledge. They’re not just passively receiving information. They build their own understanding and their meaning based on their own personal experiences.

And the sociocultural model is fundamentally situated in learning as a social endeavor, a collaborative process embedded within a specific culture. So if you’re not part of that culture, if you don’t have membership in that classroom, if you’re not participating in that culture, you’re not constructing your learning. So location, being part of the culture, accessibility to the materials, participation in the learning processes, is all part of learning.

In her study, she is just so clear about how we’ve been approaching talking about and studying learning by students with disabilities. The models are inconsistent with how general educators theorize about teaching and learning. I could go on more, but the punchline is how we think about teaching and learning matters here. And I think in special ed, we’ve gotta make a shift.

Tim Villegas: I wanna say something, and I’m not trying to get anyone upset, but…

Michael McSheehan: It’s okay to get upset. We can unpack it.

Tim Villegas: Let’s unpack this. So what I am hearing, and it’s so cool that this is math, because with ELA you can be squishy, but with math it’s like… There’s this idea that everyone learns differently. I’ve heard that in a very positive way.

Michael McSheehan: The intention is positive, yeah.

Tim Villegas: The intention of that statement is that we value how people learn, sometimes differently. But what I’m hearing is that the pedagogy and the brain science of how people learn is that it’s a social endeavor. If you’re not participating, you’re not constructing learning.

So these are all things that, to your point, general education practitioners already know. They’re building on it, they’re innovating, they are going forward with all of this. And special education practitioners, I’m just gonna use that term, have a different worldview of how students learn. So if you have a medical or behavioral lens, then you’re gonna set up your environment for learning differently. You’re gonna say, “Okay, there’s a stimulus, and then there’s this outcome that I want. I’m gonna reward the correct, quote-unquote, response, and then they will learn that response. So two plus two is four. Great job. Here’s a Skittle.”

That is a whole different view than having students collaboratively learn and do an activity and problem solve. And again, for people who know about evidence-based practices, those things are commonplace in the literature and in how we know students learn. And so if you’re not even there, if you don’t even believe that’s possible for some students, you’re not gonna do it, right?

Oh, I love talking with you, Michael. My brain is always buzzing when we have a conversation. So yeah, go ahead.

Michael McSheehan: So think about the practical implication of what the researchers…

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: …who have done these studies for decades have found. Think about the practical implication now for our special educators who think they are introducing that specially designed instruction, their powerful special sauce that they’re gonna mix in with general ed instruction. And they go to do the mixing, and it’s oil and vinegar. These two things never blend. They can be near each other, but it’s not the same as mixing colors. We’re not gonna get yellow and blue and wind up with green. There’s no blending that way. They’re still gonna end up separate, because the starting point for how we’re thinking about thinking, how we’re thinking about learning, is so dramatically different, right?

So much of math in particular is built on how students are strategizing, applying their thoughts of mathing in any kind of problem that they’re attempting to solve. The strategy that they’re using, how they are conceptualizing numbers and number relationships, is as important as the external behavior, if not more. So we need to support them to talk about their thinking.

Tim Villegas: Yes.

Michael McSheehan: How did you get to this number? When it says, “Show me your work,” “show me your work” is there for a reason. The teacher wants to know, are you applying these strategies that we’re teaching you? Not just, “Oh, you got the right number. Check plus.” I wanna know how you’re thinking about this.

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: And we’re not setting up our special education staff to bring that juice to the conversation. The research is not supporting it. And then we wonder why our special educators are so overtaxed and overwhelmed, and why general educators may be frustrated that they’re not getting information that’s useful to them in class. And it results in them feeling like, “Okay, I guess Johnny has to be at the separate table with the para,” because the materials and the methods that Johnny is gonna use are so dramatically different from the rest of the class.

It’s not a matter of intent. Everybody intends to do the right thing, but when they turn to the evidence-based practices that are available, they don’t line up.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. Going back to your resource, I want to put a spotlight on the language of “continuum of supports.” I’m curious, was that intentional because of the continuum of alternative placements referenced in IDEA? I think our audience would pick up on that, but I would like to hear what you have to say about it.

Michael McSheehan: Sure. And we haven’t really talked about the continuum. So…

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: What the continuum does is it allows you to look at how all five features are interacting…

Tim Villegas: Okay.

Michael McSheehan: …and determine, are we achieving the five features, and if so, how are we achieving them? So there are four points, and this is how we landed on continuum, because there are four points that have a relationship with one another on this gradation. So we have a continuum, literally.

Tim Villegas: Literally, yeah.

Michael McSheehan: And our choice of using that obviously is influenced by IDEA’s continuum, right?

Tim Villegas: Yes.

Michael McSheehan: So, a universal experience. If all five features are built into the design of the lesson, of the field trip, if the design allows for all five features to happen, and for students to bring the supports that they would use, their wheelchair, their AAC device, their speech-to-text software, if those things can seamlessly drop into that experience without add-on supports, it’s universal.

If we have to add on supports in order to ensure the five features, then we’re at what we call aligned. Both are great, in my opinion. If we can get to aligned for all the students by adding on supports, that’s fine as well. It’s just a little extra work. If we can do it upstream in universal, super. If not, aligned works.

If we lose participation, if students are participating in different instructional arrangements, if their role is not equitable, then we move into alternate, the third point on the continuum. It’s an alternate experience. It’s not aligned with what the non-disabled peers are experiencing. Now, you can get to alternate in other ways. At the end of the day, it’s the judgment of the team or the individual doing the reflection. The minimum guidance we provide is to say if participation’s gone, you can’t get to aligned. You’re at least at alternate.

And then if you lose location, you’re in restrictive. That’s the fourth point on the continuum. Because if you lose location, you now can’t have participation, ’cause it’s all comparative, right? It’s compared to the non-disabled peer. So if I’m not in the location of my non-disabled classmates, I can’t be participating in what they’re doing.

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: So that continuum provides a way to interpret and then reflect and do some planning. But I think our continuum describes so much more than IDEA’s continuum of placements.

Tim Villegas: Oh, yeah. I feel like this is such a powerful tool for reflection, and potentially also planning. I think you have action steps in the guiding questions.

Michael McSheehan: Yes, we do.

Tim Villegas: So I guess in our time, we really could probably talk another hour about this resource, but I do wanna close the loop on a couple things. Let’s talk about how a team or an educator might use this to support a student: going through guiding questions and then determining action steps. I think that’ll give someone who’s accessing the resource some guidance.

Michael McSheehan: Sure. So within the resource, there’s about a page-and-a-half pullout of a reflection guide, which can be used however educators or family members want to use it. Our intention is for observing, reflecting, and then planning for improvement. There’s always gonna be improvement, right? No matter what we do, there’s always gonna be room for improvement. So this is no slam on anybody if you don’t have all five features in place.

The questions go by feature, proceeding from location to accessibility, participation, affirmation, and agency. You can pick up any one feature to observe for it, if that is particularly important to you. And the guiding questions will raise the comparable issues. So the participation prompts are organized around: is it the same arrangement? Is it the same learning process? Small group, large group, independent work.

If we get into affirmation and agency, we’re talking about where that student is situated within those relationships. Yes, they’re participating, but I can participate and also be hearing some not-okay words being thrown around class.

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: I can be participating, but my paraprofessional is on me, and it feels stigmatizing. So yes, I participated, but the affirmation has some room for improvement there. So the questions allow folks to either look at all five or pick a learning area where you’d like to grapple and improve some things.

Tim Villegas: Yeah.

Michael McSheehan: And you’ll see this when the book comes out next April through Corwin. We’ve been very careful in the book, as I think we are in the resource packet, to not be shaming or blaming, but to give people the questions to ask and observe and answer.

Tim Villegas: Yeah. Man, again, if this resource was available when I was in the classroom, what a gift this would be to bring to a team and ask some really hard questions, and hopefully productive questions.

Michael McSheehan: Hopefully.

Tim Villegas: This is wonderful. Thank you so much for bringing this to the field and to our audience. And whenever we get that final version, we’ll make sure to share it, hopefully by the time this is published. Anything else you wanna talk about as far as the resource goes before we move on to our next segment?

Michael McSheehan: No, I think we covered it. I would just emphasize that it’s 2026, we’ve been doing this for decades, right? It’s time that we move beyond just saying inclusion and inclusive education. We need to start specifying what we mean. And your selection of evidence-based practices and staffing arrangements, system changes, curriculum selection, all of those are really important and should be informed by the lived experience of students with disabilities.

Tim Villegas: Well said, Michael. Thank you so much. All right. You ready to play a game?

Michael McSheehan: I have been told to get my deck of cards and six-sided dice, and I’ve got them. What am I doing with them?

Tim Villegas: Nice. Have you done any sort of role-playing, D&D, anything like that?

Michael McSheehan: No.

Tim Villegas: No? Okay, guess what?

Michael McSheehan: Let’s do it. I trust you, Tim. I’ll follow your lead.

Tim Villegas: Yes. I am learning this role-playing game mechanic, and I’m brand new to it. I really started it this year. I wanted to change up the segment at the end of our podcast. And so I’m like, “What if I did a micro role-playing game where I was like the dungeon master or the game master, and I would lead the guest through an experience?” And so that’s what’s been happening. I’ve done it a handful of times, and it’s great every time. So there you go. Let’s do it.

All right. This game, or this experience, is called Awake Among the Stars. We’re gonna start with your eyes closed, and I’m gonna count down, and then you’re gonna open, and then I will narrate what happens. Okay, so close your eyes for a second. Three, two, one, open.

You wake up gasping and cold, floating in a dim metal room. Your head is pounding and your memory is syrup. It’s classic hibernation sickness. You hear a soft chime in the distance, and a calm voice, which is your spaceship’s computer, Cora, says, “Good morning. You have been asleep for a very long time. We are in orbit above an uncharted planet. Oh, and minor note, our teleporter is running on reserve power. Please explore responsibly.”

And so through the porthole in your spaceship, you look and you see a planet that’s spinning, and you don’t know what this planet is. So before you get to explore the planet, we need to find out who you are. So get your die and roll it, and I’ll tell you who you are.

Michael McSheehan: Just one?

Tim Villegas: Just one, yep. What’s the number?

Michael McSheehan: I’m five.

Tim Villegas: You’re five. Okay, you are Ensign Pip. We’ll just call you Pip.

Michael McSheehan: Okay.

Tim Villegas: And you are a rookie commander on your very first mission. You are overconfident and eager, and you’re just trying to prove that you know what you’re doing.

Michael McSheehan: Sounds like me in my early career.

Tim Villegas: There you go. Just imagine that. Pip.

Michael McSheehan: Put myself back in my late 20s, early 30s. I’ve got an image. It’s not pretty, but I’ve got the image.

Tim Villegas: All right. Okay, so in your best Pip voice, say good morning to your computer. The computer’s name is Cora.

Michael McSheehan: Good morning, Cora.

Tim Villegas: “Good morning, Pip. Are you ready to explore?”

Michael McSheehan: Let’s do it.

Tim Villegas: Okay. Pip, I need you to roll your die one more time so we know where you’re going.

Michael McSheehan: Four.

Tim Villegas: You are going to the ocean world. This ocean world is a planet that’s covered in water, but it’s only waist deep. So when you teleport to this ocean planet, you will be wading in the water, but you won’t sink. At least not yet, anyway. And the water glows with your emotions. So if you are feeling happy, it’s this gold and yellow color. If you’re feeling fear or anxiety, it’s this purple color. So you really can’t hide how you feel. That’s the special condition of this planet.

Okay, so Cora is now speaking. “Ensign Pip, we are teleporting you down to the ocean world. Five, four, three, two, one. You are now on the ocean world. Your mission is simple: learn about what this ocean world is all about. On your back, you have a backpack, and in your backpack is a scanner that you can pull out to see if there’s anything around you. And you only have limited time, ’cause we have reserve power for the teleporter.”

So what do you want to do? You’ve been beamed down onto this ocean planet. You’re waist deep, you’re looking around. Do you want to explore? Do you want to just wait where you are, or do you want to teleport back to the ship? The choice is yours.

Michael McSheehan: I wanna explore.

Tim Villegas: You wanna explore. Of course you do. Okay, so take your cards. I don’t know if they’re shuffled or not, but go ahead and deal three cards face down.

Michael McSheehan: Three cards face down. Okay.

Tim Villegas: Yep. Okay, pick a card and tell me what you got.

Michael McSheehan: I got the five of clubs.

Tim Villegas: The five of clubs. Okay, here we go. So you are exploring this ocean planet, and as you are walking around waist deep, in the distance you see an island. And on the island are big, tall trees that have a fruit hanging down, and the fruit is glowing like a lantern. As you’re walking up to this island and you see the glowing fruit hanging from the trees, you watch one fall, and where it lands, something is starting to grow. So what do you do?

Michael McSheehan: I’m having a flashback to the movie Alien, with the little pods all over the ground, glowing and opening up. So all the water around me just turned purpley-blue from that moon…

Tim Villegas: It’s very purple. Very purple.

Michael McSheehan: Very purple. And not only is the water wet, but I’m now all wet.

Tim Villegas: Okay, get your scanner out of your backpack.

Michael McSheehan: Okay.

Tim Villegas: You take your scanner and you’re moving it toward the fruit pod that fell onto the ground and is growing, and you’re gonna do a quick analysis. You’re running it around, and on the screen of the scanner, what does it say? What does it tell you about the pod?

Michael McSheehan: It’s giving me a word I don’t understand, but it just looks like a fish. What I know as a fish.

Tim Villegas: It looks like a fish, okay. So it looks like a fish and you think it’s a fish. All right, what I’m gonna do is…

Michael McSheehan: It’s got really long…

Tim Villegas: Yeah?

Michael McSheehan: It’s got really long… oh my God, wings. Fins.

Tim Villegas: A fish with really long fins, okay.

Michael McSheehan: Really long fins.

Tim Villegas: All right, tell you what. This is a perception check, so this is a D&D thing. I want you to roll, and if it’s over a two, we’ll learn a little bit more about the fish plant.

Michael McSheehan: It’s a four.

Tim Villegas: Okay, great. So on your scanner, you hit a couple buttons and you can see a bunch of different text about the fish. It’s an ancient alien fish that lives in these trees. It’s an actual fish plant. And as you watch, the fish plant is growing right in front of you. It grows really fast. In just the few seconds that you are there, you see another tree grow to full height, and then more fruit comes and starts populating. And what you also realize is there are trees like this all over the island, and more and more of these pods keep falling on the ground. So more trees are growing and growing. So what do you do?

Michael McSheehan: Knowing me, I stand there in awe, watching how fast these things are growing.

Tim Villegas: There you go. What’s the water like? Is it still purple, or is it different now?

Michael McSheehan: The water is going back to a neutral color. It’s not in the happy goldens yet, but it’s, let’s say, a lavender.

Tim Villegas: Okay, it’s lavender. A light purple.

Michael McSheehan: I’m both intrigued and still a little on edge.

Tim Villegas: All right. You have a choice. You can keep exploring, you can wait around and watch the fish trees, or you can teleport back to the ship. What would you like to do?

Michael McSheehan: We’re on reserve, so I’m probably supposed to teleport back.

Tim Villegas: Okay. All right, so here we go. Cora tells you you only have time for one more thing, just one more minute, so flip over one card and tell me what you got.

Michael McSheehan: Ten of spades.

Tim Villegas: Ten of spades. All right, we got spades, we got the ten. So as you are watching the fish trees grow, all of a sudden the water around you starts to move. Not quite in waves, but like a whirlpool. If you’ve ever been in a wave machine at an amusement park, all of a sudden you’re rocking back and forth, and the waves are getting stronger.

And then you hear something in your earpiece. It’s Cora. She’s saying, “Pip, it’s time to get back to the ship. I’m gonna beam you back in five, four, three, two, one.” The light swallows you again, and now you are back aboard the ship. A little bit wet, but alive. You see the ocean planet in the window of the ship, and you say, “Wow, that was something.”

And Cora says, “Since you’re the first explorer of that planet, you get to name it.” So what is the name of the planet that you just explored?

Michael McSheehan: Ironically, I wanna call it Dusty.

Tim Villegas: Dusty is the name.

Michael McSheehan: It was the name of my childhood dog.

Tim Villegas: There you go. Dusty is the name of the planet. So you have been the first to explore Dusty. What is the thing that you will remember about Dusty the planet?

Michael McSheehan: I will remember the water changing color.

Tim Villegas: There you go. All right, Pip, time to go back to sleep and on to your next adventure. You didn’t flip over one of the cards, but some things have to remain a mystery. So thank you for playing.

Michael McSheehan: Awesome. That was fun.

Tim Villegas: That was fun, right? It’s different every time. It’s beautiful.

Michael McSheehan: I like it.

Tim Villegas: All right. Michael McSheehan, thank you so much for being on the Think Inclusive Podcast. We really appreciate it.

That was Michael McSheehan. Here’s what I’m taking with me.

Michael said that if every learner is in a small group and the student with a disability is doing the same content off to the side with a para, that doesn’t count as participation. Same room, same content, still not the same experience. The comparison point is always what the other learners are doing.

And then there’s his challenge to read the accommodations page of the IEP and look for even one support that is there to help a student participate and belong. Not to hit a goal. To actually belong. Most of us would have a hard time finding one.

One practical step for educators: pick one student and one lesson this week. Watch for just one of the features we talked about, participation. Is the learner in the same arrangement as their classmates, doing the same kind of learning, with a real role? Write down what you see, and then bring it to your team.

We’ll link the Five Features resource in the show notes, and we’ll also let you know when the book is out. Share this episode with a colleague who’s building inclusive schools. Rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, and follow Think Inclusive wherever you get your podcasts. If you have something to share, please email me at tvillegas@mcie.org.

Now, let’s roll the credits. Think Inclusive is brought to you by me, Tim Villegas. This show is a proud production of the Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education. Writing help from Claude, editing by Ray from Internet, scheduling and extra production help from Jill Wagoner. Our original music is by Miles Kredich, with extra vibes from Melod.ie. Awake Among the Stars is adapted from Alone Among the Stars by Takuma Okada. You can find the original role-playing game at the link in our show notes.

Big thanks to our sponsors, IXL and Inclusive Schooling. Visit ixl.com/inclusive and inclusiveschooling.com/mcie-behavior. If you’ve made it this far, you’re officially part of the Think Inclusive inclusion crew.

Want to help us move the needle forward for inclusion? Head to mcie.org and click the Donate button. Give $25, $55, $100, or even $1,000. It helps us keep partnering with schools and districts to move inclusive practices forward and support educators doing the work. Find us on the socials almost everywhere @thinkinclusive.

Thanks for hanging out. And remember, inclusion always works.