The 5 Ps of Inclusive Education with Dr. Shelley Moore ~ 1101

Tim Villegas
Hi friends, I’m Tim Villegas, from the Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education. And you’re listening to Think Inclusive, our podcast that brings you conversations about inclusive education, and what inclusion looks like in the real world. Today is the start of a new season. Season 11 actually. Yep, I’ve been podcasting since 2012. And every year, I get a little bit better, I think. And this season is going to really be something.

We are kicking it off with an amazing guest, one of my favorite educators of all time: Dr. Shelley Moore. Originally from Edmonton and now based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Dr. Shelley Moore is a highly sought-after teacher, researcher, speaker, and storyteller, and has worked with school districts and community organizations around the world in supporting and promoting equity for all learners.

Her first book, One Without the Other, is a bestseller, and her new book is scheduled to come out sometime this year. Shelley completed her undergraduate degree in Special Education at the University of Alberta, her Master’s at Simon Fraser University, and recently received a PhD from the University of British Columbia.

For this episode, Shelley shares her research findings on the key factors that contribute to successful inclusion, including positive attitudes, placement in inclusive classrooms, shared community and learning experiences with peers, purposeful goals, and planning for all learners from the start. Dr. Moore also highlights the need for professional development that supports teachers in implementing inclusive practices and shares her insights on the current state of inclusive education in Canada.

One of the great things about our conversation is that Shelley gives examples from secondary schools. In fact, that is what her dissertation was all about. So get ready for a fascinating conversation.

Thank you so much to our incredible sponsor for this week’s episode, Changing Perspectives, an international nonprofit that partners with schools and districts to create inclusive and equitable learning communities for all students. They offer customizable teacher training, family workshops, and curriculum resources. They’ve already helped over 300,000 students, 12,000 teachers, and 500 schools. Visit their website at changingperspectivesnow.org to learn more and schedule a free meeting.

Make sure you hang around until the end of the interview with Shelley where we both answer this episode’s mystery question. And at the end of the episode, I’m introducing another new segment for Season 11 called Free Time. After a short break, my interview with Dr. Shelley Moore.

Shelley Moore
One of my faves.

Tim Villegas
So you are in prized company because you’re a two-timer.

Shelley Moore
I am?

Tim Villegas
You’re a two-timer now. Katie Novak is a two-timer. Julie Causton is a two-timer.

Shelley Moore
Love them both.

Tim Villegas
Paul Occlusive, two-timer. The originals. And now you—two-timer name company.

Shelley Moore
I’m honored to be part of that role.

Tim Villegas
So anyways, I should have said Dr. Shelley Moore when I do because you have your doctorate. So how did you feel?

Shelley Moore
It’s the hardest thing I ever did. Two years. It was so hard. And I can’t even believe that I actually did it. But now that it’s done, I feel amazing. There are so many things that I want to do now that that’s off my plate.

Tim Villegas
Right? And you were already doing all the things.

Shelley Moore
I know, but now I can do things like I want to be a gardener and I want to learn how to barbecue really well.

Tim Villegas
Okay, what would you like to barbecue?

Shelley Moore
Well, I’m from Alberta and Alberta is where the really good beef is. All I know is I burn it all the time. I didn’t understand medium well, well done. I want to really perfect a good steak. So when my brother comes to visit, I’ll be like, “You want a steak? How do you want it?” And I could just whip it right up, and it’s perfect.

Tim Villegas
We’re going on a number of trips this year. We’re doing our road trip, and then it’s my wife and I’s 20th anniversary this year. So we are going out of the country. I keep telling Brianna—that’s my wife’s name—I really want one of the grills that’s like a flat iron grill. She’s like, “Do you want to go on vacation or do you want a grill?” I like vacation.

Shelley Moore
I know. I have all of these dreams now that I have the capacity in my brain to hold other things other than a thesis. It was hard. I’m really proud of myself. It’s not something that I anticipated would be something I would do in my life. And yeah, I’m pretty proud of myself. It won an award recently. If anyone out there is working on their PhD, just keep going because one day it’ll be done. And it is a pretty great feeling.

Tim Villegas
Well, you know, I did read it.

Shelley Moore
Did you?

Tim Villegas
Yeah, I read it.

Shelley Moore
Sure, Tim.

Tim Villegas
Okay, so when I say that I read a dissertation, I didn’t read it word for word. But I did go through the table of contents. And I looked at certain things. And that’s actually where I put a lot of the questions. I’m really interested in the path forward. I don’t know if you’re feeling this sense of optimism about inclusive practices, but I am.

Shelley Moore
I mean, COVID has been hard on everybody. It put everybody back about a decade. But you know that saying, “Three steps forward, two steps back”? I think we did two big steps back. But I also feel like COVID helped us. Everybody in education realized that there are a lot of things that aren’t working for all kids. It gave us permission to let go of some things. It forced us all to be innovative.

Now that we’re coming back to some sense of normalcy, we’re pairing that with a huge shift in understanding privilege and the role that diversity, equity, and inclusion play in the betterment of society. There are things lining up that haven’t lined up before. People are in the midst of it right now, and it is hard, it is messy. But I agree with you—I feel like we’re starting to transition from the two steps back to seven steps forward.

Not that it feels easy, but I feel like people’s vision has changed. There’s not just a practice shift happening, but some perspective shifts that are critical to this work.

Tim Villegas
Yeah, I agree. I’m hopeful with what’s going on in Washington and California and other states. I want to talk about your dissertation and the focus you had on secondary schools. That’s a question we get a lot: what about inclusion in middle and high school? Lots of examples in elementary.

Shelley Moore
That’s why I did it. As a secondary teacher, I wanted to figure this out for the students I was working with because I was in high school working with kids with intellectual and developmental disabilities. I wondered, what does this look like for them? Whenever I was trying to find examples and professional development, it was always K–7 or K–5. If we figure this out in grade 12, don’t talk to me about grade five.

When I was doing my literature review for my dissertation, there’s not a lot. My literature review is enough—I got 20 studies—but there’s not a lot of secondary research out there. This is a huge gap and the exact reason why I chose secondary academics. If there’s no research and no one has seen it, I understand why people say it’s not possible.

Tim Villegas
In your literature review, you give this great history of inclusive education and how the practices have evolved from the Canadian and American perspectives. One of the points was about LRE. Let me see if I can sum it up for you, and let me know if I got it right.

The conception of LRE—least restrictive environment—was always about including learners with their typical peers in general education classrooms. Great intent, and curriculum like everyone’s getting the same thing in the same place. But that’s not how people interpreted it. Putting this decision on IEP teams about where LRE is ended up being problematic. Did I get that right?

Shelley Moore
Yeah. It turned into a very subjective decision about what LRE is. A big conversation in the disability field is if a student’s not successful, from a social perspective, it’s because something in the condition isn’t right, not something in the kid. But if a team is looking at a student through a medical model and they’re not having success, that could be interpreted as an LRE decision instead of “How do we fix the conditions in the environment?”

It puts a lot of emphasis on individual student success from a medical perspective, but also puts a big decision on a team with completely different philosophies and very subjective criteria. There’s no requirement for people to move away from the medical model. The entire special education system is dependent on it. Your determination of what is LRE could change depending on the teacher. That makes for a lot of different interpretations, even if the goal has good intent.

Tim Villegas
Do you think this is where the idea of a continuum happened?

Shelley Moore
I think continuum of services also got misunderstood. To me, a continuum of services means a student and family get to determine where a child goes, not that a school offers a continuum of services. When the decision comes down to a panel that often doesn’t involve the student or parent, it’s not a continuum for families and students—it’s a continuum of what’s available for a district to choose from.

The intent was to offer a continuum of services to families. But parents rarely have a choice. So it’s not a continuum for them. It’s a continuum for the system. Intentionally trying to move in the right direction, but what has actually happened is more students have been put into specialized placements and become less included.

Well-intentioned people only know what they know and what they’ve been taught. That makes the decision rely on someone who might not know what to do, and that changes the trajectory of students’ lives. Rather than the emphasis being, “If a student’s not successful, the attention goes to the place, not the kid.” How do you change the place? What supports are we putting into the place? That shifts toward the social model and gives more opportunities for students to decide where their best place to learn is.

Tim Villegas
In your history section, you describe the different paths regarding education policy and inclusion. You talked about the Salamanca Statement, which I don’t think I remember learning about. Then I realized it was part of the UN Charter on Disabilities.

Shelley Moore
Yeah, it was pretty significant in Canada for shifting things. Quite a few countries and governments aligned to it. But you can say you’re doing something—what does that actually look like in practice?

One of the biggest differences between the U.S. and Canada is Canada doesn’t have any policy. We align, and it’s in the charter, but we don’t have the same type of laws and compliance that America does. There are pros and cons to both. I’d love to get a law into place. In New Brunswick, for example, they’re one of the only places that does have some laws, but it’s creating pushback.

Tim Villegas
So even though some provinces probably include more kids and have more of a history of inclusion, the policies that protect that aren’t as strong as in the U.S.—except that in practice, the U.S. historically hasn’t included.

Shelley Moore
Honestly, we need the best of both. There is an expectation that all provincial and territorial ministries provide inclusive education. That has influenced a lot of belief. Across the board, more students are included in Canada. It’s not perfect, but for example, in Ontario, they’re starting to pass policy around de-streaming or de-tracking.

People think they’re being inclusive because they’re including the kids who are there, but they’re not asking who’s missing and who’s getting sent away. Canada isn’t a federal education system, so every province is different.

In British Columbia, where I’m from, there’s a fundamental culture that inclusion is important—probably more than anywhere I’ve been. People know we need to do it. It doesn’t mean there isn’t pushback or that kids aren’t excluded, but from teachers, families, and administrators, we’re on the same page that we need to move in this direction.

Do we have enough resources? No. Does everyone know how to do it? No. But the underlying belief is there. So we don’t need policy as much as we need infrastructure and resources. In other places, there’s policy and laws, but no policy can force someone to believe it’s the right thing to do. There’s no law about moral imperative.

It’s a balance: how do you shift mindset and provide resources? The people who push back are often the loudest—parents, teachers, administrators. That’s why I think a continuum of services makes sense from a student point of view. It’s not about forcing people together for the sake of policy, but allowing students and families to say, “You will receive equal access and support in any of these settings. Which one is good for you?”

The opportunity makes it equal; the choice makes it equitable. But that’s not how continuum of services is used at all. There are so many moving parts. Some places believe strongly in inclusion, but kids are still sitting with a para, not peers. Other schools have self-contained classrooms but want to blow it up and start fresh.

I’d rather work with a school that knows they have growth to do than one that thinks they’re doing it and has nothing else to learn. Around the world, interpretations of inclusion vary. I can’t tell you how many places say, “We’re inclusive,” but kids with intellectual disabilities are still behind locked doors. Inclusion means all means all. It’s also about who’s not here.

Few of us grew up in truly inclusive contexts. This is shifting a paradigm, practice, thinking, and infrastructure in a system that wasn’t designed to be inclusive. There are some deficit legacy monsters out there.

Tim Villegas
Let’s talk about the research you did and some key takeaways as far as what needs to change—maybe specifically in secondary schools. Some schools are getting it right, some have the mindset but not the practice. What are the big things we need to change about how we include learners?

Shelley Moore
One of my favorite parts of my dissertation was the literature review. I looked for studies that included students with intellectual disabilities in secondary academic classrooms. I’ve always had this hunch: these kids hold the answers to education. What they need is what everybody needs.

When I looked at what all these studies had in common, five big ideas came out. And these apply to every kid in the system. I call them the five Ps. They build on each other. Ready?

Number one: Positive attitude. Do you believe it’s possible? Do you believe all kids can learn in any context? I’ve never met someone who said to my face, “They can’t be here because they can’t learn.” But decisions people make—like determining LRE—are based on hidden biases about presuming competence.

If you don’t think it’s possible, you’re not going to enroll the student. Research showed that in high schools, students were enrolled in academics up to grade eight, then it dropped off. These were well-meaning people, but they thought, “It’s not meaningful for them.” That’s why attitude is the easiest and hardest barrier. It costs nothing, but there’s no law to make people believe it.

Number two: Placement. Students have to actually be in an inclusive classroom or program. They have to be enrolled. This seems obvious, but a lot of kids aren’t even at the school—they’re sent away. Who are we planning for? Who’s missing? Do all students have opportunities to learn electives and academics with their peers?

Number three: Peers. Students need shared community and learning experiences with each other, not just adults. This was the biggest challenge in our schools. Kids were there, the attitude was there, but students with disabilities were working with adults, not peers. Proximity matters. Shared experiences lead to interaction and friendship—but it can’t always be a helping role.

Number four: Purposeful goals. If students are included in general education classrooms, their goals have to align with the classroom, not be disconnected or contradictory. IEPs should align with community, curriculum, assessment, and accommodations. They should act as a blueprint, not a separate plan.

Number five: Plan for all from the start. This pushes back against what we were taught—adapting and modifying for individuals. Retrofitting makes inclusion harder and resource-heavy. Designing accessible lessons from the start—UDL principles—makes it easier for everyone. Teachers need support to take grade-level standards and make them accessible and challenging for all students before the class even walks in.

When those conditions are right, amazing things happen. In my research, two students with intellectual disabilities passed English 11 for credit because the environment was designed for them. Most people think that’s impossible.

Tim Villegas
Interesting. Yeah. Next book—are you dropping this knowledge in the next book?

Shelley Moore
Yes, because I tried to do a book and a dissertation at the same time. Many people are waiting, but the next book is about evolving IEPs to align with the community so students are placed in purposeful ways.

Tim Villegas
Aren’t there tools now that have planning matrices so educators can align IEP goals with inclusive placement?

Shelley Moore
There are, but those matrices are often based on deficit skill areas or over-focus on social, behavioral, and communication goals. In my research, not one IEP had a curricular goal derived from grade-level curriculum. They were all individualized personal, social, or behavioral goals. Everyone else is learning curriculum—they should too.

That brings me back to the fifth P: planning for all from the start. Teachers often say, “I don’t have time to adapt and modify.” It’s not the para’s role either. So kids end up waiting around or working on social goals while everyone else learns curriculum. That leads to challenging behavior, anxiety, disengagement, and non-attendance. Then we say, “This placement isn’t successful.” Of course it’s not—they weren’t designed for.

This isn’t just about kids with disabilities. We’re coming out of a pandemic where nobody is where they should be. We can’t plan for where kids should be and then adapt for everyone who isn’t there. We need to design for the kids in front of us now.

I wasn’t taught how to do that. I was taught to adapt and modify. No wonder people push back against inclusion. No wonder streaming and tracking happen. If we expect teachers to adapt for every kid, it makes sense they resist.

So the fifth P is the most important: how do we support teachers to collaborate and design lessons that are responsive to the variability of their class before the class even walks in?

Tim Villegas
It was lost on me until you said they were all Ps—the five Ps.

Shelley Moore
Positive attitude, placement, peers, purpose, plan for all.

Tim Villegas
Nice.

Shelley Moore
That was one of my favorite parts of my research because I got to look at schools and see what was in place, where they grew, and what their next steps were. The actual research involved working with teachers and teaching them how to do this. We had professional development over the year where a classroom teacher, a gen ed teacher, and a special education teacher came together. We showed them how to design for all, and every single one of them shifted.

The big finding was this makes it easier for everybody. It helps everyone out. Two of the seven case study students passed the class for credit because the conditions were right. They showed evidence at grade level and received credit for English 11—something most people think is impossible.

Tim Villegas
So what was different about the professional development the educators received compared to what’s happening now? When I say PD, most people have an idea of what that is.

Shelley Moore
This wasn’t a training. I purposely don’t use that word because if we expect every teacher to do the exact same thing, how do we expect them not to do the same thing with kids? If we want teachers to be responsive to kids, we have to be responsive to teachers.

We moved away from everyone doing the same thing to everyone going through a similar learning process. The PD was tied to an inquiry model. They joined by choice because they wanted to learn about inclusive practices. We presented new, practical information each time. When it came to implementation, they got to decide what to try.

They scanned their class, determined needs, and chose which practices to implement. They had time to plan and pick what was meaningful to them and their kids. That’s different from the “implement this with fidelity” model. The process was the same for everyone—ask questions, reflect, plan next steps—but the content was responsive to their context.

This honors teachers’ autonomy and their ability to make professional decisions about their communities. It’s powerful because it doesn’t strip the diversity of teachers, which is what we’re telling them not to do with kids.

Tim Villegas
Makes sense. You’re developing educators like you want them to develop learners. That’s not a big leap, but we need more PD like that.

Shelley Moore
Absolutely. It’s starting to happen—series of sessions instead of one-off workshops. Here’s something new, let’s reflect, learn from each other. One thing I learned working with Katie Novak this week was how she balanced time for us to talk and time for people to learn from each other.

Education is very colonial—one person knows everything and bestows knowledge to empty vessels. That’s how we treat kids and teachers. Teachers have an important role as resources to each other. If we want kids to learn together, we have to model that in PD.

It’s more sustainable when I’m gone and they keep working together. The research around inquiry-based PD is profound for shifting practice. If the goal is to shift practice, we can’t just tell them what to do.

Tim Villegas
I’d like to know what you learned from the students with intellectual disabilities.

Shelley Moore
That was my favorite part of the research. I interviewed teachers and students in the classrooms. I wanted to know how this experience was for the kids—what they liked, what was hard, what worked, what didn’t.

I talked to at least 50 kids. Every single student believed inclusion was important. One student said, “I don’t understand your question.” He’d been with the same peers since kindergarten. For him, inclusion was normal. That non-response said a lot: “Why wouldn’t they be here?”

The kids with intellectual disabilities all communicated that they liked being there and had friends. But there was a subgroup that emerged—students with less visible disabilities like learning disabilities or autism without intellectual disability. They weren’t my case studies, but they had fascinating insights.

One student said, “I feel like we’re all treated the same, but that doesn’t meet my needs. Everyone learns differently. If we’re all treated the same, I won’t be successful.” That was powerful.

This subgroup also reported the least sense of belonging. When I dug deeper, they had the fewest peer interactions. It showed how important community is—and that we can’t just focus on kids with the most visible disabilities.

Another finding: in one class, a student had a one-on-one para and didn’t interact with peers at all during any observation. That reinforced how adult proximity can block peer relationships.

The student voice was the most valuable part of the study. Their belief in inclusion was strong, but their perceptions of belonging and equity were nuanced. They nailed the difference between equality and equity. I almost didn’t include this question because I was late in my dissertation, but I’m so glad I did. It made the research come alive.

Tim Villegas
After a short break, Shelley and I answer the mystery question.

The mystery question is: Which magazine would you like to be on the cover of?

Shelley Moore
That’s hard because there’s my favorite magazine and then the one I should pick. I’d love to be on National Geographic because they have the best visuals and interactive apps. It’d be so cool.

Tim Villegas
I don’t subscribe to magazines anymore, but in my previous life, I would’ve wanted to be on Spin or Rolling Stone because I was a musician. Now maybe Education Week.

Shelley Moore
Or Time—top 100 influencers.

Tim Villegas
With my headphones and microphone!

Shelley Moore
I’d buy it. My dog made it into Canadian Geographic. It was a proud day.

Tim Villegas
That’s so nice.

Shelley Moore
This was Finley. He passed last summer. He was an Irish Terrier. They had a contest on Instagram—tag Canadian Geographic. I love taking photos, and he was such a good subject. We got in twice in the “Take Your Pet” section. His memory lives on in Canadian Geographic.

Tim Villegas
Absolutely, forever. Dr. Shelley Moore, thank you so much for being on Think Inclusive.

Shelley Moore
Thanks so much, Tim. Always a pleasure.

Tim Villegas
One of the best things about having a podcast is figuring out how to spice things up. The mystery question will now be a regular segment, and something else I’m calling Free Time. In classrooms, free time is when learners aren’t engaged in structured activity. For the podcast, it’ll be different each time.

For this episode, I have two podcast recommendations:

1. Beyond Six Seconds by Carolyn Kiel. She recently had Nate Shalev on to talk about trans and autistic inclusion at work. Fascinating conversation.
2. The Lucky Few. Their recent episode is “Included, Seen and Heard: The Impact of Successful Inclusion,” featuring a principal and two teachers from a Brooklyn school highlighted in The New York Times.

Check out both wherever you listen to podcasts.

Thanks again to our sponsor, Changing Perspectives. Love Think Inclusive? Rate us on Spotify or leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Email me at tvillegas@mcie.org or become a patron for extra content. This week, I’m posting 11 minutes of extra audio from my interview with Shelley. Go to patreon.com/thinkinclusivepodcast to sign up.

Thanks to our patrons: Carol Q., Aaron P., Jarrett T., Joiner A., Cathy V., Mark C., Gabby M., and Kathleen T. For more information about inclusive education or how MCIE can partner with your school or district, visit mcie.org.

Think Inclusive is written, edited, designed, mixed, and mastered by me, Tim Villegas. Original music by Miles Credits. Additional music from Melody. Thanks for your time and attention, and remember: inclusion always works.

Shelley Moore
So Katie Novak and I have been working virtually with Washington and California. On Monday we met for the first time in person. It’s like we’ve known each other forever. We had an absolute blast and are both wiped out, but it was so much fun.

Tim Villegas
That’s amazing.

Shelley Moore
So much cake.

Tim Villegas
Are you a cake person?

Shelley Moore
No, but it’s one of the metaphors. I mean, I’ll eat it, obviously. But it’s one of the metaphors, so people either feed me cake or baked potatoes.

Tim Villegas
From MCIE.