Inclusion, PLN’s, and Moore.

As a high school student in the late 1990’s I attended a medium-sized school – big enough to perhaps not know all of my peers’ names, but small enough to visually recognize just about everybody as also being in my school. This included many students that I would see in some places (for example, around the gym classes, a shop class, or when we were eating lunch) and not in others, as they had other things/classes that they would do while I was in History/English/Precalculus 12. This was Special Education in the late 1990’s, which was a positive development vs. historical approaches but which we’d view today as being a segregative model. My Personal Learning Network as a student was narrowed through these practices to a degree I won’t ever know, as interactions were limited institutionally based on a timetable meant to mimic a traditional ‘working day’ in the classic school-industrial model: we might have had a shared lunch break, but we worked in different ‘departments’.

In 1999 I understood (and was told that, by both of my teacher parents) this model was progressive versus the exclusions of yesteryear, but I’ve come to realize that limiting opportunities is never a good thing. Earlier this year Dr. Shelley Moore spoke at my school as the keynote speaker of a Pro-D event/day, so when her piece came up as part of our weekly readings I was brought back to her talk. Some of what she spoke of that day – her story and in particular her 2 years of experience in an American school – are familiar from the talk, as is the following ‘vibe’:

“Inclusive education is about providing opportunities with supports to all students to have access to, and contribute to, an education rich in content and experience with their peers. Period.”

Strong verbiage… punchy and saleable… but the idea that someone with limited experience as a classroom teacher vs. their much longer career as a paid speaker has ‘the answer’ should also be viewed carefully. I suspect some teachers, and those advising them/being paid to speak to them at Pro-D events back when Chrétien was still giving out forceful handshakes, might have spoke with such definitive authority when I was in school – and yet we’ve moved further since then. Dr. Moore is a proponent of revolutionarily-styled ideas, with the full (moral and pecuniary) and enthusiastic support of the same administrations that refuse to adequately support classroom teachers… if she is revolutionary, though, why do those in power love her so much? She is in an interesting position as a result, but is ultimately trying to benefit students at the core of her speeches. It is not her fault that her general ‘try harder’ message is tough for many people in the profession she used to be involved with to be excited about – our working conditions aren’t within her control. I certainly believe she means well, overall, and have no objections with her definition of inclusion at this point in time.

My thinking about inclusion and its inherent ability to keep a PLN as diverse and interesting as possible has changed since the late 1990’s, and here’s the thing: I bet it’s going to change again by the 2030’s. It could include ideas next year that haven’t yet occurred to me, or to any professional speakers I might hear from. I believe the key is to be humble, and not to ever believe that you or anyone else knows ‘the answer’. If pressed, I’ll posit that a possible key towards development around the idea of inclusion as an educator is to take on new information/viewpoints as if becomes available to you, and combine it with other trainings/ideals/morals you have into the most productive and human gestalt of practice practicable at work in order to benefit the most humans possible. I would also caution against following any particular viewpoint as doctrinal, because what sounds progressive at one moment can sometimes end up looking negative at another point in time. We’ll see, in the future.