Investigate Ways in Which Trauma May Be Exacerbated in Educational Settings

129

Preparing Trauma-Sensitive Teachers: Strategies for Teacher Educators

Connie Honsinger, Ph.D Chesterfield County Public Schools

Mavis Hendricks Brown, Ph.D. University of Richmond

Abstract

Many children who attend school have or will experience some type of trauma that may impact cognition, behavior, and relationships (Van Der Kolk, 2014). The result of these adverse experiences is often diminished concentration, memory, organization, and language skills that can exacerbate maladjustment in the school setting (Ogata, 2017). According to the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (2016), difficulties displayed by children impacted by trauma can also include poor social skills, increased aggression, an inability to trust, dysregulation, fearfulness, anxiety, and avoidant behaviors. Despite how common exposure to trauma is and the significant impact it can have on students and the classroom, few teachers are prepared to recognize and respond appropriately. This paper will provide information and resources that can assist teacher educators to better prepare future teachers to address these concerns and build resilience in all students particularly those impacted by trauma.

Keywords: Trauma, Classroom, Strategies

“When little people are overwhelmed by big emotions, it is our job to share our calm, not join their chaos.” L. R. Knost "There is no more effective neurobiological intervention than a safe relationship." “Relationships are the agents of change and the most powerful therapy is love.” -- Bruce Perry, PhD, MD, researcher & child psychiatrist

130

Trauma has no boundaries with regard to age, gender, socioeconomic status, race,

ethnicity, geography, or sexual orientation and it is often a common experience of individuals

who struggle with mental health disorders. Students who have experiences of trauma exist in

every school and community. There is a strong correlation between students who have

experienced trauma and poor school performance (Goodman, Miller, & Olatunji, 2011). Given

these concerns, it has become critically important to help prepare teachers with the skills and

strategies necessary to successfully work with students who have been impacted by trauma.

Virginia has taken the lead in focusing on issues that impact children with the

establishment of the Children’s Cabinet by Governor Ralph Northam in June of 2018. The

executive order identified a number of priorities; (a) Early childhood development and school

readiness, (b) Nutrition and food security, and (c) Systems of care and safety for school-aged

youth. One of the goals of the governor’s policy council on PreK-12 education in Virginia was to

identify significant issues and make recommendations on how to improve public education.

Equity and opportunity for every student was described as a high priority and within this

category the council acknowledged the importance of promoting alternatives to punitive school

discipline. Recommendations further supported the implementation of positive behavioral

supports, restorative practices, and making Virginia a national leader in using trauma-informed

instruction in all of its public schools to support student success.

In addition, the governor created the Trauma-Informed Care for Children Work Group

that was charged with developing recommendations to enhance student safety and to support a

consistent, evidence-based, and culturally-competent statewide response to childhood trauma.

Although the groups are in the preliminary stages of work, one recommendation that has come

131

forward is for child and family-serving agencies to adopt the Substance Abuse and Mental

Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) definition and framework of trauma-informed care.

The Virginia Department of Education has also reflected this emphasis on trauma

education within teacher licensure and recertification requirements, approved August of 2018.

According to the State Board of Education, Licensure Regulations for School Personnel (Article

2.1) Human Development and Learning, skills in this area shall contribute to an understanding of

the physical, social, emotional, speech and language, and intellectual development of children

and the ability to use this understanding in guiding learning experiences and relating

meaningfully to students. Highlighted within this article is an understanding of trauma, including

child abuse and neglect and other adverse childhood experiences and family disruptions (VDOE,

2018). According to Tara McDaniel, director of teacher education in Virginia, there are no plans

at the moment to include any specific professional development regarding adverse childhood

experiences and understanding trauma, as that is currently left up to the individual locality (T.

McDaniel, personal communication, January 23, 2019).

Developing a Trauma-Informed Approach

Given the absence of direction on the specific content related to trauma, what should

teacher educators include in their teacher preparation programs? Currently the child abuse and

neglect recognition and intervention training curriculum guide on the Virginia Department of

Education website (Attachment A, Superintendent Memo #209) provides some information

regarding child abuse recognition and reporting, promoting resiliency, and resources. In

addition, information from The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

(SAMHSA, 2014) can assist teacher educators with resources on trauma-informed care and

trauma-sensitive practices. Both are excellent resources however, what are the most important

132

concepts teachers should know prior to walking into the classroom? How can teacher educators

help future teachers develop a trauma-sensitive lens, what skills are needed, and what does this

look like in practice?

Institutions as well as many school districts and organizations have looked to local

expertise for direction in providing education in becoming trauma-informed. The Greater

Richmond Trauma Informed Community Network (TICN) is a diverse group of individuals,

convened by Greater Richmond SCAN (Stop Child Abuse Now), who share a commitment

towards the creation of a more trauma informed and resilient community within the Greater

Richmond region. This network includes a number of committee’s to address this mission

including a training committee that has developed a common language and understanding around

our community on the impact of adverse childhood experiences and strategies to build individual

and community resilience.

Members of the training committee provide community workshops free of charge as well

as presentations to specific organizations upon request using research-based information and best

practices. The TICN Outcomes Committee has worked to develop an evaluation plan to measure

the collective impact and value of the TICN in the community. Knowledge is assessed using a

variety of methods including pre and post-tests, evaluations, qualitative feedback, and

assessments to identify changes in how individuals, organizations, and/ or systems function and

interact as a result (Greater Richmond SCAN, n.d.).

The Virginia Department of Behavioral Health, responsible for promoting behavioral

health wellness, has also launched their Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Initiative with its

Master Trainer series in partnership with Dr. Robert Anda, one of the original researchers of the

ACE study. Two cohorts of trainers have participated in this two-day in depth training with the

133

charge to conduct a minimum of three additional trainings in their own communities across the

state. This training is provided free of charge and trainers are listed on the prevention works

website (Virginia Prevention Works, 2019).

According to SAMHSA (2014), a trauma-informed approach includes four Rs; (1)

Realize the widespread impact of trauma and understand potential paths for recovery, (2)

Recognize the signs and symptoms of trauma in clients/ students, families, staff, and others

involved with the system, (3) Respond by fully integrating knowledge about trauma into policies,

procedures, and practices, and (4) Resist re-traumatization. Using this framework, teacher

educators can address student needs and promote learning that will prepare them to work with K-

12 students who have been impacted by trauma. Key concepts, skills, and strategies within this

framework will be addressed in this article.

Realize: The Impact of Trauma

The first step to becoming trauma-informed is the realization that trauma is pervasive in

the lives of children. It is not isolated to students with emotional and behavioral disabilities or

select schools or communities but exists everywhere. According to the U. S. Department of

Health and Human Services (DHHS) (2013), an estimated 679,000 children were victimized by

maltreatment that included neglect, physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. Nearly a half

million children who experience physical and sexual abuse and neglect are placed into foster care

each year (Dwyer & Noonan, 2005). An estimated one in five Americans was sexually molested

as a child, one in four was beaten by a parent, and one in eight children witnessed their mother

being physically assaulted (VanDerKolk, 2014). Nearly 11 million children under the age of 18

grow up in households with alcoholic relatives; 10 million have experienced the incarceration of

a parent and live below the poverty level in unsafe communities (Paccione-Dyszlewski, 2016).

134

There is little question, that for many students, adverse childhood experiences or ACEs

are common and often highly interrelated; where one ACE occurs, there are usually others (ACE

Interface, 2015). There is a significant dose-response relationship that indicates the more adverse

experiences; the more likely an individual is to experience mental, physical, behavioral health,

and social problems (Felitti et al., 1998). Adverse experiences are also more likely to be

transmitted from one generation to the next repeating toxic levels of stress and unhealthy coping

patterns.

Teacher educators will want to keep in mind that some future educators they work with

have their own histories of trauma (Carello & Butler, 2015). Statistics regarding undergraduate

college students indicate as high as 66-94% report exposure to one or more traumatic events

(Frazier et al., 2009). The introduction of information regarding adverse childhood experiences

can trigger individual responses that pre-service teachers may not be prepared for. As a result,

teacher educators need to be mindful of potential reactions and be prepared to provide

appropriate support and resources that may range from warning students of such a reaction prior

to the introduction of the material to the provision of resources for those who may want to seek

additional supports provided by the institution such as counseling.

Recognize: The Signs and Symptoms of Trauma

SAMHSA defines trauma as an event, series of events, or set of circumstances that is

experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life threatening and that has

lasting adverse effects on the individual’s functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or

spiritual well-being. In addition, the adverse events often involve intense fear and helplessness

and fall outside of one’s ability to cope (Perry, 2017). Examples of trauma include, but are not

limited to: experiencing or observing physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; childhood neglect;

135

having a family member with a mental health or substance use disorder; experiencing or

witnessing violence in the community or while serving in the military, poverty, and systemic

discrimination (NCTSN, 2016).

A significant number of youth have previously or will experience some type of trauma

prior to the age of 18 that may impact their ability to regulate their emotions, develop healthy

relationships, and achieve academic success in the school environment (Van Der Kolk, 2014).

Neurobiological studies have identified physiological changes to children’s brains due to

exposure to trauma potentially resulting in emotional and behavioral responses that can interfere

with learning (Center on the Developing Child, 2007). Children impacted by trauma may

experience diminished concentration, difficulty with memory and organization, increased

aggression and negative peer interactions, dysregulation, avoidant behaviors, and distrust of

teachers which can exacerbate challenges in the school setting (NCTSN, 2016; Ogata, 2017).

So how does a teacher know if a student has been affected by trauma? The answer is,

despite some academic, behavioral or social indicators, they may never know. We need to

presume the K-12 students we serve have a history of traumatic stress and exercise “universal

precautions” by creating systems of care that are trauma-informed (Hodas, 2005). Universal

design theories share some common principles with trauma-informed care such as using a

strengths-based, person centered, and solution-focused approach (Carello & Butler, 2015).

Respond: Using a Trauma-Sensitive Lens

Teachers working with children and adolescents in the school environment spend a

significant amount of time addressing difficult behaviors and assisting students with poor

academic achievement (Keller-Dupree, 2013; Perry, 2009). Educators who learn about the

impacts of trauma can have a greater understanding of some of the underlying reasons for

136

children’s inappropriate behavior in the classroom rather than misreading it as intentional

misconduct in need of more harsh consequences. A barrier to adopting a new and more trauma-

informed approach for educators who believe in a discipline-oriented or more confrontational

style for student misbehavior is the perception that one is “being soft” (Walkley & Cox, 2013).

Meeting the needs of students is a collaborative effort among all school professionals.

The strategies associated with a trauma-informed environment need to span a continuum of

prevention through intensive intervention using a multi-pronged approach that includes access to

both internal and external supports (Chafouleas, Johnson, Overstreet, & Santos, 2016). Internal

supports such as school counselors, social workers, psychologists, and special education teachers

can help to facilitate coping when students are experiencing stressors. The goal is to provide

universal (Tier 1) supports for all students by fostering a positive environment and skill building.

Students who need more intensive services (Tiers 2 & 3) may require more targeted or individual

interventions to support academic, social-emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs. These

supports can extend to adult needs for education as well as support with regards to practices,

data, and systems.

It has been well documented that trauma changes the way children and adolescents

interact with others and they may adopt behaviors or patterns of thinking that can compound

their problems and cause further trauma. Evidence-based approaches have demonstrated the

importance of breaking the cycle of trauma by considering the question, “What happened to

you?” instead of “What’s wrong with you?” (SAMHSA, 2012). Multi-tiered frameworks of

service delivery such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) are built on

foundations involving early identification of risk, varied levels of intervention designed to teach

skills and prevent more serious problems which align well with a trauma-informed approach.

137

The focus is on positive, preventive, and proactive approaches and a continual data-driven

evaluation of responses. It is critical for teacher preparation programs to address frameworks

such as PBIS. According to the National Education Association (2014), positive behavior

supports help teachers recognize the significance of classroom management and preventive

school discipline in order to maximize student success.

A shift in mindset puts the focus on what has happened to the child and what skills are

needed rather than focusing on discipline alone for behavior that may be a student’s attempt to

cope with elevated levels of stress (Greene, 2014). Failure to acknowledge the impact of

traumatic stress in children in the school setting may also lead to mislabeling students and giving

diagnoses such as attention deficit disorder and oppositional-defiant disorder among others

(Black, Woodsworth, Tremblay, & Carpenter, 2012). Further support for this movement came

from the recent reauthorization of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) which included the

provision for trauma-informed approaches, training for school personnel, and recognition of the

strong relationship between a positive school climate and student learning (NEA, 2014; Prewitt,

2016).

Many children who have experienced traumatic events view the world as a dangerous

place and are more vulnerable to stress which can sabotage their ability to manage emotions and

use coping mechanisms that can help to regulate their behavior. The development of learning

environments that feel safe and supportive require underlying foundations such as trusting

relationships, organization and structure, and engagement that builds on student strengths and

teaches self-regulation skills. Teachers who provide trauma-sensitive supports in their

classrooms can play a significant role in healing for students impacted by trauma but those

practices will also benefit the growth and development of all students with whom they work. It

138

is important for teacher educators to provide prospective teachers not only an understanding of

the importance of becoming a trauma-informed educator but specific strategies for K-12 teachers

to follow in order to become trauma-sensitive practitioners (Table 1). These strategies fall within

the three main components of the trauma-informed care movement.

Creating Safe Environments

The trauma-informed schools movement was created to encourage the development of

positive and supportive learning environments that are responsive to the needs of students who

have been impacted by trauma. Safety and consistency are cornerstones of a trauma-informed

educational practice. This is often created through the use of school-wide positive behavioral

interventions and supports and classroom expectations that are consistently taught and reinforced

(Cavanaugh, 2016). High rates of positive interactions help to build upon student strengths and

support feelings of success and self-efficacy as do increased peer supports and social skills

instruction (Sugai, O’Keefe, & Fallon, 2012). The classroom environment should be a place of

comfort and safety. The teacher can foster a caring classroom community where peers support

each other as well as modify the physical environment by considering desk arrangements, color,

lighting, music, scents, plants, and even alternative seating options. The environment can be the

first line of defense and set the stage for regulation to occur throughout the school day. Imagine

as a student coming from a loud and crowded bus ride, navigating through a busy hallway with a

school bell ringing to a classroom where the teacher greets you by name with a smile, lights are

lowered, the room is organized, there is calming music playing, and the schedule for the day is

clearly displayed in the front of the classroom with the expectations outlined for the beginning

routine. All students thrive and feel safe in an environment where the expectations are clear,

routines are predictable and consistent, and students know what to expect (Sugai & Horner,

139

2010). Research indicates school and classroom environments benefit from the integration of

trauma-informed strategies within the PBIS framework which focuses on improving school

climate, reducing problem behaviors, and enhancing academic achievement (Chafouleas et al.,

2016).

Building Relationships and Connections

Students who have experienced trauma may have some difficulty forming healthy

relationships. Discouraged children often have a negative view of self, others, and the world

which may translate to maladaptive ways of dealing with others and school related tasks. Safe,

predictable, and consistent relationships can help to bring the brain back into regulation allowing

students to then be able to access higher level thinking and reasoning skills (Perry, 2011).

Supportive relationships with students that provide unconditional positive regard can promote

healing and growth. Perry (2011) referred to relationships as the “agents of change” and Comer

(1995) said, “No significant learning can take place without a significant relationship.”

According to student interviews, teacher actions that demonstrated care and respect included

both verbal and nonverbal signals and behaviors such as calling them by name, answering their

questions, talking respectfully to them, noticing and greeting them, and helping them when they

needed help (Payne, 2008). Students can often quickly tell when a teacher’s interactions and

intent are not genuine and if their behaviors indicate judgement or support.

Students impacted by trauma often have lagging social and emotional skills that can

make developing positive relationships and connections with them more challenging. Teacher

educators could introduce the 2 X 10 strategy to teacher candidates for practice (Wlodkowski,

1983). This strategy includes talking with the person for at least two minutes each day for ten

days in a row. The conversation should be brief, honest, allow for student voice, solution

140

oriented, and a reminder the student is accountable to others (Smith & Lambert, 2008). This

simple strategy can increase student engagement, improve behavior, and send the message to the

student that you are interested and you care (Smith & Lambert, 2008).

Supporting and Teaching Emotional Regulation

Increasingly important is an awareness of the internal emotional state of the adult. When

a student exhibits disruptive or even aggressive behaviors an adult’s emotional reaction may

elicit a similar response. This is not only ineffective but can often escalate the situation.

Educators must maintain a focus on preventative strategies while also understanding how to

respond to challenging behaviors. According to Tackie, Nixon, and Keels (2018), aggressive or

disruptive behaviors are indicators that a physiological response inside the student’s brain and

body is also taking place. Adults may feel similarly making it difficult to respond in a calm and

thoughtful manner. Helpful strategies could be taught through role playing potential scenarios of

student disruptions and include depersonalizing the behavior (it’s not about you), remaining calm

and minimizing your outward reactions (using deep breathing and possibly some mindfulness

techniques), and using short and simple language (Tackie et al., 2018). A sequence of strategies

could include; 1) identify the behavior the student is displaying, 2) check to see if you interpreted

their behavior correctly, 3) affirm and validate student feelings, 4) assist the student in

identifying reasonable choices or options, and 5) follow up with the student and discuss what

went well, what possible changes or plans need to be in place for the future. Some things to

avoid may include 1) don’t argue or get into a power struggle, 2) don’t raise your voice, and 3)

don’t handle the situation in public in front of the student’s peers because you will open the door

to additional drama (Tackie et al., 2018).

141

When a student is feeling stressed and overwhelmed or may be trying to deal with

traumatic or painful memories the pre-frontal cortex or rational thinking and problem-solving

areas of the brain shut down and a state of intense emotions with often impulsive responses takes

over (Siegel, 2011). Students need skills in order to manage stressors so it is critical that

teachers learn specific techniques they can model and practice with students that can build

coping strategies such as identifying and validating emotions, deep breathing, positive imagery,

and the creation of calming spaces or break times that can assist a student to calm emotions and

return to a focus on learning (Weist-Stevenson & Lee, 2016). Teachers in the field can access a

variety of support personnel such as the school counselor, social worker, and psychologist who

can provide further guidance in this area. Perry (2006) recommends a sequence of engagement

that begins with calming or managing emotions also referred to as regulation in order to be able

to connect with or relate to the student and then reason with them. Regulation can be done

independently by the student who has learned the skills and tools needed for reducing stress or

can be assisted by the teacher using a calm voice, giving choices, modeling use of sensory items

or moving to a calming area. Once regulated the teacher will be able to relate to the student,

identify and validate feelings, and then move into problem-solving or reasoning with the student.

Resist Re-traumatization: Traditional Approaches are Not Working

Research indicates traumatic experiences in childhood can lead to toxic levels of stress

that can disrupt development, impact academic success, and contribute to behavior problems in

school-aged children (Clarkson Freeman, 2014; Proche, Fortuna, Lin, & Alegria, 2011).

According to a study conducted in Spokane Washington, students with three or more adverse

experiences had three times the rate of academic failure, five times the rate of severe attendance

problems, six times the rate of school behavior problems, and four times the rate of poor health

142

compared with children with no known trauma (Blodgett et al., 2012; Iachini, Peetiwala, &

DeHart, 2016). Without sufficient education, teachers are more likely to view these behaviors as

bad or disruptive resulting in a focus on punishment as opposed to skill building (Emmons &

Belangee, 2018). Traditional approaches to disruptive behavior in the classroom often focus on

consequences and include strategies such as a change in status on a behavior chart, a loss of

points or privileges, public correction, removal from the classroom, calls home, and suspension.

The school discipline reform movement, considering the impact of trauma, has

recommended the reduction of exclusionary discipline practices and an increase in the use of

non-punitive, trauma-informed restorative practices to address the root causes of disruptive

student behavior (Max, 2017). Evidence-based, multi-tiered behavioral frameworks, such as

School Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS: www.pbis.org), are built

on a prevention oriented approach that is proactive rather than reactive. This framework includes

a continuum of intervention support designed to teach skills and prevent problems (Universal,

Tier 1), early identification of risk (Targeted, Tier 2), and more intensive interventions

(Individual, Tier 3) supports (Sugai & Horner, 2009). Implementation of SWPBIS can help

improve overall school climate and safety by explicitly teaching and reinforcing expectations and

self-management skills, promoting positive relationships, and taking a strengths-based approach

which are key components of a trauma-sensitive school and classroom (Bradshaw, C., Koth,

C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J., 2009).

Research indicates students who have experienced even one suspension are less likely to

earn a high school diploma, less likely to earn a college degree, and more likely to have been

arrested and been in prison than their non-suspended peers (Rosenbaum, 2018). As seen in zero

tolerance policies, applying the same standards of punishment regardless of individual

143

characteristics often results in discriminatory practices with minority students and students with

disabilities (Mayworm & Sharkey, 2014; U. S. Department of Education, 2016). Evidence shows

discipline practices that remove students from instruction, such as office referrals or suspensions,

do not help to improve either student behavior or school climate (Skiba, Shure, Middelberg &

Baker, 2011). In reality, removal and suspensions isolate students and communicate the message

“you do not belong” which in turn can cause additional trauma (Forbes, 2012). Neither out of

class or out of school suspensions teaches appropriate behavior but rather teaches students what

they are not supposed to do and that is it important not to get caught (Mayworm & Sharkey,

2014; Strawhun, Peterson, Fluke, & Cathcart, 2015).

There is a need for school discipline policies to balance accountability with an

understanding of traumatic behavior. According to the U. S. Department of Education (2016),

3.5 million students are suspended in-school and 3.45 million suspended out-of-schools each

year and even more alarmingly are the noted disproportionately suspended numbers of African

American children. According to the Virginia Department of Education, a large portion of

student suspensions were due to incidents of disrespect and classroom disruption (VDOE, 2016).

Negative consequences of suspensions include a higher risk of academic failure, disengagement

from school, failure to graduate on time or at all, student alienation, alcohol and drug use, and

future antisocial behavior (Sheryl, Stephanie, Herrenkohl, Toumbourou, & Catalano, 2014).

The fact that a great majority of suspensions are attributed to disruptive behavior as

opposed to more serious or violent offenses tells us it is past time to reconsider our approach to

student discipline. Understanding the students we work with and how to meet their needs can

provide more equitable learning environments and focus on solutions rather than punishments.

Trauma-informed educational practices such as using a multi-tiered systems approach where

144

expectations and self-management skills are explicitly taught and positively reinforced can

provide much needed supports not only for students but for teachers as well.

Conclusion

The teaching profession is challenging both intellectually and emotionally particularly

with the increasing numbers of students who are impacted by trauma. It is important to develop

an awareness and understanding of the impact of trauma on the lives of children before we can

begin to implement effective strategies that can support learning in the classroom. It has also

become painfully clear that traditional methods of discipline that focus on consequences do not

develop the skills students need to be successful. Research supports the use of Positive

Behavioral Interventions and Supports in conjunction with trauma sensitive practices that

address the environment, relationships, and one’s ability to regulate emotions (Chafouleas et al.,

2016; Dorado, Martinez, McArthur, & Leibovitz, 2016; Sugai & Horner, 2010). The essentials of

a trauma-informed approach include a focus on the four Rs; Realize, Recognize, Respond, and

Resist Re-traumatization. The ultimate goal of implementing trauma-sensitive practices is to

provide safe environments where students can feel supported, increase their ability to identify,

express, and manage emotions, decrease trauma-related symptoms that can impact behavior, and

increase their ability to develop healthy relationships which in turn can promote success in the

school as well as the community setting (Dorado et al., 2016; Hummer, Crosland, & Dollard,

2009). Safe, predictable, and consistent relationships can help to bring the brain back into

regulation allowing students to then be able to access higher level thinking and reasoning skills

(Perry, 2011). The Examples of Trauma-Sensitive Classroom Practices chart (Table 1) provides

a number of proactive strategies within these essential components that teacher educators can

145

highlight when helping preservice teachers develop the skills and strategies necessary to put

information into practice.

Table 1

Trauma-Sensitive Classroom Strategies

Environment Relationships Self-Regulation

Welcoming, positive signage, daily greeting

Greet students by name every day

Identify and validate emotions

Predictable routine, visual schedule posted each day

Use calm, respectful voice & demeanor (unconditional positive regard)

Teach students how to scale emotions (e.g., on a scale of 1-5 how strong, Zones of Regulation

Communicate clear, consistent expectations for ALL activities and settings

Inquire about students’ interests & strengths

Teach / Model a variety of deep breathing techniques

Design of physical environment – organized, defined spaces, etc.

Increase opportunities for humor and fun

Yoga poses (e.g., Yoga Pretzels, Yoga for the Classroom)

Consider lighting, alternative seating, calming music, etc.…

Hold regular class meetings or proactive circles

Mindfulness (e.g., Mind Up Curriculum, Mindfulness for Kids)

Provide a safe space for calming (e.g.,“peace corner,” “meditation room,” passes to take a break, etc.)

Use behavior specific praise for academic skills and behavior (Identify skill. behavior; not just good job)

Sensory items available for use (stress ball, fidgets, etc.…)

Active supervision; be aware of students’ body language, tone of voice, emotional state

Plan activities and move seating frequently to help peers develop connections

Coloring Mandalas, Zentangle, etc.

146

Prepare students for transitions, give advance notice, use common signal

Use cooperative learning strategies to increase engagement

Movement / brain breaks (e.g., Go Noodle, Move to Learn, CosmicKids, Fuel Up to Play)

Monitor seating arrangements Provide opportunities for helpful participation (jobs, mentor, etc.)

Incorporate themes of emotion regulation into curriculum / literature

Communicate safety procedures & how you will handle situations

Address issues / concerns in private NOT public

Progressive Muscle Relaxation

Use positive recognition / reward systems and logical consequences NOT systems based on punitive consequences or take away

Assume positive intentions – Often students struggle because of lagging skills (punishment will not create the skills they need)

Establish a safe/quiet place for students who feel overwhelmed (e.g., peace corner, meditation space)

Increase engagement, provide student voice and choice in learning / projects

Collaborative problem- solving - Include the student when developing plan

Talk about, teach, and model stress management

References

Black, P., Woodsworth, M., Tremblay, M., & Carpenter, T. (2012). A review of trauma-

informed treatment for adolescents. Canadian Psychology, 53(3), 192-203.

Carello, J. & Butler, L. D. (2015). Practicing what we teach: Trauma-Informed educational

practice. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262-278.

Cavanaugh, B. (2016). Trauma-informed classrooms and schools. Beyond Behavior, 25(2), 41-

46.

147

Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. (2007). A science-based framework for

early childhood policy: Using evidence to improve outcomes in learning, behavior, and

health for vulnerable children. Retrieved from https://developingchild.harvard.edu/

Chafouleas, S. M., Johnson, A. H., Overstreet, S., & Santos, N. M. (2016).

Toward a blueprint for trauma-informed service delivery in schools. School Mental Health, 8,

144-162.

Clarkson Freeman, P. A. (2014). Prevalence and relationship between adverse childhood

experiences and child behavior among children. Infant mental Health Journal, 35(6),

544-554.

Cole, S. F., O’Brien, J. G., Gadd, M. G., Ristuccia, J., Wallace, D. L., & Gregory, M. (2005).

Helping traumatized children learn: Supportive school environments for children

traumatized by family violence. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Advocates for Children.

Dorado, J., Martinez, M., McArthur, L., & Leibovitz, T. (2016). Healthy Environments and

Response to Trauma in Schools (HEARTS): A whole-school, multi-level, prevention and

intervention program for creating trauma-informed, safe and supportive schools. School

Mental Health, 8, 163-176.

Dwyer, D. & Noonan, K. (2005). Measurement error in reported reasons for entry into the foster

care system. Southern Business and Economics Journal, 28(3&4), 88-107.

Fallot, R. D., & Harris, M. (2009). Creating Cultures of Trauma-Informed Care (CCTIC): A self-

assessment and planning protocol. Washington, DC: Community Connections.

Retrieved from http://www.healthcare.uiowa.edu/icmh/documents/CCTICSelf-

AssessmentandPlanningProtocol0709.pdf

148

Felitti, V., Anda, R., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D., Spitz, A., Edwards, V., Koss, M. &

Marks, J. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of

the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study.

American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14, 245–258.

Forbes, H. (2012) Help for Billy. Beyond Consequences Institute.

www.BeyondConsequences.com

Frazier, P., Anders, S., Perera, S., Tomich, P., Tennen, H., Park, C., & Tashiro, T. (2009).

Traumatic events among undergraduate students: Prevalence and associated symptoms.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 450–460.

Glaser, D. (2000). Child abuse and neglect and the brain: A review. Journal of Child

Psychology and Psychiatry 41, 97–116.

Greater Richmond (SCAN) Stop Child Abuse Now. (n.d.). Trauma-Informed Community

(TICN) Network. Retrieved from http://grscan.com/trauma-informed-community-

network/

Goodman, R. D., Miller, M. D., & West-Olatunji, C. A. (2011, August 22). Traumatic stress,

socioeconomic status, and academic achievement among primary school students.

Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. Advance online

publication. doi: 10.1037/a0024912

Greene, R. (2014). Lost at school. New York, NY: Scribner

Iachini, A. L., Petiwala, A. F., & DeHart, D. D. (2016). Examining adverse childhood

experiences among students repeating the ninth grade: Implications for school dropout

prevention. Children & Schools, 38(4), 218-226.

149

Hodas, G. (2006). Responding to childhood trauma: The promise and practice of trauma-

informed care. Retrieved from

http://www.childrescuebill.org/VictimsOfAbuse/RespondingHodas.pdf

Keller-Dupree, E. A. (2013). Understanding childhood trauma: Ten reminders for preventing

retraumatization. Practitioner Scholar: Journal of Counseling & Professional

Psychology, 2(1), 1-11.

Mayworm, A. M., & Sharkey, J. D. (2014). Ethical considerations in a three-tiered approach to

school discipline, policy and practice. Psychology in the Schools, 51(7), 693-704.

National Child Traumatic Stress Network (2016). Symptoms and behaviors associated with

exposure to trauma. Retrieved from http://www.nctsn.org/trauma-types/early-childhood-

trauma/Symptoms-and-Behaviors-Associated-with-Exposure-to-Trauma

National Education Association. (2014). Positive behavioral interventions and supports: A

multi-tiered framework that works for every student. An NEA Policy Brief. Retrieved

from https://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB41A-Positive_Behavioral_Interventions-

Final.pdf

Ogata, K. (2017). Maltreatment related trauma symptoms affect academic achievement through

cognitive functioning: A preliminary examination in Japan. Journal of Intelligence,

5(32), 1-7.

Overstreet, S. & Chafouleas, S. M. (2016). Trauma-informed schools: Introduction to the

special issue. School Mental Health, 8(1), 1-6.

Paccione-Dyszlewski, M. R. (2016). Trauma-informed schools: A must. The Brown University

Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter, 32(7), 1-8.

Payne, R. (2008). Nine powerful practices. Educational Leadership, 65(7), 48-52.

150

Perry, B. D. (2006). The Neurosequential Model of Therapeutics: Applying principles of

neuroscience to clinical work with traumatized and maltreated children. In N.B. Webb

(Ed.), Working with traumatized youth in child welfare (pp. 27-52). New York: The

Guilford Press.

Perry, B. D. (2009). Principles of working with traumatized children. Retrieved from

http://teacher.scholastic.com/professional/bruceperry/working_children.htm

Perry, B. (2011). The boy who was raised by a dog. New York, NY: Basic Books

Porche, M., Fortuna, L., Lin, J., & Alegria, M. (2011). Childhood Trauma and Psychiatric

Disorders as Correlates of School Dropout in a National Sample of Young Adults. Child

Development, 82(3), 982-998. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29782885

Prewitt, E. (2016). New elementary and secondary education law includes specific “trauma-

informed practices” provisions. Retrieved from https://www.acesconnection.com/g/aces-

in-education/blog/new-elementary-and-secondary-education-law-includes-specific-

trauma-informed-practices-provisions

SAMHSA. (2012). About the National Center for Trauma-Informed Care. Retrieved from

https://www.samhsa.gov/nctic

SAMHSA. (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed

Approach SAMHSA’s Trauma and Justice Strategic Initiative. Retrieved from

http://store.samhsa.gov/product/SAMHSA-s-Concept-of-Trauma-and-Guidance-for-a-

Trauma-Informed-Approach/SMA14-4884

Sheryl, A. H., Stephanie, M. P., Herrenkohl, T. I., Toumbourou, J. W., & Catalano, R. F. (2014).

Student and school factors associated with school suspension: A multilevel analysis of

151

students in Victoria, Australia and Washington State, United States. Children and Youth

Services Review, 36(1), 187–194. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.11.022

Siegel, D. J. (2011). The whole brain child. New York, NY: Bantam Books

Smith, R., & Lambert, M. (2008). Assuming the best. Educational Leadership, 66(1), 16–21.

Strawhun, J., Peterson, R., Fluke, S. & Cathcart, A. (2015). In-school suspension strategy brief.

Lincoln, NE: Student engagement Project, University of Nebraska- Lincoln.

Sugai, G. & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-Intervention and School-Wide Positive

Behavior Supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17,

223-237.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2010). Schoolwide positive behavior supports: Establishing a

continuum of evidence-based practices. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools,

11(1), 62–83.

Sugai, G., O’Keefe, B. V., & Fallon, L. M. (2012). A contextual consideration of culture and

school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14,

197-208.

Tackie, H., Nixon, J., Keels, M. (2018). Strategies for de-escalation and student re-

engagement. Practice Brief #5. TREP Project.

U.S. Department of Education. (2016). School climate and discipline: Know the data.

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/school-discipline/data.html

Van Der Kolk, B. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of

trauma. New York, NY: Penquin Random House.

Virginia Department of Education (2016). Annual report for discipline, crime, & violence.

Retrieved from

152

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/info_management/data_collection/support/school_safety/ind

ex.shtml

Virginia Department of Education (2019). Child Abuse and Neglect Recognition and

Intervention Training Curriculum Guideline. Retrieved from

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/boe/guidance/health/child_abuse_intervention_training.pdf

Virginia Department of Education (2018). Professional studies requirements for Prek-12

endorsements, special education, secondary grades 6-12 endorsements, and adult

education. Retrieved from

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title8/agency20/chapter543/section140/

Virginia Prevention Works (2019). Virginia’s Adverse Childhood Experiences Initiative.

Retrieved from http://www.virginiapreventionworks.org/family-wellness/

Walkley, M., & Cox, T. L. (2013). Building trauma-informed schools and communities.

Children & Schools, 35(2), 123-126.

Wiest-Stevenson C, Lee C. Trauma-informed schools. (2016). Journal of Evidence-Informed

Social Work.13 (5):498-503.

Wlodkowski, R. J. (1983). Motivational opportunities for successful teaching [Leader's Guide].

Phoenix, AZ: Universal Dimensions.