National Context
Research is providing evidence-based science with data demonstrating how unresolved trauma can lead to changes in developing brains, which can result in toxic stress response and impairment of executive functioning (Waehrer, et al., 2019; Shonkoff et al., 2012; Danese & McEwen, 2012). There is a large and growing body of research demonstrating that early life adversity is associated with a multitude of long-lasting ACEs. These facets of trauma are often correlated with long-term toxic stress. Research demonstrates that traumatic stress can impact the human body, creating ingrained and lasting damage (Katz et al., 2012; Danese & McEwen, 2012; Shonkoff et al., 2012). Further literature shows that early trauma experiences can leave a resounding negative impact that can affect brain development and long-term health managing stress levels (Shonkoff et al., 2012; Danese & McEwen, 2012).
Current research offers that incidents causing exposure to trauma have increased over various periods of study, and that this trauma perseverates in a lifelong manner. More than two-thirds of children report being affected by a trauma event by age sixteen, and because of this exposure, the risk factors for negative outcomes elevates (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2017). Trauma has enduring attributes, such as decreased ability to have appropriate social and emotional relationships, behavioral ramifications, and physical and mental health consequences. Research shows there is a strong correlation between the number and associated severity of adverse childhood experiences and the likelihood that the individual will be emotionally impacted in adult life (Felitti et al., 1998; Anda et al., 2010). According to researchers, higher ACE’s correlate with health risk behaviors, school drop-out, substance use, toxic stress, and suicidal behavior (Felitti et al., 1998; Anda et al., 2010). Research supports the idea that intervention is needed to change the trajectory of the effects of ACEs (Shonkoff et al., 2012; Danese & McEwen, 2012).
Moreover, disruptive classroom behavior is on the rise in classrooms across the United States and can lower class achievement scores (Gage et al., 2017; Mahvar et al., 2018). Managing classroom behavior is already challenging, but with increased traumas and behaviors in the classroom, it becomes even more difficult. The most common disruptive behaviors that teachers identified included disruptive talking, avoidance of work, interfering with teaching activities, lack of concentration (daydreaming), general disobedience, being late to class, interrupting the teacher, bothering classmates (verbally or physically), verbal insults, rudeness to teacher, and defiance (Abacioglu et al., 2019; Sun et al., 2012). Tenured teachers can experience many behavioral disruptions per day, causing teacher stress. These disruptions are overwhelming and can even cause the teacher to depart from the profession (Ducharme et al., 2011; Flower et al., 2017). However, this is even more impactful for preservice teachers. Research shows that many teachers are not prepared for behavioral challenges that may emerge in the classroom and stems from lack of training and preparation (Christofferson et al., 2015; Flower et al., 2017; Reinke et al., 2011).
Previous statistics reveal that students are more likely to experience a punitive response for disruptive classroom behaviors or outbursts such as in school and out of school suspensions. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that in, “2013–14, approximately 2.6 million public school students (5.3 percent) received one or more out-of-school suspensions. A higher percentage of Black students (13.7 percent) than of students from any other racial/ethnic group received an out-of-school suspension, followed by 6.7 percent of American Indian/Alaska Native students, 5.3 percent of students of Two or more races, 4.5 percent each of Hispanic and Pacific Islander students, 3.4 percent of White students, and 1.1 percent of Asian students” (NCES, 2019).
Therefore, there is a necessity for preservice teachers to be become trauma-aware and incorporate trauma informed indicators (see Table 2) in their classroom behavior management plans. Research is clear and demonstrates that although students may have emotional and social deficits due to a traumatic history, it is possible for teachers to impact some of these negative learned behaviors and help foster positive interactions with teachers and peers (Chafouleas et al., 2016; Cole et al., 2013).
Table 2
Trauma Informed indicators from the Missouri Model for Trauma-Informed School
Indicator
Meaning
SAFETY:
Ensure physical and emotional safety, recognizing and responding to how racial, ethnic, religious, sexual, or gender identity may impact safety throughout the lifespan.
TRUSTWORTHINESS:
Foster genuine relationships and practices that build trust, making tasks clear, maintaining appropriate boundaries and creating norms for interaction that promote reconciliation and healing. Understand and respond to ways in which explicit and implicit power can affect the development of trusting relationships. This includes acknowledging and mitigating internal biases and recognizing the historic power of majority populations.
CHOICE:
Maximize choice, addressing how privilege, power, and historic relationships impact both perceptions about and ability to act upon choice.
COLLABORATION:
Honor transparency and self-determination. Seek to minimize the impact of the inherent power differential while maximizing collaboration and sharing responsibility for making meaningful decisions.
EMPOWERMENT:
Encouraging self-efficacy, identifying strengths and building skills which leads to individual pathways for healing while recognizing and responding to the impact of historical trauma and oppression.
Situational Context
Previous literature suggests that teachers often find themselves unprepared to address classroom behaviors that are often stemmed from trauma (Brunzell et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2019). Furthermore, preservice teachers often report that classroom behavior management is not sufficiently addressed, nor do they have enough social emotional training. Investigating instructional practices that are utilized for pre-service educators may indicate that becoming trauma-informed could better prepare teachers to deal with said behaviors. Therefore, clinical/practicum instructors from a small, private university in the Midwest region of the United States were invited to participate in an interview regarding the inclusion of trauma informed practices in clinical/practicum classes. A sampling of students’ classroom behavior management plans was analyzed for the presence of trauma informed indicators (see Table 2). My goal was to discover if this information would increase my knowledge of how pre-service educators are prepared for trauma informed practices in schools.
Personal Context
I believe that all students should have access to trauma-informed educators. Many of my fellow general education teachers are not trained to address a child with a trauma background or are not cognizant of how to implement the training they have received. Students continue to disengage, or become emotionally elevated, only to find themselves with a punitive consequence. I believe that if a student’s trauma is addressed, their focus can shift to academic growth, and foster healing. If the trauma is not addressed, behaviors will reveal themselves, preventing the student from learning, as well as preventing others in the class from retaining educational knowledge as well. This becomes frustrating to the teacher, and student, and can even lead to teacher burnout. As a teacher, I can see the benefit of incorporated trauma-informed instructional practices into classroom management behavioral plans, and I often wish that I had been trauma-informed when I began my teaching career.
My undergraduate degree was in psychology, and I began in the special education field later in life. I graduated with my Master of Arts in Teaching in 2011 from Fontbonne University, and I began my special education teaching career at Great Circle. My population of students included those with a diagnosis of other health impaired, learning disabled, autism, emotional disturbance, traumatic brain injury, and other differing abilities. Many students had significant trauma backgrounds. My mission was to guide, teach, and address their adverse childhood experiences, so they could graduate and return to a general education population, and ultimately become independent, working and successful adults. This was not an easy feat, and the job was difficult, in every way possible. In my first formidable years, some of my students acted out physically, or emotionally, and although I had classroom behavioral management training, I did not feel equipped to address their behaviors or trauma. I often felt as though I was failing myself and my students, and unfortunately experienced secondary trauma more than once. I did not have trauma-informed trainings until I had been teaching several years, but I strongly believe that including trauma-informed practices in classroom management behavioral plans will assist the educator to being prepared to address trauma related disruptions in the classroom.