As educators and students return to classrooms across the country, it is prudent for all stakeholders in school communities to set intentions around the type of learning environments we want to cultivate together. We cannot leave seclusion and restraint out of these discussions. The language we use about these practices matters as we strive toward equitable student outcomes.
Many of us know that seclusion, or the intentional isolation of a human being in a space they are prevented from leaving, and restraint, or physical restraint preventing a human from independent movement of their own body, are touted as crisis response strategies and in most cases, only legally allowed in emergencies. We also know that incidents of seclusion and restraint are largely overutilized and underreported in our nation’s schools. The definitions of “emergency” and “crisis” are often murkier, leaving the application of these traumatizing practices open to subjective interpretation at the hands of school staff, who may or may not have adequate training.
Historical data tells us this is a recipe for disaster that can be avoided if we consistently discuss the implementation of these practices (and how to avoid using them) within our school communities.
Applied educational neuroscience, or AEN, provides alternative pathways to avoid using seclusion or restraint. When the field of education embraces emerging research from the field of neuroscience, we can better address the needs of staff and students. When we consider what happens in the brains and nervous systems of all individuals involved in any journey ending at seclusion or restraint, we can chart a more equitable course. The better we as educators understand the neurobiological processes more likely to end with seclusion or restraint, the better we can collaborate to respond in neuro-abiding, trauma-informed ways, which are proven to lead to better outcomes. It doesn’t matter what the situation is; if we move toward dysregulation, we are headed toward seclusion or restraint. If we instead head toward awareness of how our nervous systems determine our words and actions, for students and staff, we are now in a space of empowerment where a true paradigm shift can happen.
If we shift the language we use when discussing big behaviors, we can also shift the focus of our conversations, leading to increased collective wisdom. What is the opposite of seclusion? It’s connection. Applied educational neuroscience tells us that social connection and acceptance are prerequisites to student learning. If we have secluded a student, we have extinguished any sense of belonging they may have had in our school community. What about the opposite of restraint? This one is perhaps more obvious, but it’s freedom. When we restrain students, we strip them of autonomy, another prerequisite to learning. There are three known deterrents to the full function of the prefrontal cortex, the brain’s “decider”: seclusion, restraint, and chronic unpredictability.
If schools are truly in the business of learning, it’s hard to see how seclusion and restraint can ever be seriously considered as adequate strategies to support student learning.
Instead, as we prepare to head back to school, we should be centering our planning around the cultivation and retention of student assent. Inviting our students to join us in the learning we have planned is critical to its effectiveness. Abbey Mix and Kristen Myers, both educators from Kent County, Michigan, talk about seclusion and restraint not as interventions but as the default operating mode many educators revert to when interventions fail. When a child loses control, it is the responsibility of the adults supporting them to have a toolbox full of options that are both 1) research-based and supported by evidence and 2) trauma and neuro-abiding in order to lead the way down the path toward the prefrontal cortex via nervous system awareness. This is how we ultimately end the use of seclusion and restraint in our schools. We resource ourselves with interventions designed to create the circumstances we want for our students: connection and autonomy.
Mix and Myers also remind us that values take precedence over procedures. The organization they work for, Kent ISD, has established a formal belief statement around values, which outlines their approach to prioritization of values over procedures:
- We are focused on providing opportunities for students to make progress throughout each school day rather than influences and/or barriers that are beyond our control
- We recognize the specific needs of disabilities and presume competence while designing instruction to match those needs
- We strive to create learning environments in which students are willing participants
- We meet students where they are and follow their lead to teach critical skills
- We seek to understand why behavior occurs before attempting to change it
- We value student self-advocacy and their communication in any form over forced compliance
- We prioritize safety, relationships, and dignified alternatives for our students above all else, especially in moments of crisis
To read more about the amazing work that Mix and Myers are leading in Kent County, Michigan, check out Prioritizing Relationships and Student Engagement to Reduce Problem Behavior: Guidance for Minimizing Exclusionary Discipline and Preventing the Usage of Seclusion and Restraint.
You already know how to plan for seclusion and restraint. And you already know it’s the last thing any of us should ever be compelled to do.
What you might not know is how wholly unnecessary these practices are when neuro-abiding and trauma-informed pedagogy is available. We are stuck in an obsolete system that actively ignores emerging research. Values over procedure. Project what you expect. Plan for the results you wish to create. The escape plan from obsolescence is the acceptance of a new norm.
Let’s embrace the bounty applied educational neuroscience offers and let our students bask in the wealth.
When you begin to meet with colleagues to prepare for the year, consider your shared values and develop a list of easily accessible resources you plan to use across your organization to prioritize student assent over compliance. How will you know if student assent is present? What might create a sense of connection for the student? What opportunities for autonomy exist? Plan for these things.
