Trauma Informed Practices for Supporting Special Education Students

Abstract #

At least 60% of the general education population has one at least one adverse childhood experience (ACE). While up to 96% of students needing special education services have had an ACE adverse childhood experience . This literature review explores practices around trauma informed care (TIC) tailored to support students with special education needs who have experienced ACEs adverse childhood experiences . These practices center around creating a resilient student who can overcome and withstand trauma. TIC trauma informed care practices are built on the pillars of safety, connection, and emotional regulation. Safety covers data informed frameworks, consistent environments, professional development, and community and family collaboration. Connection is built through positive interactions, peer support, cultural responsiveness, and trustworthiness. Emotional regulation encompasses strength based practices, self-management, agency, and mindfulness. This review underscores the need for ongoing research to adapt and refine TIC trauma informed care strategies for students with disabilities, advocating for a holistic, inclusive approach to education that addresses both academic and emotional needs.

Introduction: Adverse Childhood Experience #

Trauma is a deeply human experience that permeates various forms of art and literature reflecting the universal nature of pain and struggle. As the novelist William Goldman said, “Life is pain… anyone who says differently is selling something,” (The Princess Bride, 1987). From personal struggles to the collective anguish caused by societal events, trauma permeates our existence and shapes our shared narrative. Trauma casts a long shadow over friends, family, colleagues, and other survivors, affecting them in diverse and profound ways. Despite this, people are more than their pain; they possess resilience and the capacity for growth and healing. Teachers, especially those working with students needing special education services, are uniquely situated to be helpers for trauma-affected students, providing them with the support, guidance, and structure needed to overcome their challenges. This paper systematically explores the literature for trauma informed practices that teachers can implement to support students needing special education services. By putting students at the center of these practices, educators can foster environments that address behavior as a response to trauma enabling students to build resilience to thrive regardless of past or future experiences.

By definition, trauma is pervasively unique, painful, and long-lasting, with overwhelming impacts on all aspects of life (Hunter, et al., 2021; Maddox et al., 2022,). In 1998, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention partnered with Kaiser Permanente developed a questionnaire to screen for adverse childhood experiences (California Department of Health Care Services). Common ordeals, referred to as the Ten ACEs adverse childhood experiences , fall into the categories of abuse, neglect, and household situations. Abuse may be physical, mental, or sexual while neglect is either physical or mental. ACE adverse childhood experience that falls under the household situations include loss of parent, witnessing domestic violence, or living with someone struggling with addiction, mental illness, or incarceration (Center for Disease Control, 2021). More modern screenings also include societal traumas like racism, community violence, war, and other impactful events such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Cavanaugh, 2016; Maddox et al., 2022).

Unfortunately, more than 60% of students will have at least one ACE adverse childhood experience by age 17 (Cavanaugh, 2016; Goldenthal et al., 2024; Maddox et al., 2022). Despite this high percentage, only one in five students needing mental health services will receive it (Maddox et al., 2022). This is particularly impactful to those living in rural or impoverished areas as they tend to have limited access to mental health services outside of school (Maddox et al., 2022). It is imperative that educators develop trauma competence and improve our systems of support. Awareness of the issue is no longer sufficient. Action is needed to provide safety, relationships, and emotional regulation skills (Maddox et al., 2022).

Intersection of Adverse Childhood Experience and Special Education #

Understanding the pervasive impact of trauma is crucial, especially when considering its intersection with special education. Students with disabilities are particularly vulnerable, which can lead to a higher proportion of ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Hunter, 2020). In 2022, Offerman et al. studied this intersection to see exactly how many of their students with disabilities were impacted by ACEs adverse childhood experiences . This study was conducted with students who attended a school to support emotional and behavioral disorders in the Netherlands. 167 students participated in this study and their responses were compared to parent surveys and school files. 96.4% of students self-reported at least one ACE adverse childhood experience , while 89.5% of parents reported student ACE adverse childhood experience . Student files identified 95.3% rate of student ACE adverse childhood experience . The study also found that most ACEs adverse childhood experiences happened before the student turned 8. This rate was considerably higher than the national average of 45.3%. This study highlights the importance of early intervention for students with disabilities due to the high ACE adverse childhood experience prevalence rate.

In the United States, 80% of students with disabilities have at least one ACE adverse childhood experience , and many of these students have four or more ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Maddox et al., 2022; Offerman et al., 2022). Students with disabilities often face compounded challenges that require tailored support and interventions. ACEs adverse childhood experiences exacerbate students with disabilities already complex needs leading to more behavioral disruptions and decreases in academic success (Hunter et al., 2021, Maddox et al., 2022). Trauma’s effects are profound and far-reaching, particularly for students with disabilities (Hunter et al., 2021,). Trauma responses are more complex than behaviors that can be redirected and require complete systems of support to work effectively (Offerman et al., 2022).

Negative trauma responses are mechanisms by which the brain creates impairments to defend against future trauma, often affecting executive functions, memory, or even speech and language (Liasidou, 2022). These negative responses to trauma can lead to “anxiety, impulsivity, and fear,” which undermines emotional regulation (Liasidou, 2022, p. 6). This can lead to behavioral dysregulation which can seem erratic to the outside viewer but serves to protect the child from a perceived threat. Dysregulation can take the form of withdrawal, bullying, or even disassociation (Brunzell et al., 2015). This dysregulation due to negative trauma responses may present many of the same behaviors or patterns that lead to learning or behavior disability diagnosis (Maddox et al., 2022). Trauma can significantly impair cognitive functions, emotional regulation, and social interactions, making it essential for educators to adopt trauma informed practices tailored to special education (Hunter et al., 2021,). These students will need holistic interventions such as positive behavior interventions and support (PBIS) or individualized education programs to see improved academic outcomes (Riggs & Landrum, 2023).

Life events surrounding people with disabilities can add to the student’s ACEs adverse childhood experiences . Living with a disability may be traumatic due to the way others interact with a child (Maddox et al., 2022). Differences can be isolating, making relationships and connections harder to come by (Hunter et al., 2021). The disability diagnosis process can be traumatic as well as cultural biases and systemic barriers can be impediments (Liasidou, 2023). Students may struggle with behaviors and academic outcomes for years before receiving a diagnosis, which many times is a barrier to receiving support services to access curriculum on an authentic level (Cavanaugh, 2016).

While not the first to address trauma informed care (TIC), Cavanaugh’s paper “Trauma-Informed Classrooms and Schools,” was one of the first to identify the need for systemwide TIC trauma informed care approach to be effective (2016). He based his ideas on The National Center for Trauma-Informed Care (NCTIC, 2014) four-part school wide approach to TIC trauma informed care . Schools needed to first realize the impact of trauma as understanding the importance behind these changes affects professional attitudes around the practices. Second, it was critical to recognize the signs of trauma. The third and fourth part necessary for a school wide TIC trauma informed care approach were recognizing students are reacting to past experiences because it helps mitigate emotions in professionals and to keep negative interactions less personal.

Cavanaugh then went on to establish six key principles for TIC trauma informed care . These principles were ways for educators to implement the 4-part schoolwide approach from the NCTIC. The six principles would become the foundation of following studies and reviews of trauma practices. These key principles are safety and consistency, positive interactions, culturally responsive practice, peer support, and target support. This paper was created for schools overall and did not address challenges specific for students in special education. However, later researchers like Diggins (2021) and Hunter et al. (2021) would use this research to inform practices specific to students with disabilities.

When the COVID-19 pandemic arrived, I was a new educator beginning my career in special education just six weeks before the schools closed. This was a traumatic event that significantly increased the prevalence of ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Maddox et al., 2022). I witnessed firsthand the impact this crisis had on students. Living in a digital age, yet wholly unprepared for digital schooling, students lost crucial years for social interaction and skill development, particularly in low-income or immunocompromised students. Families with the means to create friend pods and take time off when sick had a distinct advantage. This led to disparities in equity among students. Students with disabilities, who already struggled with social connections, became increasingly isolated. It was heartbreaking. This period saw a rise in student apathy, exacerbated by social promotions, widespread grief, and a heightened awareness of societal issues (Delisio et al., 2021). These experiences underscored the importance of addressing trauma in education. This raises the question, what trauma informed practices are available to support students with special education needs?

Trauma Informed Care #

TIC trauma informed care practices specific to students with disabilities are integral because students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences are four times more likely to receive special education service compared to their non- ACE adverse childhood experience peers (Liasidou, 2022). Maddox et al. (2022) combed through available literature to create a resource to use for TIC trauma informed care practices tailored to students with disabilities. They emphasized three categories, or pillars for TIC trauma informed care : “safety, emotional regulation, and connection” (Maddox et al., 2022, p. 4). Practices under the category of safety involve creating a secure environment where students feel protected, including data driven frameworks, consistent environments, professional development, and community partnerships. Connection practices focus on fostering strong supportive relationships through positive interactions, trustworthiness and transparency, peer support, and cultural responsiveness. Emotional regulation practices refer to helping students manage emotions effectively centering on mindfulness, agency, building on strengths, and self-management. Much like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, these pillars build on each other (Maslow, 1943). Students need safety first and foremost. Once they feel safe, they can build connections. With patience and understanding, teachers can leverage that trust to teach students the skills they need to build resilience (Maddox et al, 2022).

Due to the individualized nature of trauma and the individualized nature of special education, there are many places where practices overlap (see figure 1). These comprehensive TIC trauma informed care practices are meant to be a toolbox of skills to use as needed (Diggins, 2021). Not all students will respond to all practices and there needs to be patience when trying new ideas (Asperline et al., 2020). TIC trauma informed care should be used as a supplement to systems and frameworks already in place (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). TIC trauma informed care will look different depending on specific school district requirements (Maddox et al., 2022). Practices discussed in this review are guidelines and supportive, not a rigid dogma to follow.

Figure 1

TIC trauma informed care leads to outcomes for students with special needs that include preventing re-traumatization, the building of self-regulations skills, and potential prevention of future adverse experiences (Goldenthal et al., 2024). TIC trauma informed care practices will take time to see results (Asperline et al., 2020). Educators need to trust the process and assume student growth and resilience will come with time and practice. Educators will need to continually monitor while using sensitivity to see if changes to their practice is needed (Maddox et al., 2022). Building trust and emotional regulation skills in students can take years, but the long-term benefits are profound. One other important thing to note is that accepting students for “who they are now” does not mean lowering challenges or standards. Rather it means understanding their current needs, supporting them where they are while maintaining high expectations (Aspelin, 2020). Students continue to need boundaries and structure to reach standards, they just need it in a positive, consistent, restorative manner (Woollett et al., 2020).

Safety #

Establishing a safe learning environment is foundational not only to TIC trauma informed care , but also in all educational settings (Cavanaugh, 2016). Students need to feel safe to learn. Establishing a safe environment is particularly crucial for students with special education needs who often have compounded challenges when affected by trauma. The TIC trauma informed care of safety exemplifies the need for systemic changes to effectively implement these practices (Diggins, 2021). Students need physical and emotional safety school wide, even district wide in addition to individual classroom safety. Within TIC trauma informed care , the pillar of safety addresses four aspects, data informed frameworks, consistent environments, professional development, and family and community partnerships (see figure 1).

Data Informed Frameworks #

One way to create this consistency is through TIC trauma informed care practices is to incorporate them into an already existing framework like a Multi-Tier System of Support (MTSS: Goldenthal et al., 2024). MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support is a framework for providing support to students that begins with a base level of support for all students and gradually increases interventions for students based on data collected. This incorporation through the MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support framework enhances the effectiveness of ongoing support systems without replacing them (Goldenthal et al, 2024). A MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support for TIC trauma informed care would include 3 tiers. All students will receive a standard level of care at tier 1, especially important in special education settings where rates are upwards of 80% ACEs adverse childhood experiences . This helps diminish stigma and creates equity for all students.

Every student at tier 1 will then have an opportunity for formal screening to determine if more services are needed at tier 2 (Hunter et al., 2021). Formal screening is a process to identify at risk students (Cavanaugh, 2016). Identifying at risk students will help to address ACEs adverse childhood experiences as early as possible and prevent the escalation of issues (Maddox et al., 2022). Early intervention increases the chances of mitigating long lasting damage (Offerman, 2022). Screening is particularly helpful when identifying behavioral challenges often associated with ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Cavanaugh, 2016). Effective screening allows students who need additional support to be identified to higher tiers within the MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support framework. This ensures that students needing more intensive TIC trauma informed care can receive targeted interventions specific to their needs promoting better academic and social outcomes (Goldenthal et al., 2024). By leveraging screening data, schools can make informed decisions about resource allocation, intervention strategies thereby enhancing the overall efficacy of trauma informed practices (Maddox et al., 2016).

Tier 2 services focus on small group interventions, counseling services, and mentoring programs. These targeted interventions can be effective to provide specific support as needed to ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with special education needs (Hunter et al., 2021). Targeted interventions are designed to fit the unique needs of the student and group and when using a MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support framework are typically implemented at the 2nd or 3rd tier (Goldenthal et al., 2024; Riggs & Landrum 2022). While targeted interventions can be varied, they typically revolve around students developing their social emotional skills. (Hunter et al., 2021). Social emotional lessons (SEL) teach students skills that fall outside of academic learning. According to Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), SEL social emotional lessons covers decision making, relationship skills, social awareness, self-awareness, and self-management. These targeted interventions will be discussed more in the sections on connection and emotional regulation.

Multidisciplinary teams are beneficial when working in higher levels of service (Maddox et al., 2022). Tier 3 is the most intensive where students receive individually focused care. It is important that students who need special education services continue to be monitored through data collection at these levels to ensure the effectiveness of the interventions and to make necessary adjustments (Goldenthal et al., 2024). The data collected should include behavior triggers and motivators, which can be found with the help of collaborating with families (Cavanaugh, 2016). This style of comprehensive data enhances the overall effectiveness of social emotional and behavioral supports.

Several frameworks exist to support these practices, Functional Behavior Analysis (FBA) (Hunter et al., 2021), and Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP) (Berger et al., 2021), and Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Riggs and Landrum wrote an article that outlined using TIC trauma informed care within a PBIS positive behavior interventions and support framework to support students with disabilities. This article looked at studies across the United States to find commonalities and success rates. PBIS positive behavior interventions and support is a type of MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support schoolwide practice where students are rewarded for following school expectations. The rewards vary between schools, but they tend to be high value, low effort items like stickers, lunch with a friend, extra recess, or small toys. Trauma-informed PBIS positive behavior interventions and support involves understanding the impact of trauma on behavior and supports emotional regulation and resilience. Riggs and Landrum reported that PBIS positive behavior interventions and support can lead to “55.1% fewer out-of-school suspensions, 79.8% fewer in-school suspensions, and 58.9% fewer disciplinary incidents across more than 1,700 schools,” in Georgia (p. 154).

FBA Functional Behavior Analysis and the subsequent BIP Behavior Intervention Plans are more data driven ways of addressing individual issues. An FBA Functional Behavior Analysis is a systematic method for identifying underlying causes and functions of challenging behaviors which may include trauma triggers (Cavanaugh, 2016). Once these are identified it can be leveraged into a BIP Behavior Intervention Plans that gives the students positive replacement behaviors. BIPS Behavior Intervention Plans have clear operationally defined expectations. It gives specific consequences or rewards as goals are met and takes uncertainty out of the equation (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Students needing special education services frequently benefit from this type of explicit instruction as they may not be able to learn behaviors through observation. At the core of each of these systems is the understanding that teaching and reinforcing positive behaviors can prevent and address behavioral issues more effectively than punitive measures.

Consistent Environments #

Safe, consistent environment practices often operate behind the scenes, much like the technical crew in a play, ensuring everything runs smoothly without drawing attention (Maddox, et al, 2022). Student safety on the surface seems straight forward. Keep track of students and prevent harm. However, as legal cases have shown, this is not always a cut and dry issue. Courts expect teachers to act “in loco parentis,” meaning that teachers take on the responsibility to care for students in their classroom (Schimmel, 2019). Special care is needed to create a physically safe environment for students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences and additional support is needed to achieve the consistency necessary to succeed academically (Cavanaugh, 2016). Student responses to ACEs adverse childhood experiences can increase their hypervigilance causing them to react to changes in routines (Berger, 2021). Students needing special education services are double affected by this intersection as they also thrive in routine and structured learning environments.

Classroom safety for students with ACE adverse childhood experience and need special education services tends to fall into environmental classroom management strategies. A 2021 study by Diggins found compelling evidence showing how TIC trauma informed care practices of strong routines and predictable classrooms work to support students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and/or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study took place over 12 months in Australia and the results showed significant improvement in emotional and behavioral outcomes, such as conduct problems, peer problems, and overall difficulties through the implementation of the ReLate model. The study was particularly effective for new students who may not have had TIC trauma informed care at prior schools. Also, this study showed that students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences and those with clinical disorders benefit equally from the TIC trauma informed care practices giving credence to using school wide tier 1 support consistently across classrooms.

Practices to support strong routines include visual schedules, rhythmic routines like chants or walking between transitions (Diggins, 2021). Visual schedules need not use language to be effective. Many special education classrooms utilize pictural schedules. They have also been combined with the rhythmic activity of moving the picture from a personal chart to the classroom schedule. An important part of the schedule is that a student may reference it at any time and that the teacher refers to it regularly (Goldenthal, 2024). Predictable routines also improve the student-teacher relationship as students are more at ease when they feel safe in their environment (Berger, 2021). Transition warnings, giving students a 5-minute notice before changing activities reminds students of expectations and allows their mind to process the event slowly rather than expecting an immediate response. Warnings and multiple prompts about irregular schedules will also help to soothe a hypervigilant student (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Riggs and Landrum (2023) identified key trauma informed practices to support consistency for special education students. One of these practices was to create classroom rules to support students needing special education services. Rules should be created with student input. Creating rules together is a way to open discussion about the traits students value in school culture. Teachers can guide the discussion to cover topics like trustworthiness, choice, group work, and safety (Maddox et al., 2022). Ideally rules should be short and sweet, less than 4 so they are easy to remember (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Classroom rules, like schedules, must be clearly posted in a way students can access. For students needing special education services this may include pictorial versions of the rules. Lastly, rules are to be positively stated (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). The “dead man rule” is a principle used in behavior management to determine if the rule is beneficial for student engagement. This rule, as explained by Maag (2018) suggests that if a behavior can be performed by a dead man, it is not a positive behavior. This rule emphasis the importance of framing classroom expectations in a way that promotes active participation. Asking students to be quiet is insufficient, as anyone can do this. Instead, ask students to be active listeners, responding to others, summarizing, and asking relevant questions are examples of positively stated rules.

Rules and teacher expectations need to be explicitly taught and have clear consequences so that they can be enforced consistently. Additionally, consequences should be delivered in a professional, calm manner (Goldenthal et al., 2024, p.8). Educators cannot assume a student knows what the rule “be safe” means. They need to be taught that it means staying in the classroom, keeping their hands off classmates, staying in line during transitions, or any other specific requirements in the classroom. Ideally, these rules would be consistent across the school environment, with small variations in individual classrooms to allow for student voice (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Students who witnessed or experienced trauma may develop debilitating conditions like posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). As part of the PTSD response, students may perceive unassuming events or items as an external threat (Brunzel et al., 2015). Repeated triggering can cause long term psychological damage. Internal responses such as withdrawal, depression, or anxiety are equally damaging but may be harder to identify as the behaviors tend to be quieter (Cavanaugh, 2016). Trigger identification is important for psychological and physical safety as external trigger responses like aggression or disruptions can be dangerous for peers and the student. Safety plans can be created on an individual or classroom basis to address incidents as they occur (Diggins, 2021).

Several common triggers for some students needing special education services are loud noises, smells, changes in routine, transitions, physical touch, and power struggles with authority figures. Environmental changes can reduce many of these triggers and distractions (Hunter et al., 2021). For example, teachers frequently have foreknowledge of fire drills which trigger both loud noises and changes in routine. Educators may prevent triggering by giving students advance notice, moving them to the correct location before the alarm goes off, or providing ear protection (Cavanaugh, 2016). Avoiding power struggles can be harder, but following trauma informed communication strategies will help. Students with trauma may be suspicious of teacher’s motivations and will reject first to avoid pain. Strategies to help in this situation include instructional choice, opportunities to respond (Riggs & Landrum, 2023) incorporating play and silliness into lessons, and remembering that students are trying their best even when behaviors are dysregulated (Brunzell et al., 2015).

When working with students with special education needs, it is important to remember that not all students are comfortable or capable of verbalizing distress. It is essential to have systems in place for these students to communicate their distress. Berger et al. (2021) found that students who could communicate their desire for environmental changes like lighting, sounds, or sensory materials were more effective when coping after exposure to trauma. Systems could be as simple as a mood board for students to point or move something that symbolized them to it. It could also be a specific graphic on an augmentative and alternative communication device.

Effective teacher intervention plans and training are crucial for managing behavior dysregulation. Planning for these events requires collaboration with schoolwide support systems, whether through PBIS positive behavior interventions and support or individual BIPs Behavior Intervention Plans . Educators should be trained in de-escalation techniques to manage trauma-induced outbursts effectively (Maddox et al., 2022). This training includes recognizing the signs of distress, maintaining a calm manner, and providing a safe environment for the student to regain control. This may require having classmates leave the room. However, it is important to remember that when emotional regulation is tied to psychosis it can be difficult to self-regulate since this is a chemical brain issue (Delisio et al., 2023). This is why focusing on the relationship between teacher and student will be the most important factor when deescalating. Students who trust the adults around them and have practiced these skills together will have more success.

Fostering a holistic environment for students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences and needing special education services to thrive requires a look into the school culture around discipline (Hunter, et al., 2022) Traditional discipline practices such as suspensions, detentions, or removal from classrooms only isolate students, making them even more suspectable to more ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Cavanaugh, 2016). These practices also lead to the marginalization of students with diverse needs, including students with disabilities, students of color, and multilingual students (Liasidou, 2022). Additionally, traditional discipline practices are ineffective, as they fail to treat the underlying trauma that causes behavioral issues (Diggins, 2021; Maddox et al., 2022). Traditional methods that focus on behaviors alone are inadequate for students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences .

Restorative discipline shifts the focus from punitive measures to holistic restorative consequences. Restorative discipline uses TIC trauma informed care to repair harm, restore relationships and foster a sense of community. This approach is grounded in empathy, accountability, and mutual respect. These methods create an environment where students learn from their mistakes to develop their social emotional skills. Restorative discipline focuses on implementing preventative measures through clear rules and expectations (Diggins, 2021). Additionally, restorative discipline leads with curiosity. When incidents occur, staff can begin a conversation with questions showing genuine interest (Goldenthal et al., 2024). Beginning with curiosity rather than punishment helps with student defensiveness and gives students a chance to work through their feelings. When working with students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences and needing special education services, it is crucial to avoid putting them in a position where they feel trapped, potentially retraumatizing them (Offerman et al., 2023). Educators who are aware of the situation should start by stating facts. This approach promotes openness, allowing students to be heard and understood while still holding them accountable for their actions. These supports inherently require collaboration from all shareholders in the educational process. Collaboration helps maintain students’ care and learning while meeting educational standards. This practice not only includes educators and specialists but also administration to lead and motivate (Goldenthal et al., 2024).

Professional Development #

One of the challenges of TIC trauma informed care is fidelity in implementation. A 2024 case study by Goldenthal et al. explored the implementation of TIC trauma informed care within a MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support framework in a special education environment. The study surveyed teachers working at a therapeutic day school for students who needed support from a local hospital to address their emotional regulation. The intervention began with tier one universal supports and included four sixty minutes of TIC trauma informed care training for staff. Staff were taught to recognize trauma symptoms, understand its impact, and apply practices to support students. Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions involved more targeted support for higher need students implemented by clinical staff from the hospital. Effectiveness of implementation was collected through an environmental scan checklist used by school staff. It covered safe environments, building relationships, and social emotional learning.

While the study showed some success with practices contributing to classroom safety and anger management, they discovered the biggest issue faced was a lack of system wide consistency. This lack of consistency led to increased professional stress, inconsistent data tracking, and educators following multiple philosophies with an ever-changing discipline code. This is one area of education where consistency is key. Special education students thrive when they receive the same expectations of behavior across all classrooms (Goldenthal et al., 2024; Hunter et al., 2021). The researchers concluded that educators needed proper support through training and professional development to ensure fidelity with TIC trauma informed care .

Hunter et al., (2021) highlighted that successful implementation of TIC trauma informed care relies heavily on ongoing professional development and support for educators. Their study spoke to the importance of understanding how to implement TIC trauma informed care within an MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support framework. Training is needed to provide understanding about trauma and ACEs adverse childhood experiences and finding ways to stay informed about the latest research and best practices in TIC trauma informed care . Their study concluded that continuous training helps teachers develop the necessary skills to manage trauma-related behaviors. By investing in regular training sessions educators can refine their skills, learn how to collaborate with the community, explore trending research and share insights with each other.

Hunter et al. (2021) was not the only researcher to speak to the need for TIC trauma informed care training. Over half of the reviewed literature highlighted the critical role of professional development in equipping educators with the skills and knowledge to implement trauma informed practices effectively (Aspelin et al., 2020; Berger et al., 2015; Cavanaugh, 2016; Delisio et al., 2020; Diggins, 2021; Goldenthal et al., 2023; Hunter et al.; 2021; Liasidou, 2022; Maddox et al., 2022; Offerman et al., 2020; Riggs & Landrum, 2023; Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). TIC trauma informed care training can be incorporated into behavior management training and emphasize the importance of consistent application of TIC trauma informed care principles across all educational settings (Hunter et al., 2021). Regular ongoing training helps teachers integrate TIC trauma informed care into their daily practice and reinforces a unified schoolwide approach. Goldenthal et al. (2024) also underscore the importance of administrative support in professional development initiatives. Administrators set the tone for the school.

Effective professional development should include practical strategies for classroom management, trauma-sensitive practices, incident management, and methods for building relationships with students (Maddox et al., 2022). Building relational competence is essential for special education teachers to build meaningful connections with their students (Aspelin 2020). Mindfulness and self-care training should also be part of the training curriculum (Singh, 2020). Professional development times may also be used to establish a common vocabulary for addressing trauma issues. A shared language helps educators communicate more effectively about student needs and how best to support them (Brunzell et al., 2015). A common vocabulary for feelings and emotions also ensures consistency across different classrooms and grade levels (Riggs & Landrum, 2023).

Additionally, professional development is the perfect opportunity to create trauma teams or a behavioral health team (Maddox et al., 2022). These teams can work to ensure students have the specific behavioral and emotional support they need (Goldenthal et al., 2023). Teams may include multidisciplinary teachers, counselors, other educators, or specialists though community partnerships (Hunter et al, 2020). These teams are critically needed to address the high percentage of ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with disabilities as they benefit when specific supports are in place to address mental health needs (Offerman et al., 2024).

Community & Family Partnerships #

Community partnerships are another important aspect when addressing student safety. Educators have an essential role within TIC trauma informed care , but it falls within the scope of supporting students’ needs, teaching skills for connection, and preventing re-traumatization. Just as educators would not prescribe medications for students, they are not qualified to give trauma treatments. Joyce Epstein’s model framework on collaboration underscores the importance of engaging families and communities in supporting student development (Organized Engagement). The framework builds off the theory that schools, families, and communities have overlapping spheres of influence. Through consistent communication and support, families can reinforce the emotional and behavioral strategies taught at school (Goldenthal et al, 2023; Organized Engagement). Community-based activities and partnerships can provide additional resources and support helping to mitigate the effects of trauma and promote resilience (Hunter et al, 2021; Liasidou, 2022; Organized Engagement).

By integrating Epstein’s model, schools can ensure that practices are coordinated with professionals who are trained to handle known trauma triggers (Diggins et al., 2021; Organized Engagement). Specialists in the community are needed for treatments, therapy, and helping students process the ACE adverse childhood experience (Woollett et al., 2020). These partnerships can be very effective at the Tier 2 and 3 levels for student support (Hunter et al., 2021). Forming partnerships with community organizations can facilitate access to additional resources and service, such as trauma-focused therapy, family counseling, and crisis intervention (Maddox et al., 2022). According to the Epstein model, these efforts align with the principle of “Community Collaboration” (Organized Engagement).

One such therapeutic practice can be found in a 2020 study by Woollett et al., about the effectiveness of play and art therapy when working with students experiencing ACEs adverse childhood experiences . This study explored interventions that combined “trauma focused cognitive behavior therapy (Verbal therapy method) with art and play therapy (Non-verbal therapy methods) (Woollett et al., 2020, p 1). The participants were school aged children and their mothers from domestic violence shelters in both the United States and South Africa. 95% of the children in the study self-reported ACEs adverse childhood experiences . The results of this study showed that through this novel intervention, student self-reported depression dropped from a mean of 13.7 to 8.3 (Children’s Depression Inventory) over the 12-week trial. Perhaps even more importantly were the qualitative results. Children were able to connect with their caregivers and express difficult emotions easier. They also reported that the intervention helped them to manage their behaviors.

Collaborating with the community give students’ access to mental health services they may never receive (Maddox et al., 2022). Practices like this can be helpful when working with students with verbal disabilities by giving them alternate means to express themselves. The Woollett et al., study (2020) used art therapy as a way to use creativity through art to express emotions, reduce anxiety, and grow self-awareness and self-esteem. The artwork creates a dialogue between the student and the professional. Play therapy is similar in that it helps build communication in ways outside of language. “Play has the distinctive ability to honor the child’s emotional world and personal logic” (Woollett et al., 2020, p. 3). Furthermore, the benefits of integrating creative therapies with mindful practices extend beyond the individual students.

The study found that these activities combined with mindfulness training for caregivers lead to a significant decrease in depression in children and caregivers. The authors found that working with caregivers and children created a circular framework of healing in which caregivers were less triggered by child behaviors, and child behaviors went down as the relationship subsequently increased in trust and safety. These therapeutic practices require specialized knowledge and skills, but working together with the community is worth the effort to provide holistic support for students.

In addition to working with professionals, working with families increases behavior regulation in students struggling with ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Cavanaugh, 2016). Including families in the planning and decision-making process ensures that interventions are culturally sensitive and tailored to meet the specific needs of the students (Organized Understanding). When possible, building connections with families creates a unified support system for the student. Students with special education needs may be reliant on family members for daily function tasks. Note that it is not always appropriate to collaborate with caregivers as some caregivers may be the source of the trauma that is affecting students (Cavanaugh, 2016; Woollett et al., 2020). However, when relationships with families are in place, it is possible they will approach educators when they are aware of student ACEs adverse childhood experiences . In this way families and educators can work together to identify and implement TIC trauma informed care support for the student (Hunter et al., 2021).

Caregivers frequently have their own trauma that may or may not be related to the trauma students are going through. Educators can establish relationships with parents to be in a position to recommend community support services such as individual counseling and therapy (Goldenthal, 2023; Hunter et al., 2021). Students benefit when caregivers have strategies in place to manage their own emotions (Woollett et al., 2020). This collaboration can disrupt the cycle of generational trauma and encourage healing through trusting the relationship (Liasidou, 2022).

Caregivers of students with special education needs will benefit from many of the same mindfulness practices teachers use (Singh, 2020). Educators can reach out and share resources, or even set up community-based classes for support. For example, schools can organize workshops or support groups where caregivers learn and practice mindfulness techniques together. Relationships with families can be built primarily through open communication and cultural responsiveness. Caregivers want their concerns heard and validated. Teachers should create regular opportunities for dialogue through in-person conferences, e-mails, or informal check-ins.

Collaboration with families often leads to more tailored and impactful interventions for students. Families often have unique insight into the way their child’s mind works. They can understand behavior motivations, antecedent triggers, socially valid goals, or even rewards that will have high value to the child. Working with families allows for wraparound support based off student strengths (Cavanaugh, 2016). Caregivers are integral participants for structures like the FBA Functional Behavior Analysis or BIP Behavior Intervention Plans (Berger, 2021). By involving caregivers in the development and implementation of these plans, educators can ensure that the strategies are consistent across home and school environments, enhancing generalization and effectiveness. Students needing special education services benefit from every opportunity for generalization, that is transferring skills across different settings (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021).

Connection #

The second pillar of TIC trauma informed care is connection (Maddox et al., 2022). Behaviors due to traumatic experiences need to have the root causes addressed, which frequently is a lack of trust due to ACEs adverse childhood experiences . Connection is the key to building relationships, making connections, and is an impactful way to negate the impact of trauma with the isolation it incurs (Aspelin et al., 2020). Students need connection to feel safe. Connection is a pivotal part of creating psychological safety in classrooms. However, making connections with other people can be complicated without the addition of ACEs adverse childhood experiences or special education needs. The pillar of connection contains four components, intentional positive interactions, cultural relevancy, peer support, trustworthiness, and transparency (See figure 1).

People are adept at hiding pain, as there can be social stigma around it. Educators are uniquely placed in society where they have a chance to notice subtle changes that may indicate things are not right (Goldenthal et al., 2024). However, this can only be successful when student-teacher relationships are in place. Students may very well show signs of trauma in a school setting that could be missed at home. School regularly places demands on students, such as testing, which adds to the stresses and anxieties in a child’s life. Teachers have opportunities to see these cracks in the “everything is ok” mask (Maddox, et al., 2022). With proper trauma informed training and relationship building, educators will be able to recognize these cracks for what they are, trauma responses, and attend to the student needs. While not all emotional or behavioral dysregulation can be attributed to trauma, they are strong indicators (Hunter et al., 2021).

Understanding student emotions and behaviors is crucial for educators to effectively use a “trauma lens” to reframe misbehavior. Shifting teachers’ perspectives of student behaviors from intentional belligerence to understanding the cause behind the dysregulation is essential for building relationships with students (Goldenthal et al., 2024). Remembering that the student is an individual with unique needs, experiences and learned behaviors invites students into a mutual exchange wherein relationships and cooperation can be established (Aspelin, 2020).

Positive Interactions #

Students can connect with teachers through intentional positive interactions (Aspelin et al., 2020; Riggs & Landrum 2023). Incorporating positive moments into the classroom gives a model for students to use when practicing relationship skills (CASEL). By consistently modeling positive supportive behavior, educators create a stable environment that fosters trust and safety for ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with special education needs (Hunter, 2022). Educators cannot control how the student responds, but they can control their own reactions (Aspelin et al, 2020). Unconditional positive regard creates pathways to repair broken attachments, help students with emotional regulation and resilience (Berger et al., 2021). This warm and caring demeanor for the classroom shows that educators value students regardless of behavior (Brunzell et al., 2015).

Students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences may be hesitant to accept new relationships at first, after all life has taught them not to trust others. Brunzell et al. (2015) wrote about a teacher working with incarcerated students. The first attempt at building trust had students skeptical and hostile as they rejected the social emotional lesson. Instead of returning hostility with hostility, the teacher found a way to create a connection with the students. His unconditional positive attitude-built trust creating a safe learning environment in which students could thrive. Then the teacher continued to make the lesson more accessible by chunking the ideas into smaller learning segments. While slow, this process taught the students a shared language they could use to discuss emotional regulation. The students learned two new words a lesson and then were asked a simple question “Which of these two words would you want to manage this scenario if you were involved?” The students had the background knowledge now to engage in meaningful dialog. Since the vocabulary was chunked up into smaller lessons, only two words at a time, it was not overwhelming, and the students were successful in learning about mental strengths (Browder & Spooner, 2014).

This story is an excellent example of how to support students needing special education services. First teachers need to avoid power struggles in the here and now and accept students as they are (Aspelin et al., 2020). Accepting students as they are leads to trust. The teacher showed this by creating lessons that met students’ strengths and ability levels. In doing so, the teacher showed that connecting with the students is more important than who is right or wrong. They would do well to remember the quote by Douglas Adams, “I’d rather be happy than right any day.” (The Ultimate Hitchhiker’s Guide, 2005, p.128). Creating happy relationships with students in special education services needs to take priority over being right, winning an argument, personal pride, or compelling a student to finish all their work during periods of behavioral dysregulation.

Intentional positive interactions should come at a high rate and include both behavior specific statements and nonconditional praise (Cavanaugh, 2016). Students with special education needs and who have experienced ACEs adverse childhood experiences need excessive amounts of positive interactions. They have received life altering amounts of negativity and need more positivity in their lives to grow hope and resilience (Offerman et al., 2023). Non contingent praise includes things like greeting students at the door every morning while behavior specific praise refers to things students have worked hard on (Cavanaugh, 2016). Praise can also include tangible rewards through a PBIS positive behavior interventions and support system (Goldenthal et al, 2024). Positive interactions are critical for students in special education, especially when experiencing dysregulation due to trauma responses (Brunzell, et al., 2015). Students also need opportunities to initiate positive interactions (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Cultural Responsiveness #

One point that arose in the literature repeatedly was that TIC trauma informed care practices require a culturally responsive environment (Cavanaugh, 2016; Goldenthal et al., 2023; Hunter et al., 2021; Maddox et al., 2022; Riggs & Landrum, 2022). School and classroom policies need to be reflective of the students’ cultural backgrounds. Students needing special education services have higher rates of single parents, poverty, and multicultural backgrounds (Offerman et al., 2022). Recognizing and validating the diverse backgrounds of students helps in addressing their unique needs and experiences. Further, different cultures have different expectations on how to process trauma as they may be contending with historical factors (Maddox et al., 2022).

Educators need to understand how the communities and families they support deal with these tough situations. One such example comes from Cavanagh’s paper on trauma informed classrooms (2016). If an educator were to state “You didn’t push in a chair,” if could be interpreted different ways depending on culture. Some students may take it as a simple fact, and have no behavioral change while other students may recognize it as a command that the chair needs to be pushed in. This can be even more challenging with students going through trauma, as stating the request as an actual command may trigger a power struggle or increase anxiety. Understanding the cultures can bring valuable insights into how to support students through their trauma (Hunter et al., 2021).

Incorporating culturally relevant pedagogy is crucial when building connections and trust with students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences and who need special education services. Principles of diversity support holistic learning that can be sensitive to the needs of students with ACE adverse childhood experience (Hunter, 2021). Students need positive representation of their personal cultures for TIC trauma informed care to be effective (Maddox, et al., 2022). Educators should strive to integrate students’ cultural experiences into the curriculum to acknowledge unique perspectives they brings to the classroom. This helps to validate students’ identities and creates a sense of belonging and trust necessary for connection.

Trustworthiness and Transparency #

According to a 2020 survey of special education teachers by Aspelin et al., earning trust with students is central for building relationships. The researchers surveyed 21 special education teachers who had been working in education for a range of nine to forty-two years. The survey focused on answering two questions, the first revolving around the role of social relationships as a special education teacher and the second concerned relational competence. The results of the study showed that special education teachers overwhelmingly believe that connection with students is fundamental for the special education profession. The study also found that relational competence is developed through building trust with students through accepting who they are, and understanding will help to build this connection. The survey did caution that student teacher connections take time to develop but “it means everything” (Aspelin et al, 2020, p. 680).

Trust is a key part of establishing relational competence. Building trust involves being consistent, reliable, and honest in all interactions with students, in other words, being transparent (Maddox et al., 2022). Transparency means being open about classroom expectations, decisions, and processes which helps to build trust and security with students. When teachers are transparent, students are more likely to feel comfortable which leads to motivation in academics. Advocacy is another way to build trust in a relationship. Teachers are in a unique position to advocate for students; to make sure student voices are heard and their needs are met within the system. Students in particular benefit from this advocacy which helps counteract the effects of ACE adverse childhood experience (Liasidou, 2022, p.7).

Trust and transparency build a student teacher relationship based on based on mutual understanding (Aspelin et al., 2020). When mutual understanding is in place it is also easier to avoid power struggles and diffuse difficult situations. As students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences are more common than not, particularly among diverse populations, it is safe to assume that all children are going through something that is causing irregular behavior (Offerman et al.,2022). Meeting these behaviors with empathy, warmth, genuineness, and compassion continues to build the trusting relationship needed for academic success (Brunzell et al., 2015).

Peer Supports #

Students building relationships with peers through guided instruction is another practice to support students experiencing ACE adverse childhood experience (Hunter et al, 2021). Peer support is a way for students to naturally work on social awareness and relationship skills (CASEL). Trauma can lead to feelings of isolation and withdrawal from social interactions (Brunzell et al., 2015). Intentionally planned opportunities for students to engage in structured social activities can help to foster a sense of belonging and community within the classroom. Bonding with peers, making genuine friendships can be daunting to a child who has been hurt and may not understand social queues. Structured support for student interactions can facilitate connections with peers especially ACE adverse childhood experience affected students needing special education support (Hunter et al., 2021).

Cooperative learning strategies can be incorporated into classroom lessons. Strategies include group projects, peer-assisted learning, and face-to-face promotion (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). These strategies first need to be modeled so that students know what is expected of them. For example, in face-to-face promotion, students are invited to support and encourage each other’s success. However, first the teacher needs to lead a discussion of what are considered positive words, how to use them properly, positive body language, and how to be respectful with giving feedback (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). The literature review by Wattanawongwan et al. (2021) demonstrated that cooperative learning strategies not only enhance academic outlooks up also play a crucial role in building social skills and peer relationships. The researchers found that these strategies help support ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with disabilities to develop trust and mutual support, which are essential for their emotional and social development.

Students needing special education services may benefit from visual support or an interaction checklist. The more specific the topic is covered, the easier they can participate. One example of specificity could be telling a student they should wait at least 30 seconds after speaking to let others share. Once they are confident, they can use the provided frameworks to interact positively, support one another, and grow together. Students have the added advantage of seeing their peers as role models showing positive interactions (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Learning from peers can have a greater impact as students identify more closely with children their own age.

Teachers should continue to monitor students as they interact giving immediate feedback when they are following expectations (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). This practice can have the advantage of a more intimate setting as it can be done with partners or small groups. This alternate to large group instruction allows students to bond while working on academic tasks (Hunter et al., 2021). Students needing special education services, particularly those with ASD autism spectrum disorder or ADHD attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder frequently struggle with peer interactions (Diggins et. al., 2021). Smaller settings can be seen as safer, leading to more open dialogue, positive interactions, and connection. Positive interactions from peers can have greater impact on student’s emotions, impacting self-efficacy, confidence, and feelings of success (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Social support systems outside the classroom can also provide opportunities for students to connect with their peers (Maddox et al., 2020). These groups are beneficial to students with ACE adverse childhood experience and special education needs as they offer a break from the traditional academic environment while promoting social interaction (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). Peer tutoring or mentoring programs have been used with success to support students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences (Cavanaugh, 2016). Peer tutoring is also a chance for students to engage in positive interactions (Goldenthal et al., 2024). These programs create a network where students can rely on each other, reducing feelings of isolation. Indeed, when students begin to look to peers for support and problem solving, this can indicate the classroom has a trusting atmosphere (Brunzel et al., 2015).

Structured community meetings can help students process emotions after a tumultuous event at school (Diggins, 2021). These meetings should follow a consistent pattern but can be used to address large or small issues. Community meetings have been shown to reduce anxiety and learn strategies from other students to cope with unexpected events (Hunter et al., 2021). Students can use this time to work on their shared vocabulary around adverse events which enhances their understanding of empathy. Additionally, sharing experiences together adds to the sense of emotional safety in the school or classroom culture (Riggs & Landrum, 2023).

Community meetings are not just for student benefit either. Teachers should have time for processing with their coworkers after crisis events (Offerman et al, 2024). Community meetings can be as simple as checking in with each other to see how people are feeling and where everyone can find help (Diggins, 2021). These informal meetings can work to reduce vicarious trauma (Cavanaugh, 2016). Crisis debriefing provides a structured opportunity for staff, and potentially students, to express feelings, reflect on the event, and support one another (Goldenthal et al., 2023). They can also be more in-depth debriefing to discuss what happened, their reactions, and strategies for inevitable future events. These reflective practices are part of the TIC trauma informed care process to support teachers and show they are valued and respected (Goldenthal et al, 2024).

Emotional Regulation #

The final pillar of TIC trauma informed care is emotional regulation (Maddox et al., 2022). For this pillar to be most effective, it is essential that the other two pillars of safety and connection are firmly established. Safety and connection are needed to keep the student’s brain from triggering an alarm state. Alarm states lead to dysregulated behavior that impedes learning (Woollett et al., 2020). Once students are safe and have a sense of connection, then skill acquisition may begin. The pillar of emotional regulation has four components which are, using student strengths, target interventions, agency, and mindfulness (See figure 1). By integrating these components, educators can support students in building their emotional strength and resilience.

Students experiencing emotional dysregulation my not have the capability yet to deescalate on their own and will need support from caring educators (Delisio et al., 2023). When teachers model effective emotional regulation, they provide a blueprint for managing their own emotions (Diggins et al., 2021). This is particularly important for students with special education needs, who often struggle with emotional behavior regulation compounded by ACE adverse childhood experience responses (Goldenthal et al., 2024). Educators modeling emotional regulation is a critical component of special education and needs to be used when implementing TIC trauma informed care (Hunter et al., 2021).

School may be the only place students interact with emotional competent adults. Students need these examples as some caregivers struggle with emotional regulation (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). Everyone becomes frustrated at one point or another, and students will watch to see how their teacher manages the situation. Consider the story told earlier from the Brunzell (2015) paper. The teacher gave explicit instructions to the students to learn vocabulary to support emotional regulation. First though, he modeled emotional regulation. It is unlikely the impact would have remained the same had the teacher’s emotional state fallen into dysregulation and yelled at the students. Teachers who effectively manage to display emotional regulation serve as powerful role models for their students, demonstrating constructive ways to handle emotional challenges (Brunzell et al., 2015).

ACE adverse childhood experience affected students need explicit SEL social emotional lessons skill practice for self-management, mindfulness and with agency (CASEL). These SEL social emotional lessons interventions must be practiced when the student is regulated to call upon the skills in moments of dysregulation. Students will need intentional, targeted skill building to support emotional regulation. Emotional regulation practice is easier done when life can be anticipated, and roles are consistent. It takes time and proactiveness to learn social skills and queues, executive functioning, and self-efficacy (Asperline et al., 2020). The more times students can practice with their brain in its executive state, the more effective it will be during moments of dysregulation (Goldenthal et al., 2024). SEL social emotional lessons for ACE adverse childhood experience affected students needing special education services should involve very straight forward specific examples to follow and give the reasons behind them (Hunter et al., 2021). When possible, explain subtext in conversations to make students aware of communication differences.

Strength Based #

SEL social emotional lessons interventions should be built around student strengths (Aspelin et al., 2020; Cavanaugh, 2016; Brunzell et al., 2015; Goldenthal et al, 2023; Mason et al., 2022). Positive behaviors that need to be encouraged in students, were identified in the CIA Classification of Character Strengths and Virtues (Brunzell et al., 2015). These six characteristics are wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity (love and kindness), justice, temperance (forgiveness, humility, self-regulation), and transcendence (appreciation, gratitude). SEL social emotional lessons lessons should boost positive emotions in the classroom or group and cover topics one or two at a time so that students have time to process. Additionally, students will need time to practice these behaviors throughout the day. Students benefit when given time to have moments of success (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Brunzell et al. (2015) reviewed the literature to find positive psychological TIC trauma informed care approaches to support healing and resilience growth in ACE adverse childhood experience affected students. The results of this review suggest that building on student strengths through positive interventions will provide opportunities for healing. One practice Brunzell et al., shared was providing moments of success with working on transcendence, meaning gratitude, hope, humor, and spirituality that bring appreciation of beauty in the world. Students were working on the application of gratitude. The authors noted that students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences may struggle to find mental gratitude. Instead, the teachers focused on actions that showed gratitude. Students picked a gratitude target and spent a week finding ways to thank this person. This type of structured learning is beneficial to both students with ACE adverse childhood experience and students needing special education support. It gives specific parameters to succeed and has multiple ways it can be accomplished. This allows students to work within their strengths and have a higher chance of success.

Focusing on student strengths and utilizing principles of positive psychology can significantly enhance the learning experience for students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences . Recognizing and building on students’ inherent strengths gives credibility to positive praise. This can in turn foster a sense of competence and resilience, crucial for academic growth (Brunzell et al., 2015). Brunzell et al. (2015) emphasizes the importance of creating intentional learning moments that highlight and celebrate these strengths, thereby promoting a positive self-concept. These intentional learning moments can be incorporated into various lessons across curriculum. Spreading the moments out like this will help students learn that these skills are useful in all situations and not just social emotional learning environments (Berger et al., 2021).

Empowerment and Agency #

A safe classroom environment involves both physical and psychological elements (Cavanaugh, 2016). Feeling safe is just as important as being safe. Feeling safe and in control helps to calm the alarm system that can trigger stress responses when perceived threats are around (Brunzell, et al. 2015). In a review of the literature, Riggs and Landrum (2023) found three ways to build agency in students. The practices were instructional choice, student voice, and opportunities to respond. Empowerment allows for appropriate amounts of control to be given back to students within the classroom setting.

Instructional choice is a TIC trauma informed care practice that allows students some agency in assignments and can reduce emotional and behavioral dysregulation in students with disabilities (Berger et al., 2021). Choice allows students to work to their strengths and reduce anxiety around disability or ACE adverse childhood experience . Choice with assignments provides students with chances to work on decision making skills (CASEL). Also, offering choices in subject or presentation manner on assignments is a simpler practice. Berger et al. (2021) pulled from research based literature to explore school interventions to support ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with ASD autism spectrum disorder . Multiple models in the review described instructional choice as a supportive TIC trauma informed care practice that helps to mitigate trauma responses in students with ASD autism spectrum disorder . These students often face heightened sensitivity to changes in routine and increased stress due to their trauma histories. By providing choice, educators can help students regulate their emotions and behaviors.

In addition to building agency through choice with assignments, offering choices also works as a de-escalation technique. Addressing outbursts with choices is an effective way to diffuse a power struggle (Brunzell, et al., 2015). Students then can pick the outcome they prefer with a clear understanding of the expectations. Once the student has calmed down, a follow-up reflection can take place. Assignment choices allow students to use their interests to guide learning. Incorporating student interests can be an excellent way to work on building connections (Aspelin et al., 2020; Riggs & Landrom, 2023).

Empowering students with agency through voice and choice practices builds self-efficacy (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Students needing special education support may be hesitant at first to speak up due to ACE adverse childhood experience . Teachers can structure opportunities to respond through discussion in their lessons. One strategy that works well for reluctant students is using partners prior to a group discussion. Students are given chances to think about a topic then share with those around them. When the class discussion begins, they may share their own thoughts or what they learned from their peers as part of the cooperative learning process (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). Student voice can also be encouraged to use their voice by including student interests (Aspelin et al., 2020; Berger et al., 2021). When students are offered the choice to incorporate interests on assignments, student engagement in increased (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Student interest is another reason that positive representations from students’ cultures are so important in the classroom (Maddox et al., 2022). When students trust that educators appreciate their culture, they are more willing to share interests.

Another way to work on student agency is through goals, either class wide or individual. Goals encourage positive interdependence (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021). When creating shared classroom goals, they need to be clearly defined so that the students can work on the goals together. Students learn their personal contributions can benefit the whole group and, in turn, the contributions of others benefit the individual student. Working towards common goals also makes it easier for students to recognize each other’s successes. Individual goals give students a chance to work on their strengths (Brunzell et al., 2015). A check-in check-out (CICO) system is one way for students to work on individual goals with the support of an educator (Hunter et al., 2021). CICO check-in check-out is beneficial to ACE adverse childhood experience affected students as it is a consistent predictable positive interaction (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Self-Management #

Self-management is another part of SEL social emotional lessons that is crucial for ACE adverse childhood experience affected students (CASEL). Integrating growth mindset techniques is essential for these lessons (Brunzell et al., 2015). Encourage students to view challenges and new topics as opportunities for growth and learning. This can be achieved by praising effort and persistence over output. Include those positive self-talk techniques written about earlier with phrases like “Mistakes help me learn,” or “I can improve with practice.” Students may be skeptical about this. One way to counter is to show them examples of overcoming hard things. Having a relationship with the students should give insight on what comparison to use (Aspelin, 2020). Otherwise, there is a vast resource on the internet with videos of people showing multiple iterations of inventions that can help students see others succeeding after multiple attempts (Brunzell et al., 2015).

Self-management lessons for anger regulation can be effectively implemented as a targeted support for students (Goldenthal, 2024). Understanding body response concepts to stress can help students identify anger cues and things that may cause triggers so they can avoid them (Brunzel et al., 2015). Recognizing changes in body feelings is the first step to regulation emotions and behaviors. These lessons underline the importance of emotional competence and the need for social emotional lessons. Regulation of emotions and behavior is the key to increased mental health and contributes to academic achievement (Maddox et al., 2022).

Another example of a self-management intervention comes from a 2023 study by Delisio et al. This study looked at the effect of teaching students TIC trauma informed care strategies, like the use of sensory tools, for addressing self-regulation. The researchers provided grants to special education classrooms for calming corners and sensory stations and provided training for implementation. While the study involved multiple classrooms and 82 students with disabilities, two students were chosen for the case study to track intervention impact through behavioral changes. One student with ADHD attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder had a baseline of .8 aggression (hitting and kicking) behaviors and after 40 days of intervention had an average of 0 aggression behaviors per day. The second student was diagnosed with ASD autism spectrum disorder . Their baseline aggression (pinching, hitting, scratching, and throwing) behaviors averaged 7.2 per day. After the 30-day intervention the student’s aggression behaviors averaged .26 per day. Over all 90% of the teachers surveyed found that the TIC trauma informed care intervention was effective at reducing behaviors for students with disabilities.

The calming corners and sensory stations were designed to promote self-regulation to manage sensory needs for students with disabilities, promoting better focus and engagement in the classroom. These were designated areas for students to retreat when they felt overwhelmed or needed a change in stimuli. The areas should be designed to be apart from the main class so the student can be separated, but still within the teacher’s watch. These spaces should be dedicated to calm activities to help students manage emotions and return to a state of readiness for learning. The calming corners included things that reduce sensory input like soft seating like bean bag chairs, soothing visuals, fidget toys, noise-reducing headphones, and weighted blankets. Sensory stations were spaces to change or increase sensory input. Supports included bins full of interesting feeling materiel such as rice or beads, movement activities like trampolines, visually stimulating materials such as lava lamps, audio supports like white noise machines, and olfactory stimuli such as essential oil diffuser.

Brain-breaks are an additional self-management tool that can either be student advocated or teacher suggested. When students seem checked out, brain breaks should be implemented before behavior disruptions occur (Delisio et al., 2023). At a tier one level, teachers can plan for brain breaks for the entire class to help prevent mental overload (Brunzell et al., 2015). This is particularly helpful when learning new topics or participating in examinations. At tier 2 or 3, educators can collaborate with their coworkers to offer semi-private spaces for brain breaks to individuals as needed. Some students find a change of location calming and can benefit from helping in the library, reading to younger students, or even having a chance to just sit quietly in a different space.

Students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences often struggle to understand and process their emotions. For students needing special education services, it can be challenging to recognize them in themselves or peers (Brunxell et al., 2015). One way to make this more accessible is to use media examples. Students can listen to their favorite songs to identify emotions, or if the singer is using resilient self-talk or catastrophizing (Brunzell et al., 2015). This activity can then lead to discussion on how to deal with negative self-talk when it arises. Providing students with multiple means of access, such as an anchor chart or handout to take home to serve as a reminder of positive phrases will increase the accessibility of the lesson for students needing special education services (Goldenthal et al., 2023).

Another powerful way for students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences to learn strategies to deal with emotions in difficult situations is through roleplay. Students needing special education services may not be able to participate in role play, but other strategies such as giving directions to another, or creating comics around the situation can be used for accommodations. Roleplay is particularly effective for dealing with conflict management scenarios. The key point here is “play” as this activity needs to be fun. Working through difficult situations is stressful, but by keeping it fun, students can use creativity to learn problem solving skills (Woollett et al., 2020).

Mindfulness #

Teachers working with students who have high emotional or behavioral needs face significant professional stress (Cavanaugh, 2016; Offerman et al., 2024). This stress is compounded when educators deal with vicarious trauma from work. Vicarious trauma can also be called compassion fatigue and comes from empathizing with suffering students. The 2024 Goldenthal et al. study surveyed 22 staff members working with students needing mental health support in addition to special education services. One of the sections surveyed was on quality of life including burnout and secondary traumatization. While the data for both the pre and post survey fell within the moderate range, the authors concluded that burnout and professional stress contribute to educators leaving the special education field. Teachers working with students with high needs due to ACEs adverse childhood experiences or special education needs are particularly susceptible to this stress and have urgent need for support and resources to manage their own emotional well-being (Cavanaugh, 2016; Goldenthal, 2024).

One emerging practice to address vicarious trauma and professional stress is mindfulness (Cavanaugh, 2016; Singh, 2020). Mindfulness is awareness of yourself and emotions in the current moment, involving an intentional focus on the present without judgement. A study by Singh et al. (2020) directly evaluated the effectiveness of 3 different trainings; mindfulness, psychoeducation, and traditional in-service training. 216 professionals employed to care for individuals with disabilities were given 3 days of training and then surveyed 6 months later to determine the training impact. The study showed that mindfulness impacted vicarious trauma, burnout, compassion satisfaction, depression, and perceived stress significantly more than the other two types of training. In the baseline survey all three groups scored around 60 for the vicarious trauma score. 6 months after training the mindfulness group dropped to 42, the psychoeducation group dropped to 55, while the traditional in-service group stayed at 60.

These professionals involved in the Singh et al., (2020) study learned meditation practices including common hindrances that can get in the way of caring. Things like sensory desire, sloth, worry, or doubt can impede acting mindfully. Often, acknowledging personal inner reactions makes setting them aside easier for others. Before reacting, professionals can check in with themselves asking, “Why am I reacting this way?” This mindful check goes a long way with understanding mental states and resetting before responding in haste or with judgement. Participants were encouraged to practice formal meditation daily and to document the process in a journal. The study found that these mindfulness techniques had long lasting effects to increase the quality of life for professional caregivers of ACE adverse childhood experience affected students with disabilities.

A paper by Brunzell et al. (2015) gives an example of mindfulness in practice in education. While a teacher was working with students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences , they would verbally lash out when behaviors were corrected. After consulting with the administration, he resolved to use the mindfulness technique of breathing deep. When students were rude or insubordinate the teacher would pause, take a deep breath, and process his own emotions before responding to the student. After modeling mindfulness, the teacher waited for both parties to be in a calm state and then reflected on the encounter. This teacher used mindfulness to accept student attitude and stay calm, both key parts of creating trusting relationships with students (Aspelin et al., 2020).

Students with ACEs adverse childhood experiences also benefit from learning mindfulness exercises as self-awareness is one of the 5 components of SEL social emotional lessons (CASEL). One of the most commonly used versions of mindfulness is as easy as “taking a deep breath.” Intentional breathing has been found to soothe bodies when stressed (Woollett et al., 2020). Breathing deeply helps to attune to body sensations. These deep breathing exercises are effective for supporting students’ regulating their own emotions (Cavanaugh, 2016). Students could also track their heart rate during this breathing exercise to show its effectiveness showing them how bodies physically respond to trauma or stress (Brunzell et al., 2015). Breathing activities can be combined with movement practices for relaxation and calming (Goldenthal et al, 2024). Movements practices include rhythmic repetitive intervention that allows for self-regulation. Songs, drumming, chants, movement, or other sensory input can disrupt or prevent the alarm state process, particularly during transitions (Brunzell et al., 2015). Intentionally incorporating these moments into the classroom will require thoughtful planning but are a holistic way to use TIC trauma informed care with students experiencing ACEs adverse childhood experiences .

Conclusion #

When working with students who fall at the intersection of ACE adverse childhood experience and special education, relational competence is the key and foundational for TIC trauma informed care (Aspelin et al., 2020). Remember the wise words of Elwood P. Dowd, the main character from the film Harvey, “Years ago my mother used to say to me, she’d say… “In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant.” Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant.” (1950). This quote encapsulates the essential shift from focusing solely on academic intelligence to fostering a nurturing and supportive environment for students. Adopting a trauma informed approach necessitates this shift in perspective (Liasidou, 2022). In practice, this shift means prioritizing holistic environments that are safe, build connections, and support emotional regulation for all students (Maddox et al., 2022).

Establishing a safe learning environment is foundational for TIC trauma informed care and essential for all educational settings (Cavanaugh, 2016). This is especially critical for ACE adverse childhood experience affected students who face compounded challenges from trauma (Diggins, 2021). A comprehensive approach to TIC trauma informed care safety includes data informed frameworks, consistent environments, professional development, and family and community partnerships. Effective screening and early intervention to address ACEs adverse childhood experiences will help to prevent the escalation of emotional and behavioral issues (Maddox et al, 2022). Implementing TIC trauma informed care into existing frameworks like MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support ensures all students receive appropriate levels of care (Goldenthal et al., 2024). Consistent routines promote predictability and student safety for students with disabilities (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Collaborative community partnerships and professional development are essential for sustaining TIC trauma informed care practices as they reduce professional stress and enhance educator effectiveness.

Establishing connections helps mitigate the isolation caused by trauma and fosters psychological safety in classrooms (Aspelin et al, 2020; Brunzell et al., 2015). Key components of connection include positive interactions, cultural relevancy, peer support, and trustworthiness. Educators play a vital role in recognizing the subtle signs of trauma and reframing student behaviors from a perspective of understanding rather than punishment. Positive interactions, including behavior specific praise and noncontingent praise, helps build trust and emotional resilience (Brunzell er al., 2015). Incorporating culturally responsive practices is essential for addressing the diverse needs of students and fostering an inclusive environment (Liasidou, 2022). Building trust and transparency is key for developing relational competence (Aspelin et al., 2020). Peer support and structured social activities also help students form connections and feel a sense of belonging (Wattanawongwan et al., 2021).

Emotional regulation relies on the foundations of safety and connection to support to reduce behavioral dysregulation triggers (Diggins, 2021). Educators consistently maintaining emotional regulation provide students with models for managing their own emotions (Hunter et al., 2021). Emotional regulation includes strength-based practices, self-management, agency, and mindfulness. Students benefit from explicit SEL social emotional lessons built around student strengths to promote resilience (Brunzell et al., 2015). Empowering students with choice and voice in their learning builds agency and self-efficacy (Riggs & Landrum, 2023). Self-management interventions, such as brain breaks and calming corners help students to learn to manage their emotions effectively (Delisio et al., 2023). Mindfulness practices support both students and educators in managing stress and promoting emotional well-being (Singh et al., 2020). By integrating all these elements, TIC trauma informed care fosters a holistic supportive environment for students affected by ACEs adverse childhood experiences and needing special education services.

Limitations #

Students who need special education services will frequently need individualized support. This paper cannot begin to address every single accommodation or modification needed to support all students. Educators will need continued professional development to increase knowledge of current best practices (Hunter et al., 2021). Professional development for TIC trauma informed care is rare, frequently due to lack of funding or time (Liasidou, 2022). However, with the number of ACE adverse childhood experience affected students this needs to be a priority (Offerman et al., 2022). Educators need this continuous learning and emotional support to keep quality educators in the field. Training will decrease professional stress and enhance their ability to implement creative and novel solutions to their students’ specific needs (Cavanaugh, 2016).

Implementing additional trauma-informed practices without additional time or resources can make it challenging to meaningfully integrate these practices into daily routines (Delisio et al., 2023). Educator agendas are already quite full, so school districts will need to prioritize and limit the number of new interventions and social initiatives that have the lowest buy in and highest probability of success. Working TIC trauma informed care into an already established system of support such as MTSS Multi-Tier System of Support will lessen the strain on time and resources (Diggins, 2021). This approach aligns with the principle of working smarter, not harder and can help ensure that TIC trauma informed care practices are sustainable and effective.

Furthermore, it is imperative that educators examine practices in their current classroom and buildings to identify ways to respond that work within the TIC trauma informed care framework (Maddox et al., 2016). This involves assessing the environment, teaching methods, and support systems to ensure they align with TIC trauma informed care principles. They also need to proactively prevent professional stress, vicarious trauma, and burnout through employing self-care techniques such as mindfulness (Singh et al., 2020). Mindfulness is also essential for maintaining a professional attitude in tense situations (Brunzell et al, 2015). When educators are grounded and centered, they can respond to challenging behaviors with patience and understanding.

Implications for future practice #

Due to the high numbers of ACE adverse childhood experience affected students in the special education population, TIC trauma informed care should be an integral part of all special education programs. Pre-service teacher training should include comprehensive education on TIC trauma informed care , given that over 60% of students will have one or more ACE adverse childhood experience . This is even more critical for teachers planning to work with students needing special education support as they have an 80% rate of one or more ACE adverse childhood experience . Integrating this training into teacher preparation programs will equip future educators with the knowledge and skills needed to support their students effectively at the outset. Additionally, pre-service teachers need opportunities to understand the importance of intentional relationship connections with students (Asplin et al., 2020).

Furthermore, while many of the practices mentioned have shown promise there is a need for more research on their effectiveness, particularly for students with disabilities. Current studies may not fully capture the unique needs and responses of this population, highlighting the importance of ongoing research and adaptation of these practices. Offerman et al. (2022) shows the need for research due to how many students with disabilities report ACEs adverse childhood experiences . While there have been multiple studies done around ACEs adverse childhood experiences within the general population, research is limited for students with disabilities. Much of the evidence around implementing TIC trauma informed care practices is antidotal and more research is needed to see how these practices impact behaviors, academic success, and quality of life.

One area of concern found is that there are several character traits that may overlap between ACE adverse childhood experience affected students and students with disabilities such as communication deficits, sensory sensitivity, or mental rigidity (Berger et al., 2021). Due to this, students may be incorrectly placed in classrooms that do not match their academic needs. Liasidou (2022) reviewed the literature to find research behind implementing inclusion as TIC trauma informed care practice. Misplacement may lead to social isolation and increase their trauma response. Additionally, ACE adverse childhood experience affected students have quadruple the risk of needing special education services compared to non- ACE adverse childhood experience affected students. For every ACE adverse childhood experience event “experienced by a child between the ages of three and five increases the likelihood of experiencing disabling conditions such as ADHD attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder , Autistic Spectrum Disorders, and Down Syndrome by 21%” (Liasidou, 2022, p. 7). Inclusion in general education is pivotal for these students as a means of social justice ensuring they have equal opportunity and access to resources (Liasidou, 2022).

A key insight was that TIC trauma informed care practices should address underlying social inequalities as they can also be traumatic and contribute to students’ educational needs. She supports inclusion for equity as it acknowledges that disabilities are socially constructed. That means barriers and challenges faced by students with disabilities are often created by societal attitudes and structures rather than inherent in the individuals themselves. Students have a right to an inclusive educational environment in which they can thrive socially and academically. Liasidou argues that inclusion is a fundamental right for all students regardless of ability (2020). Students in inclusive settings benefit from all the support provided by both general and special education. Learning with peers allows for connections and reduces isolation. Inclusion practices take time, collaboration, and resources that some educators are unprepared to initiate. Although detailing all the requirements for successful inclusion is beyond this paper’s scope, it is essential to acknowledge that inclusion not only supports academic achievement but also enhances social and emotional well-being. While there is limited empirical research directly comparing the effectiveness of inclusion as a trauma supportive practice, inclusion is widely recognized for its positive impact on academic outcomes for students with special education needs (Liasidou, 2022).

Table of Trauma Informed Practices for Special Education Students #

Annotated Bibliography #