Maria Frankland, Ph.D. candidate in educational leadership, University of Maine<\/em> | School Counselor, Narraguagus Jr\/Sr High School<\/em> Childhood traumatic experiences affect our schoolchildren at an alarming rate. The lives of 46 million children \u2014 almost 50 percent of youth under age 18 \u2014 are impacted by trauma every year (Listenbee et al., 2012; Sacks & Murphey, 2018). Commonly referred to as adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), potentially traumatic events include violence, mental illness, and\/or substance abuse in the home; psychological, physical, or sexual abuse; and neglect. The effects of ACEs compound to create complex trauma when multiple ACEs co-occur and\/or exposure to a single adverse experience is prolonged or chronic.<\/p>\n The number of ACEs (often reported as an ACE score on a scale of 0-10) correlates positively with undesirable effects including physical illness, increased risk of mental health problems, and diminished ability to form and maintain social relationships. In the school setting, negative outcomes associated with ACEs include lower academic performance; increased rates of referral for special education services; more instances of exclusionary discipline such as office referral, suspension, or expulsion; increased absenteeism; and higher drop-out rates (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, 2014). Given the spate of negative outcomes across the lifespan that may result from the toxic stress associated with complex trauma and high ACE scores, early intervention is key (Center for Youth and Wellness, 2019).<\/p>\n Recently, the benefits of childhood trauma screening have captured nationwide attention. California primary care providers are being trained \u2014 and paid \u2014 to implement universal childhood trauma screening procedures. Other screening methods, such as those advocated in a recent Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) publication (Souers & Hall, 2016), suggest that teachers should try to determine students\u2019 ACE scores based on their preexisting and\/or anecdotal knowledge of the student and his\/her family circumstances. We applaud these efforts to ensure that students who have experienced traumatic events have the opportunity for early interventions that may mitigate undesirable outcomes. However, because a trauma history does not dictate a student\u2019s future, we are concerned that universal screenings may lead to unintended consequences.<\/p>\n The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) cautions that “asking others to identify needs based on their perspective as a first step of data collection provides limited data and is problematic” (ASCA, 2019, p. 38). Students who experience trauma are at risk of being labeled and re-traumatized. These are often the students who are perceived to be difficult. Their attendance may be poor and, when they are in school, they may be disruptive. They may be impulsive, angry, frustrated, and disengaged. Add additional stressors such as tests and peer relationships, and these students may spiral out of control. Exclusionary discipline practices such as office referrals and suspensions not only impact academics by diminishing time spent in the classroom but also reinforce students\u2019 poor self-image and weak self-efficacy beliefs. Ultimately, this cycle contributes to a higher risk of dropping out. Trauma screenings intended to lead to early intervention may instead reinforce the \u201cdifficult\u201d label, leading to more exclusionary discipline from teachers and bullying from peers. Absent a trauma-informed school climate, the student may experience re-traumatization.<\/p>\n While understanding that trauma has significant consequences, it is equally important to remember that recovery is possible and that students can achieve successful and productive lives. School climate plays a significant role in helping all students to develop adaptively, including those who have faced trauma. Research has identified several key foundational tenets that are needed for creating trauma-sensitive schools:<\/p>\n The process of creating trauma-sensitive schools will look different across Maine schools due to the wide variety of settings and resources available. It is important to remember that it is not just a matter of providing a program. Schools should use the current research on trauma-informed practice to develop a system of interventions and supports to respond to the specific needs of students in the district.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Resources for Schools<\/strong><\/p>\n Information about ACEs:<\/p>\n Developmental Assets Framework:<\/p>\n Evidence-based Social and Emotional Learning:<\/p>\n Resources for Educators: The National Child Traumatic Stress Network<\/p>\n Trauma and Learning Policy Initiative:<\/p>\n
\nSharon Pelletier-Ayer, Ed.S. candidate in prevention and intervention, University of Maine<\/em> | School Counselor, Bangor High School<\/em><\/p>\n
\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n