admin
Key points:
- A truly effective MTSS model integrates trauma-responsive strategies into every tier of support
- 3 key actions for trauma-informed student supports
- Trauma-informed teaching strategies can benefit all students
- For more news on trauma-informed teaching, visit eSN’s SEL & Well-Being hub
Across the country, our schools are being taxed beyond their capacity to support educational success. We’ve known for a long time that students need a three-dimensional structure of guidance and encouragement to thrive. That’s why the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework was created–it’s a prevention framework for early identification of varying student needs and the responses needed to maximize academic success. In theory, an MTSS supports academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs in equal measure. However, in practice, many schools are struggling to incorporate social-emotional and behavioral components in their MTSS–even as many of their students come to school bearing the effects of adversity, trauma, or crisis.
This imbalance is leaving millions of children behind.
Each year, at least 1 in 7 children in the United States experience abuse, violence, natural disasters, or other adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). By age 16, roughly two-thirds of children will have been exposed to at least one traumatic event. This can impair their ability to learn well and contribute to absenteeism, while secondary trauma spirals out from these students to classmates and teachers, multiplying the overall impact. Left unaddressed, the imprint of such events could warp the future of our school and public communities.
Since COVID-19, schools have reported unprecedented levels of absenteeism and student distress, and supporting trauma-exposed students without training puts more pressure on teachers, who are already burned out and leaving the profession at high rates. Therefore, it is clear to me that creating school-wide networks of trauma-informed adults is essential for fostering supportive learning and growth for students, enhancing educator capacity to nurture trauma-affected learners, and ensuring effective trauma resource management within districts.
Research has identified a supportive school community as a strong childhood protective factor against the effects of trauma. We should be hopeful about our path forward. But the vision and blueprint for this enhancement of MTSS need to come as soon as possible, and it needs to come from state-level education leaders and school district leaders.
Consider this scenario: A student who recently experienced a traumatic car accident sits near a window in class, experiencing significant distress or dysregulation without outward signs. A sudden screech of tires outside activates their sympathetic nervous system (the one associated with fight or flight), and the student shuts down, withdrawing into themselves. Their teacher, unaware of the student’s trauma history and unequipped with relevant training, interprets the response as a continuation of past misbehavior or as an academic deficit.
This sort of misunderstanding takes place in a thousand places every day. I would stress that this isn’t a reflection of bad intentions, but rather a symptom of fragmented systems and knowledge. Even when trauma is recognized, lack of intentional collaboration and training often result in missed opportunities or inconsistent support, which cannot maximize recovery from trauma and may, in fact, hinder it, as research on retraumatization suggests.
There might be mismatched expectations when teachers send students to the counselor, not knowing that they themselves have a role to play in the healing. In other cases, students may be referred to a school counselor and have a productive support session–but on their way back to class, a seemingly benign statement from a third party can be misconstrued or cause dysregulation, unintentionally undoing the support they’ve received. The solution to all these problems is school-wide training on trauma-informed skills. This way, all educators and staff alike develop a shared knowledge, understanding, language, and responses as they collaborate and connect with students. With the right tools, adults on campus have better trauma-informed strategies to use in their relationships with students and in building a safe and supportive school community.
Trauma training works synergistically within MTSS: social-emotional and trauma-responsive support allows for better academic outcomes, which work to further reduce behavioral problems, and so on. At the Center for Safe & Resilient Schools and Workplaces, we see this play out often with our school district partners. For example, at Pasadena Unified School District, which was recently ravaged by the Eaton Canyon Fire, trauma-informed best practices and preparations have enabled district leaders to reopen schools with sufficient psychological understanding and interventions along with the needed material support for the 10,000 students who were affected.
A truly effective MTSS model does not treat trauma as a peripheral concern. It integrates trauma-responsive strategies into every tier of support–from universal practices, to targeted interventions, to intensive mental health services. In that environment, every adult who comes in contact with students has the training to adhere to trauma best practices.
We are at a juncture where the impact of trauma poses serious risks to the education system, but evidence-based approaches exist to solve the problem. Change from the state level down is the best way to transform school cultures quickly, and I urge state education leaders to take action. Any MTSS plan isn’t complete without a trauma-informed foundation, lens, and programming. And our students–each and every one–deserve nothing less.
