The American Association of School Administrators released its latest survey on seclusion and restraint of special needs students that claims more than nine out of 10 districts responding say they monitor students at all times when there are in seclusion and administrators cease the practice as soon as an emergency ends.
The results were contained in the second of “Keeping Schools Safe,” a multi-part study on the behavior response procedures implemented by teacher that are aimed to protect the student and others during an emotional outburst. The results found that:
- 94 percent of school districts monitor students at all times when they are in seclusion.
- 97 percent of school administrators end the use of seclusion and restraint as soon as the emergency ends.
- 97 percent of survey participants responded that they do not use mechanical restraints on students under any circumstances.
- 80 percent of all school personnel trained in the use of seclusion and restraint are also trained in nonviolent intervention techniques.
AASA said it supports a recent resource document published by the U.S. Department of Education that outlines principals for schools to consider when developing their own seclusion and restraint policies. But the superintendents organization added that budget cuts are making it harder for schools to comply with particular training and procedural recommendations. The AASA survey reports that four of 10 superintendents said that the elimination of federal Safe and Drug-Free funding has made it “considerably more difficult” to fund professional development training geared toward positive behavioral support systems and non-violent crisis intervention programs.
Meanwhile, 91 percent respondents said their school district would benefit from funding to implement school-wide positive behavioral support and intervention systems and nonviolent crisis interventions.
“If Congress wants to make seclusion and restraint safer and more effective, then Congress should provide funds to implement more professional development and training for school staff members on evidence-based practices that reduce the inappropriate use of these techniques,” said Sasha Pudelski, AASA’s government affairs manager and author of the study. “Grants to districts to support appropriate intervention practices, such as positive behavior interventions and supports could make a huge difference in student safety and in school districts’ ability to use these practices wisely.”
Late last year, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) introduced a federal bill that would essentially outlaw the practice of seclusion and restraint in schools, which is supported by many child safety and disability advocates, such as TASH. However, AASA is opposed to the legislation as it said seclusion and restraint has enabled thousands of students with severe emotional and behavioral disabilities attend school in the least-restrictive environment.
AASA said Harkin’s bill “lacks a reasonable option of intervening when a student’s behavior is dangerous or unmanageable.” Additionally, AASA said it creates “onerous reporting requirements” for school districts without improving polices and practices for responding to student behavioral outbursts. And AASA said the bill prohibits school employees from secluding a student for any reason, even if a given technique has proven to be effective.
While the practice of seclusion is most often tied to the classroom, school attorney and consultant Peggy Burns said several legal cases have been filed in recent years tied to student transporters employing behavioral restraint of students on the bus, not to be confused with the use of child safety restraint systems.
