Search
On-Site Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
Bluesky
Threads
X (Twitter)
YouTube
Background: Childhood adversity and trauma are unfortunately common. In fact, according to the 2021 National Survey of Children’s Health, approximately 40% of American students have encountered one or more Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs; “Child and Adolescent…”, 2021). Trauma-informed educator practices were developed specifically to support students and teachers in classroom settings because of the increased awareness of the prevalence and negative outcomes of childhood trauma and adversity exposures (Jennings, 2018). Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) in facilitating the implementation of trauma-sensitive supports to students (Martinez et al., 2020). Within the school context, MTSS is structured with three levels of support, encompassing universal or Tier 1 support, accessible to all students, and progressively targeted support for students identified for Tier 3 assistance (Averill et al., 2011). Thomas et al. (2019) completed a systematic review of trauma-informed interventions in schools and found 33 articles that fit their inclusion criteria (i.e., empirical, school-based, addressed trauma specifically, and included an intervention); however, none were Tier 1 (i.e., universally implemented) interventions that utilized an experimental design. This study hopes to fill this gap in the literature by identifying Tier 1 trauma-informed educator interventions and programs.
Objectives: This systematic review expands on the work of Thomas et al. (2019), identifies Tier 1 trauma-informed educator interventions and programs, and discerns the particular educator practices and strategies that are employed within these programs and interventions. In addition, we aim to provide clarity on the various definitions and operationalizations of trauma (e.g., adversity experiences, ACEs), paying particular attention to how racial trauma was addressed and the implementation of equity-driven trauma-informed educator practices.
Methods: We developed our systematic approach using the guidelines of the Prisma 2020 checklist and flow diagram (Page et al., 2021). Our screening process mimicked Thomas et al. (2019) using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, but began in 2017, picking up from where the Thomas et al. (2019) review ended in 2018. Using the keywords ("trauma-informed" OR "trauma-sensitive" OR "trauma-based" OR "trauma-responsive”) AND (“elementary school” OR “primary school” OR “high school” OR “secondary school” OR “middle school” OR "kindergarten" OR "pre-kindergarten" OR "school-based" OR "classroom" OR "K-12" OR school) AND (program* OR intervention* OR strateg* OR practice*) in EBSCO, ERIC, and ProQuest yielded 5,085 peer-reviewed manuscripts. To determine eligibility, we screened manuscripts on the following criteria: (a) empirical methodology, (2) student and/or teacher outcomes, (3) include Tier 1 intervention, (4) texts in English, (5) conducted in U.S. or Canada, (6) School-Based (K-12).
Results/Significance: The results from this systematic review provide evidence for the available Tier 1 trauma-informed educator practices, interventions, and programs as well as the patterns of student/educator outcomes related to various approaches, the rigor of the presented approaches, and current gaps within this field. Additionally, it reveals the specific practice elements seen across trauma-informed programs and interventions and how they compare based on context (e.g., grade level, locale, etc.).
Dana M. Sox, University of Virginia
Helen Min, University of Virginia
Alexis R. Harris, University of Virginia
Jennifer A. Beasley, University of Virginia
Ashlee Lester Sjogren, University of Virginia
Edward D. Scott, University of Houston
Lora Henderson Smith, University of Virginia
Jennifer Serico, Kennedy Krieger Institute