TTAUSNZ Reducing risk and restrictive practices in schools
5 minute read…
The use of restrictive practices is a complex and controversial issue – which is exactly why we need to meet it head on, reflecting on what we do and how we do it. We need to take the time to reflect on the current state of affairs in our schools so we can have open, honest conversations around how to lead well in this area and consider the kinds of tools and frameworks that would be useful to implement.
In this blog, we discuss the challenges we can face when trying to reduce restrictive practices and occupational violence. We explore ways that allow for the reduction of both restrictive practices and occupational violence simultaneously, rather than only targeting one at a time.
What is a restrictive practice?
According to the definition laid out by New South Wales Department of Education, a restrictive practice is, ‘any act that has the effect of restricting the rights or freedom of movement of a person, with the primary purpose of protecting the person or others from harm.’
There’s a clear focus in this definition on harm and risk reduction, not only in relation to the young people in our schools but also to those around them, such as other students or staff. In essence, it is about keeping everyone in a school community safe.
The parameters of restrictive practice
As with all physical interventions, any type of restrictive practice should only be used when necessary. When deciding whether to employ a restrictive practice, there are a number of considerations that should be taken into account:
- Does the practice support a student’s short and long-term needs, and, where appropriate, is it collaboratively planned with both parent/ carer and student?
- Is there a clear overall aim to reduce, and eventually eliminate, the use of restrictive practices for the student, without increasing risk to them or others around them?
- Are we acting in in line with legal parameters by ensuring that any intervention is reasonable, proportionate and necessary, and are restrictive practices being used for as little time as possible?
- Do we make detailed and accurate records when restrictive practices are used?
- Do we review our use of restrictive practices and evaluate them in relation to their necessity and efficacy for supporting distressed behaviours?
Occupational violence
Unfortunately, just like in many other parts of the world, violence towards teachers in Australia is on the increase – and not only from their students. In schools globally, staff can find themselves being abused, verbally and physically, by students, parents, community members and even colleagues.
Occupational violence, as defined in the AITSL national strategy to address the abuse of teachers, school leaders and other school staff, is, ‘any action, incident or behaviour that departs from reasonable conduct, in which a person is threatened, harmed or injured by another person in the course of, or as a direct result of, his or her work.’
According to the Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey 2020, 83% of school leaders reported being subjected to at least one form of offensive behaviour in the last twelve months, including behaviour from parents and carers. Alarmingly, almost half (43%) had been exposed to threats of violence, and 37% had actually experienced physical violence, a rate that is 9.4 times greater than it is for the general population.
While our conversations are not about apportioning blame, it would be remiss not to take the rate of occupational violence into account when reflecting on restrictive practices in schools.
A tricky balancing act
Given these statistics, there is a clear challenge for school leaders to consider: how to keep students and staff safe, while simultaneously reducing the use of restrictive practices. This balancing act can often result in tension. For example, if schools reduce restrictive practices, there may be a chance, albeit in the short-term, of increasing risk for staff and other individuals.
Polarity thinking
As humans, we can often fall into the polarity trap of binary thinking, where we create an unnecessary duality with an ‘either/or’ type approach. This can be a common issue in relation to behaviour and reducing risk in our schools: one group might be concentrating only on reducing restrictive practices, while the other might be solely focused on decreasing occupational violence. The trouble with this approach is that it leaves little or no room for compromise, which in turn can create tension.
As an alternative to polarity thinking, we can start to explore alternatives that allow for the reduction of both restrictive practices and occupational violence. By using a ‘hopes and fears’ matrix (very similar to a typical SWOT analysis), we can pose questions, entertain the notion of ‘and’ thinking, examine the views of all stakeholders, and weigh up the pros and cons of each perspective.
Agility and adaptability
A proactive, rather than reactive, approach to behaviour support is always preferable and in almost every instance, the further ahead we can plan, the better. But the reality is that, when we are working with young people who are still grappling with rules and boundaries, there are times when we need to be reactive, too – especially where safety is concerned. We therefore need to promote both agility and adaptability as ways of supporting behaviour.
In this context, agility is the ability to react quickly to what is happening in real time. This is especially important for short-term solutions and when we are faced with an unexpected or unplanned event. Adaptability, on the other hand, is a more proactive approach that takes a longer term view and requires us to adjust our systems and processes over time. It is based in professional curiosity and poses questions around how we can improve. Both agility and adaptability are vital for effective behaviour support, especially in relation to the use of restrictive practices.
How can Team Teach support leaders?
As a world-leading provider of behaviour support training, our overarching philosophy is centred around de-escalation and risk / restraint reduction. We believe that physical interventions should only be used when necessary and are a small part of our overall approach to behaviour support. As such, we are perfectly placed to guide schools through the process of building behaviour support strategies and, as a result, reduce the need for restrictive practices. This links perfectly with the Positive Behaviour for Learning (PBL) framework.
Our Team Teach learning framework is based on three key elements: attitudes, skills and knowledge. A positive, ‘can do’ attitude is essential when supporting the development of shared values around behaviour in any setting. In effective and supportive environments, this attitude starts with leadership and permeates every aspect of school life.
We delve into the types of reactive and proactive support skills required to de-escalate or intervene safely when faced with challenging situations. This includes identifying foreseeable risks, managing our own responses, and creating both formal and dynamic risk assessments.
Knowledge around the functions of behaviour, and understanding why people behave like they do, is also a key premise of the Team Teach ethos, along with helping schools understand the legal context in which they operate.
Transitioning to Team Teach
Many staff have been trained by other behaviour support providers and it is important to draw on any pre-existing knowledge, experiences and expertise when moving towards the Team Teach approach. Our trainer courses are aimed at current trainers who want to develop their understanding of Team Teach’s philosophy and incorporate our strategies into their own setting. Our detailed training needs analysis helps us craft bespoke and precise training for individual contexts and allows us to deliver content around specific risk-assessed needs.
Team Teach is making a real difference in discussions about the shift in guidance with regard to restrictive practices. For example, in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), staff in all schools now undergo Level 1 Team Teach training to ensure they are in the best position possible to support behaviour in their setting. Further afield, in Western Australia, it is now mandatory for all graduate teachers to be trained in Team Teach practices, so they are equipped with a toolkit of behaviour support skills as they embark on their teaching careers.
A shared goal
No matter what our role in school, we all have the same aim in mind: to reduce risk and the need for restrictive practices, while ensuring the safety and wellbeing of each member of our school communities.
By understanding that all behaviour is communication, and keeping compassion and empathy at the heart of everything we do, we stand the best chance of achieving this goal and enabling all students and teachers to flourish and thrive.
