Teacher Awareness of Trauma-Informed Teaching

A Thesis
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science in Special Education

Sage Ballantyne

Department of Special Education

College of Education and Health Sciences

Graduate School
Minot State University
Minot, North Dakota

Fall 2020
 ProQuest Number: 28260975

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 28260975

Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All Rights Reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
Copyright 2020 Sage Ballantyne
 ii
This thesis was submitted by

Sage Ballantyne

Graduate Committee:

Dr. Lori Garnes, Chairperson

Dr. Evan Borisinkoff, Committee Member

Dr. Terry Eckman, Committee Member

Date of Defense: 11/3/2020

 iii
Abstract

This paper explores trauma-informed teaching awareness in rural North Dakota. The teachers were

asked demographic questions as well as questions regarding their teaching beliefs and what they

do in the classroom. A group of 35 participants were surveyed from three rural schools in the North

Central part of North Dakota. It was found that most teachers had not been exposed to trauma-

informed teaching strategies. Although this was true, there were a great deal of teachers who still

were using the strategies regardless of their knowledge of them. It was also found that the teachers

that fell between the 36 – 40 age range were the ones who had the most training in trauma-informed

strategies. In addition, a majority of the classes on trauma-informed teaching had taken place

during workshops that schools implemented.

Keywords: trauma-informed teaching, rural teachers

 iv
Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my family for pushing me during the times that I was feeling

overwhelmed and like I couldn’t complete this goal. I especially thank my husband, Garrett, for

always reading over my pages after I had finished them to look for grammar errors, since you are

much better at that than I am. You always calmed me down and told me that I could achieve this.

Also, a little ‘shout out’ to my special education teacher friends who helped me through this

process and answered any questions that I had.

I would like to give a special thanks to my thesis committee. They have been very

understanding and willing to work with me. I have had tragic events occurring in my life as of

late, making this difficult to finish, and my committee came together to allow me to finish

everything- so, thank you Dr. Lori Garnes, Dr. Evan Borisinkoff, and Dr. Terry Eckmann. I

cannot thank you enough for your understanding. Dr. Lori Garnes gets a big shout out. She

helped me get back on track with my paper after having been out ‘swing of things’ during my

family tragedy. I am so grateful for her putting in the time to help me. October 2020 was not an

easy month for me and I didn’t think that I was going to get this done; but, with help from my

committee, I did and I am so very thankful for that.

 v
Table of Contents

Page

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iv

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................vii

Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

Motivation for the Project.................................................................................................... 2

Background of the Problem ................................................................................................. 3

Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 4

Statement of Purpose ........................................................................................................... 5

Research Questions/Hypotheses .......................................................................................... 5

Summary .............................................................................................................................. 5

Chapter Two: Review of Literature ................................................................................................. 7

The Background and Utilization of Trauma-Informed Teaching ........................................ 7

Causes of Trauma .............................................................................................................. 10

Impacts of Trauma in Children .......................................................................................... 11

A History of Addressing Trauma in Children ................................................................... 12

Internal Locus of Control verses External Locus of Control: Two Schools of Thought... 13

Summary ............................................................................................................................ 13

Chapter Three: Research Design and Methods ............................................................................. 16

Research Question and General Design Approach............................................................ 16

Subjects and Subject Selection .......................................................................................... 17

Data Collection Instruments and Variables ....................................................................... 17

 vi
Procedure ........................................................................................................................... 19

Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 21

Chapter 4: Results .......................................................................................................................... 22

Demographics .................................................................................................................... 22

Trauma-Informed Questions.............................................................................................. 25

Chapter 5: Discussion .................................................................................................................... 31

Discussion of the Data ....................................................................................................... 31

Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 32

Recommendations for Future Research ......................................................................................... 33

Summary ............................................................................................................................ 34

References ..................................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix A: Trauma Informed Teaching Questionnaire .............................................................. 40

Appendix B: Informed Consent ..................................................................................................... 46

Appendix C: Notice of IRB Approval ........................................................................................... 47

Appendix D: Open-Ended Raw Data ............................................................................................ 48

 vii
List of Tables

Table Page

1. Demographics: Sex .................................................................................................................. 22

2. Demographics: Ethnicity ......................................................................................................... 23

3. Demographics: Age ................................................................................................................. 23

4. Demographics: Education Level ............................................................................................. 24

5. Demographics: School Role .................................................................................................... 24

6. Demographics: Years Teaching............................................................................................... 25

7. Survey Questions ..................................................................................................................... 27

8. How Material was Presented ................................................................................................... 28

9. When Training was Done ........................................................................................................ 29

10. Training Use ............................................................................................................................ 29

 Chapter One

Introduction

One can never know someone’s full life story. In schools, teachers are continuously

dealing with students who have been through traumatic events, without even knowing the

struggles they have faced and without knowing how to properly address the situation. Trauma is

caused by factors that children have no control over, yet they often endure most of the pain and

suffering; many do not understand why the trauma is occurring in their life. This can result in a

feeling of confusion, resentment, or even anger in the student, which can cause problems

psychologically and educationally. Trauma-informed teaching is a fairly new topic of interest in

the realm of education, and because of that, many teachers may not be aware of it. Paccione‐

Dyszlewski (2016) stated that trauma is any adverse event or experience that affects a child’s

ability to function. Portell (2019) explained trauma informed teaching as creating and

maintaining positive relationships with students. Positive relationships can help with the negative

impacts of trauma. Currently, the state of knowledge on trauma-informed teaching has not been

fully studied to identify the impacts of trauma-informed teaching. Although one may believe that

trauma is not a common occurrence, the statistics shockingly indicate otherwise (Paccione-

Dyszlewski, 2016). It is believed that in America alone, each year 10 million children witness

domestic violence, 2.7 million children have a parent who is incarcerated, and 11 million

children experience a household with at least one caregiver with alcoholism and many more who

are substance abusers (Paccione-Dyszlewski, 2016).

Understanding traumatic experiences is beginning to be addressed publicly in American

society. Children’s television programs are talking about the issue up front. The popular

children’s show, Sesame Street, delves into important matters on a level that children can
 2
understand, and recently came out with an episode on trauma. ‘Big Bird,’ one of the main

characters on the show, talks about how to recognize trauma and events that may cause trauma to

occur. There are a number of causes that may lead to trauma in children. These issues can

involve environmental disasters, severe emotional distress, or accidents.

This can lead one to conclude that some of the causes of trauma are controlled factors,

while others and not able to be controlled, like natural disasters. Natural disasters such as

hurricanes, tornados, floods, or fires can cause trauma in a child (Gordon-Hollingsworth, Yao,

Chen, Qian, & Chen, 2018). Childhood trauma can include the child being involved in an

accident and having trouble coping with it, or a guardian or someone close to the child being

involved in one. There is also the issue of severe emotional distress. Problems within one’s

family, such as a parent or guardian with an addiction, mental illness, or even abuse within the

family setting can be a cause of trauma in children (Foli, Woodcox, Kersey, & Zhang, 2018).

Motivation for the Project

As a former paraeducator that worked in a special education classroom, the researcher

saw how trauma can affect students in regard to their interaction with peers, their emotions, and

their grades. The researcher worked with students who suffered from post-traumatic stress

disorder because of events that happened in their early childhood. Getting to know these children

was a blessing; many just needed some help, guidance, and for those around them to be patient.

The researcher was also fortunate enough to learn a lot about trauma related behaviors and as a

result, understands the importance of this topic. The school did not have resources about trauma

or even how to approach children who had experienced trauma, and because of that, the first few

weeks with the students were difficult. There were no programs available for teachers to learn

about trauma-informed teaching, and because of that, many teachers had issues working with
 3
these students because they simply did not know the needs of the students or how to address

them properly. The researcher also ran into this problem and was unaware of how to help the

students. Because of this, the researcher spent many preparation periods researching trauma-

based interventions and ways to support the students.

The researcher was also interested in finding an approach to behavior that was different

than the more traditional applied behavior analysis approach. Applied behavior analysis (ABA)

is an effective research-based approach, but the approach may not address all of the student

issues. ABA has a focus on the external behaviors that are brought out due to internal feelings.

There is a specific focus on trying to increase positive behaviors and decrease the negative ones

(Psychology Today, n.d.) ABA is based on the idea that behaviors occur because the student gets

a reinforcer, whether that reinforcer is attention from peers or a physical reward such as a piece

of candy (Autism Speaks, n.d.). One of the most common and most often heard of ABA strategy

is a token economy. A token economy is behavior modification program which involves both

reinforcement and punishment (Kazdin, 1977). Trauma-informed teaching strategies focus more

on the internal behaviors and feelings rather than the ABA’s focus of external behaviors due to

internal feelings.

Background of the Problem

Although trauma may seem like a subject left to psychologists, neurologists, or other

people who study the brain and behavior, it is important for teachers and educational researchers

to study as well. As a result, trauma informed teaching has been appearing in schools across the

country. Trauma-informed teaching involves informing staff of schools how to understand

trauma, as well as how to provide a safe environment where students can feel free to share their

emotions, all while keeping the line between teacher and student defined (Venet, 2018). Morton
 4
and Berardi (2018) explain that trauma-informed strategies in school environments can help

students who have been through traumatic experiences deal with their emotions, academic

struggles, and even social issues. Trauma has the ability to cause both learning disabilities and

physiological pain in children. Situations such as this can lead to children to be on Individual

Education Plans (IEPs) so that they can have appropriate education opportunities. Those students

are then protected under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (1990) to have

certain accommodations in the school system that are free and individualized. The IDEA, sec.

300.8 (c) (4) provides guidelines for students with emotional disturbances (ED), which include

students who have social problems and trouble controlling their emotions. It includes: an

inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors; an inability

to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers;

inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances; a general pervasive

mood of unhappiness or depression; and a tendency to physical symptoms or fears associated

with personal or school problems (Individuals with Disabilities Act, 1990). If students are

identified as having an ED, their educational needs must legally be met. Trauma-informed

teaching may help teachers know how to approach trauma sensitive students so that they can get

the same education as other students in a safe and comfortable environment.

Statement of the Problem

Although trauma-informed teaching is becoming more popular in the academic

community, within the literature, there is crucial data missing that would help to identify the

impact that trauma-informed teaching practices may or may not have. Academic literature

discusses the negative impacts that trauma may have on a student, but there is little to no

information on whether or not teachers are trained in these practices. This is attributed to the fact
 5
that this topic is relatively new to the academic world.

Trauma is found to affect more children in America than one may think, but educators

don’t necessarily have a lot of information about how to address it in the classroom. Specifically,

teachers need to know how to approach students who may have experienced trauma and are

having negative effects because of it. The researcher addressed the issue of missing data by

surveying teachers to find out if they have had any training in trauma-informed teaching

practices and if they incorporate them into their classrooms.

Statement of Purpose

This is a topic of personal interest to the researcher. It seems that trauma-informed

strategies are relatively new, and because of that, there is little academic literature that explain

these strategies. The researcher believes that because of this, there may not be many schools that

have delved into the strategies. The purpose of this study is to analyze whether or not teachers

are aware of and use trauma-informed strategies.

Research Questions/Hypotheses

Have teachers in rural North Dakota public schools been trained in the area of trauma-

informed teaching? The researcher hypothesized that many teachers in rural North Dakota will

not have had training in trauma-informed teaching. The researcher also believes that at least

some teachers will have used trauma-informed teaching strategies, regardless of their awareness

of these strategies.

Summary

The researcher delved deeper into the topic of teacher awareness of trauma-informed

teaching practices, as well as the implementation of the programs and perceived results. Teachers

were surveyed in northern North Dakota schools to see if they had training on trauma-informed
 6
and trauma-sensitive programs. In the following chapter, the academic literature is reviewed and

the types of trauma and the causes of trauma are explained. The negative effects trauma has on

students was explored and the impact of trauma-informed teaching classrooms was reviewed.
 Chapter Two

Review of Literature

It is necessary to review the literature to identify what information is available about

trauma and trauma-informed teaching practices. This chapter looks at the background and

utilization of trauma-informed teaching practices, causes of trauma, the impacts of trauma on

children, the history of addressing trauma in children, and the difference between the internal

locus of control verses the external locus of control. The traditional method of approaching

inappropriate behaviors in school is applied behavior analysis. This method focuses external

locus of control. The alternate to this more traditional method is trauma-informed teaching.

These are both investigated within the literature. The literature delves deeper into the purpose of

the study; whether or not rural North Dakota teachers had been exposed to trauma-informed

teaching.

The Background and Utilization of Trauma-Informed Teaching

Amongst school aged children, two out of every three children is believed to have

experienced some sort of trauma (Overstreet & Chafouleas, 2016). Overstreet and Chafouleas

(2016) stated that America is taking a turn towards more trauma-informed schools because of the

high occurrence of children who have experienced some sort of traumatic event. Perry and

Daniels (2016) found that there is a link between the decrease in the impacts that trauma can

have on a person and their environment. They believe that schools that practice trauma-informed

teaching will have better academic success as well as more social success.

Within the world of academics, there are not a lot of studies on trauma-informed

teaching, as it is a fairly new idea. Buxton (2018) studied students with an ED who were on

IEPs. It was found that when the teacher better understood the trauma in the student’s life and
 8
how to deal with it, a better IEP could be written that helped the student succeed in ways that

were not achieved previously. Crosby, Day, Somers, and Baroni (2018) studied the use of the

Monarch Room, which is a four-part trauma-informed teaching method. It involved the student

going into a room for a chance to talk and debrief with a trained staff member if they were

feeling any negative emotions due to their trauma. In schools that acknowledged trauma and

used this specific method, there were tremendous reductions in expulsions and suspensions. It

was also found that teachers who were trauma-informed built better relationship with said

students, which also was believed to reduce the negative behaviors often seen by students who

have experienced trauma. West, Day, Somers, and Baroni (2014) also studied the use of the

Monarch Room in educational settings. It was found that within this program, educators found

more ‘sensitive’ ways to address situations to trauma-exposed children. This would allow

students to feel more cared for and even more relaxed. Foli et al. (2018) studied the impact that

trauma-informed programs had on children who live with a relative as their parents were either

deceased, unfit to parent, or incarcerated. In this case, the programs were being addressed to the

caregivers. From the interviews conducted, it was found that in many cases, yelling towards the

trauma-impacted child was reduced, new ways to discipline were found, and the encouragement

for support from their peers was given. These practices were found to greatly reduce the impact

that trauma had on a child.

Redd, Malm, Moore, Murphy, and Beltz (2017) examined the trauma-informed program

Bridging the Way Home. Within this program, it was found that those who were around trauma-

exposed children learned to watch for triggers. The researchers deemed this process learning

‘trauma-language’. With this, children who were exposed to trauma may not have as many

outbursts, if that is what they are prone to, or have as many negative emotional acts. Paccione-
 9
Dyszlewski (2016) found that trauma-informed teaching gives students a more comforting

feeling, which may eventually lead students to reveal their trauma to teachers. This could help

because a teacher may be able to get a student out of a painful situation.

Dorado, Martinez, Mcarthur, and Leibovitz (2016) described a trauma-informed strategy

called HEARTS; Healthy Environment and Response to Trauma in Schools. The program is

comprised of three different tiers. Tier one takes a direct approach on changing the school so that

the environment is more safe, supportive, and trauma-informed. Tier two involves teaching the

staff to incorporate trauma-informed interventions for at-risk students. The final tier takes the

task one step further and uses ‘intensive interventions’ to help students who have experienced

trauma (Dorado, et al., 2016). The interventions seemed to decrease the effects that trauma has

on students in the classroom.

In the Appalachian area of the United States, resources are limited. Traumatic events are

still occurring to children, but they may not have the means to address them. A school in the

Appalachian area took this problem head on and created a program, LAUNCH (Shamblin,

Graham, & Bianco, 2016). LAUNCH is a three-tiered program that worked to strengthen the

teachers to deal with any issues that they may come across from their students in the realm of

trauma. The first tier focuses on giving teachers the resources and abilities to support all students

in their social-emotional learning. The second tier of the LAUNCH program looks at targeting

those students who show difficult behaviors in the classroom. The final tier looks at individual

mental health issues in students that need a follow up. The study came to the conclusion that

after the teachers had experienced the program, they were much more confident in dealing with

the children. Many of the negative environmental factors were also eliminated after the teachers

had completed the program (Shamblin, et al., 2016).

 10
Causes of Trauma

When categorizing what is considered trauma, many different scenarios appear in one’s

imagination, some being more common than others. Trauma can be caused by any number of

factors being environmental, severe emotional distress, or even an accident. All of these

situations may seem very different, but more times than not, they cause a lasting impact on

children and adults alike. Some of the causes of trauma can be controlled, while others are

situations that simply cannot be prevented.

Natural disasters, such as floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, and fires may cause trauma in

students. Sometimes during natural disasters towns are destroyed, homes are lost, and in the

worst cases, lives are lost. Gordon-Hollingsworth et al. (2018) conducted a study in China and

found that natural disasters cause distress and trauma in children and adults. The study looked

specifically at earthquakes within the Asian country. A survey was administered, and it was

found that many of the children and adults developed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after

the natural disaster. Hambrick, Vernberg, Greenhoot, and Hendrickson (2018) studied 8–12 year-

old children after a tornado had occurred. Within this study, the researchers interviewed children

and it was found that the children experienced more negative and trauma-like emotions when

recollecting their past year after the tornado hit.

Severe emotional distress is found to be one of the causes of trauma in children and

adults. Crosby, Day, Somers, and Baroni (2018) found that female students who are in the court

system often display more ‘trauma-like’ behaviors. Students who were involved in the court

system were either part of the juvenile courts or were in the foster system. Crosby, Somers, Day,

Zammit, Shier, and Baroni (2017) conducted a similar study with females who were involved in

the court system within their school environments and discovered that it was not necessarily
 11
being in the court system that caused adolescents to have psychological distress, but it was the

events that led up to court that caused the negative behavior. This could possibly be crime,

family violence, abuse, or death. Buxton (2018) found by using school-based psychological

testing that family violence is one of the main factors in causing psychological issues within

children. Within this study, there was a specific focus on ED which included behaviors that are

consistent with trauma exposed children. Foli et al. (2018) stated that trauma can also be caused

by household substance abuse, a caregiver with a mental illness, witnessing spousal abuse,

divorced or separated parents, and parents that may be incarcerated for any given reason.

Impacts of Trauma in Children

Children who have experienced trauma may show a variety of symptoms that may

include psychological issues or problems in the classroom. Crosby et al. (2018) discussed the

impacts that trauma may have on female students in an educational setting. It was found that

these young women not only had lower academic achievement, but they also had lower

graduation rates. It was found that the behavior that was a result of a trauma had the potential to

cause higher rates of detention and even expulsion. Buxton (2018) found that trauma-exposed

children with emotional disturbances had the highest likelihood to have negative experiences

with school than any other group found within a school. This included issues with both math and

reading. Some had problems with concentration and memory. Buxton also found that the

development of language could be hindered, which potentially lead to larger problems in the

future. Paccione-Dyszlewski (2016) stated that the largest problem for students who experienced

trauma was the inability to control their emotions in the classroom. This lead to outbursts

directed at the teacher and students, physical violence towards peers, and the overall inability to

concentrate because of the wave of emotions that they felt. The impacts of trauma on children
 12
can go far beyond disrupting the classroom to show more deep-rooted psychological issues.

Buxton (2018) stated that in children who have experienced trauma often have negative

relationship with others, have bouts of anger, violence, or other negative emotions. It was found

that trauma-exposed children have more anti-social tendencies and are more prone to depressive

symptoms. Crosby et al. (2017) found that children who experienced trauma-influenced

behaviors because of the court system had a higher likelihood of delinquency, unemployment,

and poverty. It was also found that these students were more likely to be involved in the court

system again at some points in their lives because of the adverse effects the trauma had on them.

Carroll, Lofgreen, Weaver, Held, Klassen, Smith, and Zalta (2018) interviewed and studied

female veterans who had experienced sexual traumas and found that often times, the females

blamed themselves for the trauma that they had experienced in their lives. This is a very

important effect that trauma has on a person, as it could lead to psychological illnesses or cause

major hardships in one’s life.

A History of Addressing Trauma in Children

Trauma-informed teaching strategies are a relatively new concept in the field of

education, meaning there isn’t a large history on the specific subject. There is, however, a history

of addressing trauma in children. Children have always experienced traumatic situations,

therefore researchers thought it important to document how trauma was addressed in the past.

Forness (2005) gave an insight of the importance of evidence-based practices on children with

emotional disturbance. Cook, Tankersley, and Landrum (2013) stated that evidence-based

practices are practices that are supported by sound research that has found to be effective with

scientifically based intervention. The system of identifying practices as evidence-based was

developed in the late 20th century, and according to the researchers, was used frequently in
 13
education and special education. Cook et al. (2013) had a great belief that evidence-based

practices help students to receive higher grades. Cook et al. (2013) explained that it seems that

evidence-based practices might be the best way to address trauma in students who have ED.

Although evidence-based practices may be effective, there could be strategies that are found to

be even more effective that don’t have significant scientific evidence behind them yet.

Internal Locus of Control verses External Locus of Control: Two Schools of Thought

When one talks about behaviors, there are two distinct schools of thought that are brought

into the conversation. These two schools of thought are whether behavior involves an internal

locus of control or an external locus of control. Trauma-informed strategies are based on the

philosophy that the practices address the internal locus of control for a child, while the traditional

applied behavioral analysis teaching methods focus on methods involving an external locus of

control. Joelson (2017) explained that the internal locus of control involves a person believing

that their success is directly related to their abilities and what they do. Someone with an external

locus of control will relate their success to outside forces (Joelson, 2017). One with an internal

locus of control believes that they are completely in control of what is occurring in their life,

while one with an external locus of control believes that their life is not in their hands. Joelson

(2017) stated that one’s locus of control can be shaped by their interactions. If people are

encouraged to be independent and work out problems on their own, they are going to have a

more internal locus of control. Those with learned helplessness and anxiety are thought to have a

more external locus of control (Hiroto, 1974)

Summary

According to academic research, trauma is caused by many different influences in life. It

can have a very negative effect on children regarding emotions, thinking, and learning. There is
 14
not an extensive history of addressing trauma-informed teaching methods with children and most

practices are relatively new, leading there to be limited information of the utilization of trauma-

informed teaching in classrooms. Trauma in children can either be man-made trauma or

environmental. Academia has researched natural disasters such as tornados and earthquakes and

their cause of PTSD-like symptoms on both children and adults. Factors that were related to

human interactions that were found to cause trauma in children included being in the court

system either as part of the juvenile court or the foster system; a history of family violence,

crime, abuse, or death; substance abuse by family members; and/or caregivers with a mental

illness.

Negative school-related reactions of experiencing trauma are noted within the literature.

The different negative impacts regarding education involve lower academic achievement, lower

graduations rates, higher rates of detention and expulsion, and outburst with teachers and peers.

The impacts that trauma can have on emotions were found to be higher levels of anger, violence,

and anti-social tendencies, higher instances of being in the court system, and higher instances of

poverty and unemployment after the student is finished with school.

Researchers also touched on past methods of addressing trauma as well as the utilization

of trauma-informed teaching strategies. It was found that use of strategies addressing trauma is

new in academia, beginning the late 20th century. The main strategy that has been used in the

past is applied behavior analysis (Cook et al., 2013). Regarding current utilization of trauma-

informed teaching strategies, the method involves students talking about their emotions and

bringing them to the surface with someone that brings comfort. There is evidence that students

who had been involved in these trauma-informed teaching strategies had lower instances of

yelling and other negative emotional acts, and that ‘trauma-triggers’ had lessened.
 15
Internal and external locus of control is a useful way to separate the more traditional

model of addressing behaviors through applied behavior analysis and the researcher’s topic of

interest, trauma-informed teaching. An internal locus of control involves the individual feeling as

if they are in control of what is occurring in their lives. With an external locus of control,

external conditions control what is occurring (Partnership, 2013).

 Chapter Three

Research Design and Methods

In this chapter the researcher addresses the methodology of the study. The participants,

sampling, instruments used, variables, data-collection procedures, and threats to validity are

included.

Research Question and General Design Approach

Have teachers in rural American public schools been trained in trauma-informed

teaching? The researcher hypothesized that many teachers in rural North Dakota had not had

training in trauma-informed teaching. The researcher also believed that at least some teachers

used trauma-informed teaching methods, regardless of their awareness of trauma-informed

strategies. Trauma-informed teaching is a fairly new idea in the field of academics; however it is

unclear if or how many teachers in rural public schools have been trained in the topic.

The researcher invited teachers from three different schools in one region of ND to

participate in the study. Teacher emails were given to the researcher from the administration. The

participation involved a questionnaire with one open-ended question and thirteen multiple choice

questions. The questionnaire was made available online through Google Forms. Before the

official study began and data were collected, a pilot test was conducted with five teachers from

Minot area schools. After the official questionnaires were completed, the variables on the

questionnaires were reassigned with numbers for statistical analysis.

The researcher conducted a quantitative survey approach. This approach is taken when

the researcher wants to describe trends in a population (Creswell & Guetterman, 2019). The

researcher attempted to identify the number of teachers who are familiar with trauma-informed

teaching through this study. Therefore, the researcher was simply trying to learn about the
 17
population and its characteristics, which makes a survey approach ideal. This approach was

useful because it showed the trends in the schools, for example whether teachers had training in

trauma-informed practices. The researcher used the online survey to deliver the questionnaires.

Online surveys are helpful in their convenience, as information can be gathered quickly.

Additionally, one can look at the fact that computers and the internet are used constantly in

schools. Teachers are on their computers frequently throughout the day, so having the survey

online allowed for easier survey access for the participants.

Subjects and Subject Selection

The researcher’s population for the study was teachers in rural North Dakota. The

researcher used the term ‘teacher’ to refer to elementary classroom teachers, middle school

teachers, high school teachers, as well as special education, speech teachers, and school

counselors. Specials, such as those who teach gym and music, were included in the elementary,

middle, and/or high school teacher category. The sample included teachers in three different

rural schools in two different counties in North Dakota. These schools are close in proximity to

the researcher, which means that the researcher used a convenience sample. The researcher

treated the sample as a census in which all teachers who fit under the researcher’s definition were

invited to participate. There were 50 teachers who met this definition.

Data Collection Instruments and Variables

This study used a researcher-constructed questionnaire to examine teachers’ training and

use of trauma-informed teaching (see Appendix A). Before the questions were asked, a brief

explanation of what trauma informed teaching is was included to give the participants a common

definition on the topic. A copy of the survey questions and instructions was provided by the

researcher and can be found in Appendix A.

 18
The questionnaire began by addressing demographic questions about the participants.

The first set of questions asked about both gender and age. The questions then turned more

towards the participant’s job. Questions that collected demographic information, included the

teacher’s role in the school. This was recorded as grade level taught or their role as a specialty

teacher, such as a special education, speech teacher or school counselor. The researcher then

asked the number of years that the participant had been teaching.

Additional survey questions fell under the category of personal, attitudinal, and/or

behavioral questions along with one open-ended question. Thirteen questions addressed teachers’

training in trauma-informed teaching practices. These questions involved the participants’

knowledge of trauma-informed teaching practices in addition to where they took classes, if they

had taken them. The last question pertained to the use of trauma-informed practices asking if the

participant was aware of them, had taken a class on them, and if they use the practices. This

section included questions regarding the two schools of thought: internal locus of control and

external locus of control. These questions related directly to trauma-informed teaching strategies

and applied behavior analysis. The questionnaire contained one last question, which asked if the

teacher has used any of the practices they learned and if they would like to give more insight.

This open-ended question required the participant to give a short narrative if they chose.

In quantitative research, and all research in general, there are issues of validity and

reliability. Validity refers to the idea of a test measuring what it is supposed to measure. The

questions the researcher asks in the questionnaire directly address the research question at hand:

Have teachers in rural American public schools been trained in trauma- informed teaching? The

researcher tried to answer this question with a survey. The survey asked yes or no questions

about educators’ knowledge of trauma-informed teaching and whether the participants have been
 19
directly exposed to the strategy.

Reliability is the idea that the study being conducted produces consistent results. To

ensure the reliability of the study, the researcher provided evidence of internally consistent

reliability. This type of reliability involves the participants scores being consistent across the

survey (Creswell & Guetterman, 2019). In the questionnaire, there were multiple questions

addressing one’s knowledge of trauma-informed teaching. If the answers of these questions were

inconsistent, they were to be reported in the results section.

The researcher asked questions about external and internal locus of control and what

teachers thought about these ideas. External locus of control is considered more related to

practices used in applied behavior analysis, while internal locus of control is more indicative of

trauma-informed teaching. This was done as a way to identify a distinction between the two

teaching practices and to see if both strategies are being used in the classroom. The questions

then turned towards whether teachers have directly heard of or taken trauma informed teaching

classes. The researcher hypothesized that many teachers in rural North Dakota did not have had

training trauma-informed teaching. The researcher also believed that at least some teachers used

trauma-informed teaching strategies, regardless of their awareness of these strategies. The

hypothesis was directly related to the questions that are asked in the survey. As a result of that,

the dependent variables were the answers of the questions and the independent variables are the

questions being asked.

Procedure

After receiving approval from the IRB (see Appendix C), the Institutional Review Board,

the researcher contacted the administration at three rural schools to request participant email

addresses. The administration sent the researcher the email addresses of all teachers in the
 20
school, which included elementary, middle, and high school teachers as well as special education

and speech teachers. The researcher used an online survey tool, Google Forms, to collect the

data. Google Forms is a free online survey site, where the survey creator can ask any questions,

create their answers, and send them to the participants via email. Once the emails were obtained

from administrators from the various schools, the researcher sent an email to the participants to

explain the purpose for the study. They had the option to participate or not participate with no

fear of repercussions (see Appendix B). The participants had approximately four weeks to

complete the questionnaire. When there were approximately two weeks left, the researcher sent

out a reminder in the form of an email to all those who qualified to participate.

The participants needed to complete their questionnaire by using the link that the

researcher provided in the email. When the participant decided to take the survey, directions

were given as well as a common definition of trauma-informed teaching. Each participant went

through and answered all of the questions by choosing an option provided by the researcher. If a

question didn’t apply to the participant, they were able to choose the N/A, not applicable, option

provided. When the participant completed all the questions, they submitted it and their

participation in the study was then deemed complete.

Before the official survey was sent out, a pilot test was performed by sending out the

survey to five different teachers in a different geographic location of the state. There were a

variety of teachers chosen from schools in the Minot area. The pilot test was used to ensure that

the questions being asked were clear and appropriate. The researcher personally reached out to

the five teachers chosen and explained what the purpose of the pilot test was. The participants of

the pilot test took the survey and then provided feedback to the researcher. Once the pilot tests

were received, the researcher made the necessary changes to the questionnaire from the feedback
 21
provided. The results that were received from the participants of the pilot test were excluded

from the data.

Data Analysis

Once data were gathered, the researcher used Excel to generate percentages for each

question. Each answer on the survey needed to be assigned a variable. Answer (a) on the

questionnaire was assigned to the variable one. Answer (b) on the questionnaire was assigned to

the variable two. Answer (c) on the questionnaire was assigned to the variable three, etc. The

researcher had a handful of yes and no questions, which were assigned to new variables as

follows: yes to a one and no to a two. Assigning the answers in the questionnaire to a variable

helped in the process of analyzing and gathering descriptive statistics in quantitative research.

After the numbers were processed, the researcher was able to determine the percentage of

participants who have had training in trauma-informed teaching. The researcher used means and

percentages to determine the number of participants who had experienced trauma-informed

teaching. The researcher hypothesized that many teachers in rural North Dakota would not have

had training trauma-informed teaching. The researcher did believe, though, that teachers used the

trauma-informed strategies without being aware of them. The researcher gathered information

about how long the teachers have been in their profession as well as whether they have training

in trauma-informed teaching. This information was gathered through the questionnaire. The

researcher then used descriptive statistics to analyze the information.

 Chapter 4

Results

Data were gathered via Google Forms from three different rural schools in two different

counties in northern North Dakota. The teachers who responded were elementary classroom

teachers, middle school teachers, high school teachers, as well as special education, speech

teachers, and school counselors. Teachers teaching special subjects, such as gym and music were

included in the elementary, middle, and/or high school teacher category.

Demographics

From these three schools, 35 participants responded. Most were female, 24 (74.3%)

compared to 9 (25.7%) male participants as shown in Table 1. There were 34 (97.1%)

respondents who identified as Caucasian and one (2.9%) respondent identified as Black/African

American as shown in Table 2.

Table 1

Demographics: Sex
Sex Female Male

Percentage 74.3% 25.7%

 23

Table 2

Demographics: Ethnicity
Ethnicity Percentage

Asian 0%

Black/African American 2.9%

Caucasian 97.1%

Hispanic 0%

Native American 0%

Pacific Islander 0%

Prefer not to Answer 0%

Other 0%

The age of the respondents, shown in Table 3, varied greatly. There was one (2.9%)

respondent who was 20-25 years old. Of the age group of 26-30, 4 (11.4%) responded to that

category. The category of 31-35 year of age had the largest number, 9 (25.7%) respondents. Of

the 35 respondents, 3 (8.6%) responded as being between the ages of 36 and 40. There were 6

(17.1%) that were 41-45 years of age. The ages of 46-50 had 2 (5.7%) respondents; ages 51-55

had 5 (14.3%) respondents; ages 56-60 had 4 (8.6%) respondents; and lastly, ages 61+ had 2

(5.7%) respondents.

Table 3

Demographics: Age

Age 20-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61+

Percentage 2.9% 11.4% 25.7% 8.6% 17.1% 5.7% 14.3% 8.6% 5.7%
 24
When looking at the respondent’s education level as shown in Table 4, one can note that

19 (57.6%) had a Bachelor’s degree and 19 (39.4%) of respondents had a Master’s degree. Of

the participants that responded to this question, only one (3%) had a Doctorate degree. The

survey also described information about the role of the teachers with results shown in Table 5.

Of the 35 respondents, 29 (82.9%) identified as being part of general education. There were 4

(11.4%) respondents who were in the special education program. Out of the 35 respondents, 1

(2.9%) identified as being in related services, and 1 (2.9%) responded as ‘other.’

Table 4

Demographics: Education Level

Education Level Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate

Percentage 57.6 % 39.4% 3%

Table 5

Demographics: School Role

School Role General Education Special Education Related Services Other

Percentage 82.9% 11.4% 2.9% 2.9%

The years that the respondents had been teaching varied greatly as shown in Table 6. Of

the 35 respondents, 5 (14.3%) had been teaching 1-3 years; there were also 5 (14.3%)

respondents who had been teaching 4-7 years. There were 6 (17.1%) respondents who had been

teaching 8-11 years and 8 (22.9%) who had been teaching 12-15 years. The highest number of

respondents came from the category of teaching 16+ years, which was 11 (31.4%) of

respondents.
 25
Table 6

Demographics: Years Teaching

Years Teaching 1-3 4-7 8-11 12-15 16+

Percentage 14.3% 14.3% 17.1% 22.9% 31.4%

Trauma Informed Questions

The demographic questions were proceeded by questions about trauma-informed

teaching. The first question of this section, question number seven, asked if the respondent

believes that students can control their own behavior. Of the 35 respondents, 26 (74.3%) said yes

and 9 (25.7%) said no. The next question addressed whether the respondents believed in teaching

a student how to control their own behavior rather than just preventing it; 33 (94.3%) said yes

and 2 (5.7%) said no. Question number nine asked if the respondent recognizes when a student is

going to have an outburst and helps them to process their feelings rather than stop them. This

question had the same results as the previous question; 33 (94.3%) respondents said yes and 2

(5.7%) said no.

The next question addressed using a token economy in the classroom. There were 16

(45.7%) respondents who do use a token economy and 19 (54.3%) who do not use a token

economy. Questions 11 only had 33 participants responded to it. It addressed whether or not the

respondent believed that they control the behavior of the classroom. Of the 33 respondents, 29

(87.9%) said yes and 4 (12.1%) said no. When asked if the when intervening, a behavior from a

student can be prevented, 31 (88.6%) respondents said yes and 4 (11.4%) said no. Question 13

referred to the participants having classroom strategies that allow students to identify their

feelings- 25 (71.4%) said they did and 10 (28.6%) said that they did not. The next question asked

if the participants were open to positive relationships with their students. All of the respondents,
 26
35 out of the 35 (100%), said that they were. Question 16 asked about providing consequences to

student’s behavior and whether the participants believed in this. Once again, all 35 (100%) of the

participants said that they did. The next question asked if the participants believed that students

will work to avoid something that would punish them. Of the 34, 30 (88.2%) said yes and 4

(11.8%) said no.

The researcher then began asking questions that directly asked about trauma-informed

teaching. Question 18 asked if the participants had ever heard of trauma-informed teaching. Of

the 35 respondents, 24 (68.6%) had and 11 (31.4%) had not. The next question addressed

whether the participants had any training in trauma-informed teaching- 15 (42.9%) respondents

had and 20 (57.1%) respondents hadn’t had training. Table 7 shows the results for each question

in the survey.
 27

Table 7

Survey Questions

Percent Answered
Questions
Yes No

Do you believe students can control their own behavior? 74.3% 25.7%

Do you believe in teaching someone how to control their behavior rather

94.3% 5.7%
than just preventing it?

Do you recognize when a student is going to have an outburst and help them
94.3% 5.7%
process their feelings rather than stopping them?

Do you use a token economy in the classroom as a way to reward good

45.7% 54.3%
behaviors and prevent unwanted behaviors from occurring?

Do you believe you control behavior in the classroom? 87.9% 12.1%

If you intervene quickly and carefully, can you prevent a child from
88.6% 11.4%
exhibiting inappropriate behavior?

Do you have classroom strategies that allow students to identify their

71.4% 28.6%
emotions and feelings?

When teaching do you allow students to take ‘mental breaks’ by their own
91.4% 8.6%
choice if they are exhibiting a behavior that is less than desirable?

Are you open to positive relationships with your students? 100% 0%

Do you believe in providing consequences to student’s behavior? 100% 0%

Do you believe that students will work to avoid something that would punish
88.2% 11.8%
them?

Have you heard of trauma-informed teaching? 68.6% 31.4%

Do you have any training in trauma-informed teaching strategies? 42.9% 57.1%

 28
The open-ended question, question number 20, asked the participants what trauma-

informed strategies that they use in the classroom. There were a variety of strategies that were

addressed by respondents. Respondents said they “promote consistency,” “building

relationships,” “don’t exclude students,” and “reduce negative thinking.” Others explained

situations of which they consider a student’s home life and background if they are having a bad

day. There were some responses that involved being kind and understanding and simply having a

positive relationship with students. A number of responses explained their use of calming

corners, zones of regulation, teaching of calming skills, and methods of getting emotions of

students to the forefront. The answers to this question can be found in Appendix D.

The researcher gathered data on the level of training on trauma-informed teaching of

participants shown in Table 8. The number of respondents for each of the remaining questions

varied. In response to how the material was presented to participants, 16 (53.3%) said N/A, two

(6.7%) said a university class, eight (26.7%) responded that they learned from a workshop in

school, three (10%) said a conference, and one (3.3%) engaged in a self-study. Recency of

training is shown in Table 9. Training received by respondents was as follows: 14 (43.8%)

received training 1-3 year ago, 1 (3.1%) received training 4-7 years ago, and 17 (53.1%)

responded as N/A. When asked if the respondents use what they learned about trauma-informed

teaching in their classroom, 14 (42.4%) said yes, 1(3%) said no, and 18 (54.5%) said N/A as

shown in Table 10.

Table 8

How Material was Presented

Material Presented University Workshop Conference Self-Study Other N/A

Percentage 6.7% 26.7% 10% 3.3% 0% 53.3%

 29

Table 9

When Training was Done

When Training was Done 1-3 Years Ago 4-7 Years Ago 8+ Years Ago N/A

Percentage 43.8% 3.1% 0% 53.1%

Table 10

Training Use

Do You Use Training? Yes No N/A

Percentage 42.4% 3% 54.5%

The final question asked the participants to give examples of strategies that they use in

the classroom. Out of the 35 participants, 15 responded. Of those that responded, there were a

variety of comments on steps that involved strategies that the participants were familiar with.

This included: “giving students choices,” “letting them decompress,” “making connections,” and

“being non-judgmental,” “zones of regulation,” “CPI,” “growth mindset,” “chart system,”

“sensory breaks,” “flexible seating,” “environmental awareness,” “sticker charts,” and “a

first/them system.” Based on the comments provided by the participants, one can note that some

teachers do not know what trauma-informed practices are because they gave strategies that are

clearly applied behavior analysis. Although this is true, some of the other teachers did describe

trauma-informed teaching strategies.

From the three different schools in rural North Dakota, 35 people participated in the

survey. This included staff that were special education, general education, related services, and

those considered ‘other’. They were a variety of different education levels as well as the years
 30
that the participant had been involved in education. A majority of those had heard of trauma-

informed teaching, but less than half had any training in it. Most of this training came from

workshops that were taking place at the schools within the last one to three years. The researcher

has every reason to believe that people answered honestly and that they tried to communicate

their knowledge.
 Chapter 5

Discussion

One can come to several different conclusions from this study. The researcher

hypothesized that many teachers in rural North Dakota would not have had training in trauma-

informed teaching. The researcher also believed that at least some teachers would have used

trauma-informed teaching strategies, regardless of their awareness of these strategies. The

overall question asked was whether teachers were aware of trauma-informed teaching.

Discussion of the Data

The study showed that a majority of the participants hadn’t had training in trauma-

informed teaching practices (57.1% compared to 42.9%). Another finding was that although a

majority of the participants hadn’t had training in trauma informed teaching, 71.4% - 88.6% of

them answered ‘yes’ to engaging in the various trauma-informed methods that the researcher put

throughout the questions.

Other interesting findings were also noted. The age category that had the most

participants having been exposed trauma-informed training when looking at the total number of

participants in the category was the 36–40 age range. Within this range, all of the participants

had been exposed to trauma-informed training. This category had a many different ranges for the

length of time they have been teaching, so there isn’t a correlation between teaching length and

knowledge of trauma-informed teaching. It can also be noted that although there were many

participants with master’s degrees, a majority of those that had training in trauma-informed

teaching had a bachelor’s degree. Of those that answered that they have had training in trauma-

informed teaching, most had received the training at a workshop at their school.

This study brought some interesting outlooks regarding where the training for trauma-

informed teaching takes place. Within the population that was studied, teachers in rural North
 32
Dakota schools had not received training from universities, but rather from workshops. Because

the study yielded results from more experienced teachers who had completed university training

eight to ten years ago, this doesn’t seem hard to believe. Looking into the surveys of teachers

who were younger also showed that those teachers reported that they had not received training

from their universities. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the universities are not teaching the

use of trauma-informed teaching, but for whatever reason the younger population did not recall

it. It should be noted that universities encourage the use of evidence-based strategies. Trauma-

informed teaching practices do not yet have a strong evidence base and so traditional ABA

strategies may have been the main focus of teacher preparation programs.

Limitations

The researcher identified one of the main limitations to the study to be access to

participants. The focus of the study was on rural schools in North Dakota, but the population of

the study included only 50 teachers in a northern region of the state. Despite the high return rate

of surveys at 70%, the sample is too small to generalize the findings widely to other teachers and

schools. Not only that, but the participants from these schools were not diverse. A majority were

white females who had been teaching for ten or more years. The researcher could have looked

into adding schools to the participant list. With this limited access to participants, it makes it

more difficult to produce results that can be considered statistically significant.

Coronavirus-19 made 2020 a very unusual year. Due to this, another limitation that has

been identified involves the time that was available to engage in the research. Coronavirus-19

left much uncertainty for many people and teachers were very busy trying to figure out how they

were going to engage in distance education. Because distance education was occurring online,

teachers were spending much of their time on screens. Many educators were both receiving and

sending out countless emails from other staff, students, parents, and their administrators. It was a
 33
particularly stressful time for educators and their minds may have been elsewhere. This could

have affected the amount of people who responded to the questionnaire.

The final limitation that was identified involves the location of rural schools in North

Dakota. The nearest university is more than 100 miles from the community surveyed. Many of

these teachers don’t have as much access to classes on learning methods as one would have in a

larger area. One may have to drive far distances to see speakers and take classes, which could

deter people from wanting to do them.

Recommendations for Future Research

The researcher makes the following recommendations for future research on the topic of

trauma-informed teaching. One of these recommendations involves repeating the study in

communities that have more diverse teachers. This study yielded results from very few males.

Not only that, but only one participant was not white. It could be interesting to look into getting a

more diverse population to see if there is a difference between gender or even ethnicity when it

comes to teacher awareness of trauma-informed teaching. These two demographics could also be

looked into with what practices are being used in their classrooms. For example, do men shy

away from trauma-informed practices in their classroom and use more ABA practices? It could

be interesting to look at a population of teachers from a school that is not predominantly white,

such as those in Native American communities. With a population such as this, could one see

more or less instances of teachers who had experience in trauma-informed teaching?

There are many different definitions for trauma-informed teaching simply due to the fact

that trauma-informed teaching encompasses so many different techniques. Another

recommendation for future research could be looking into the question about whether everyone

agrees on a common definition for trauma-informed teaching. Another area of interest involves

whether teachers are aware of what trauma-informed teaching is compared to ABA. Looking at
 34
past literature, this isn’t a topic that has been touched on. Within this study, it was noted that

many teachers were not aware of which techniques were considered trauma-informed teaching,

even if they had stated they had training in it. This was demonstrated in the open-ended

questions that were in the survey.

Summary

This study proved to have interesting results. The researcher believes that this topic

should be looked into further. It is understood that universities try and use very evidence-based

practices and encourage those type of teaching methods. Although this may be true, trauma-

informed teaching methods are an emerging practice that, according to the survey, many teachers

use. To the researcher, this is enough reason to believe that this is a practice that should be

investigated further and taught in teaching programs. All programs and teaching strategies are

considered emerging before they are ever considered evidence based. By studying these

emerging practices that are already being used in public schools, teachers could have better

information regarding the efficacy of trauma-informed teaching methods and perhaps have the

knowledge to help students in a multitude of ways.

 35
References

Autism Speaks. (n.d.). Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). Retrieved 2020, October 31 from

https://www.autismspeaks.org/applied-behavior-analysis-aba-0

Buxton, P. S. (2018). Viewing the behavioral responses of ED children from a trauma-informed

perspective. Educational Research Quarterly, 41(4), 30-49.

Carroll, K. K., Lofgreen, A. M., Weaver, D. C., Held, P., Klassen, B. J., Smith, D. L., & Zalta,

A. K. (2018). Negative posttraumatic cognitions among military sexual trauma survivors.

Journal of Affective Disorders, 238, 88-93. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2018.05.024

Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., & Landrum, T. J. (2013). Evidence-based practices. Advances in

Learning and Behavioral Disabilities, 26, 1-19.

doi:10.1108/S0735-004X(2013)0000026003

Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New York, NY: Pearson.

Crosby, S. D., Day, A. G., Somers, C. L., & Baroni, B. A. (2018). Avoiding school suspension:

Assessment of a trauma-informed intervention with court-involved, female students.

Preventing School Failure, 62(3), 229-237. doi:10.1080/1045988X.2018.1431873

Crosby, S., Somers, C., Day, A., Zammit, M., Shier, J., & Baroni, B. (2017). Examining school

attachment, social support, and trauma symptomatology among court-involved, female

students. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 26(9), 2539-2546.

doi:10.1007/s10826-017-0766-9

Dorado, J. S., Martinez, M., Mcarthur, L. E., & Leibovitz, T. (2016). Healthy environments and

response to trauma in schools (HEARTS): A whole-school, multi-level, prevention and

intervention program for creating trauma-informed, safe and supportive schools. School

Mental Health, 8(1), 163-176. doi:10.1007/s12310-016-9177-0

 36
Foli, K. J., Woodcox, S., Kersey, S., & Zhang, L. (2018). Addressing the wicked problem of

childhood trauma through a nursing and cooperative extension system collaboration.

Public Health Nursing, 35(1), 56-63. doi:10.1111/phn.12375

Forness, S. R. (2005). The pursuit of evidence-based practice in special education for children

with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 30(4), 311-330.

doi:10.1177/019874290503000406

Gordon-Hollingsworth, A. T., Yao, N., Chen, H., Qian, M., & Chen, S. (2018). Understanding

the impact of natural disasters on psychological outcomes in youth from mainland China:

A meta-analysis of risk and protective factors for post-traumatic stress disorder

symptoms. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 11(2), 205-226. doi:10.1007/s40653-

015-0051-2

Hambrick, E. P., Vernberg, E. M., Greenhoot, A. F., & Hendrickson, M. L. (2018). Recalling a

devastating tornado: Qualities of child recollections and associations with mental health

symptoms. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 11(2), 227-239. doi:10.1007/s40653-

017-0199-z

Hiroto, D. S. (1974). Locus of control and learned helplessness. Journal of Experimental

Psychology, 102(2), 187-193.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (1990). U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved

from https://sites.ed.gov/

Joelson, R. B. (2017, August 02). Locus of Control. Retrieved from

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moments-matter/201708/locus-control

Kazdin, A. (1977). The token economy a review and evaluation. Boston, MA: Springer.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-4121-5

Morton, B. M., & Berardi, A. A. (2018). Trauma-informed school programing: Applications for
 37
mental health professionals and educator partnerships. Journal of Child & Adolescent

Trauma, 11(4), 487–493. Retrieved from https://ezproxy.minotstateu.edu:7087/10.1007/

s40653-17-0160-1

Overstreet, S., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2016). Trauma-informed schools: Introduction to the special

issue. School Mental Health, 8(1), 1-6. doi:10.1007/s12310-016-9184-1

Paccione‐Dyszlewski, M. R. (2016). Trauma-informed schools: A must. Brown University Child

& Adolescent Behavior Letter, 32(7), 8. doi:10.1002/cbl.30139

Partnership, G. S. (2013, October 25). Locus of Control Definition. Retrieved from

https://www.edglossary.org/locus-of-control/

Perry, D. L., & Daniels, M. L. (2016). Implementing trauma—Informed practices in the school

setting: A pilot study. School Mental Health: A Multidisciplinary Research and Practice

Journal, 8(1), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-016-9182-3

Portell, M. (2019, December 16). Understanding trauma-informed education. Retrieved

November 5, 2020, from https://www.edutopia.org/article/understanding-trauma-

informed-education

Psychology Today. (n.d.). Applied Behavior Analysis. Retrieved 2020, October 31 from

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/therapy-types/applied-behavior-analysis

Redd, Z., Malm, K., Moore, K., Murphy, K., & Beltz, M. (2017). KVC's Bridging the way home:

An innovative approach to the application of Trauma Systems Therapy in child welfare.

Children & Youth Services Review, 76, 170-180. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.02.013

Shamblin, S., Graham, D., & Bianco, J. A. (2016). Creating trauma-informed schools for rural

Appalachia: The partnerships program for enhancing resiliency, confidence and

workforce development in early childhood education. School Mental Health, 8(1), 189-

200. doi:10.1007/s12310-016-9181-4
 38
West, S. D., Day, A. G., Somers, C. L., & Baroni, B. A. (2014). Student perspectives on how

trauma experiences manifest in the classroom: Engaging court-involved youth in the

development of a trauma-informed teaching curriculum. Children & Youth Services

Review, 38(2014), 58-65. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.01.013

Venet, A. S. (2018, August 3). The how and why of trauma-informed teaching. Retrieved from

https://www.edutopia.org/article/how-and-why-trauma-informed-teaching
Appendices
 40
Appendix A

Trauma Informed Teaching Questionnaire

Instructions: Please circle one of the options provided. The researcher is studying the awareness

of trauma-informed teaching strategies, and your responses will help to determine if trauma-

informed teaching is well known in rural schools or if it is still a very new idea to this

demographic.

Please choose only one of the options provided.

Demographic Questions

1: Are you male or female

-Male

-Female

-Prefer not to answer

2: What do you identify your ethnicity as? Select all that apply.

-Asian

-Black/African American

-Caucasian

-Hispanic

-Native American

-Pacific Islander

-Prefer not to answer

-Other
 41
3: What is your age?

-20 to 25 years

-26 to 30 years

-31 to 35 years

-36 to 40 years

-41 to 45 years

-46 to 50 years

-51 to 55 years

-56 years to 60 years

-61 years+

-prefer not to answer

4: What is the highest level of education you have obtained?

-High School Diploma

-Bachelor’s Degree

-Master’s Degree

-Doctorate

5: What is your role at your school?

-General Education

-Special Education

-Related Services

-Other
 42
6: How many years have you been teaching?

-1-3

-4-7

-8-11

-12-15

-16+

-prefer not to answer

Trauma-Informed Teaching Questions

Trauma Informed Teaching Definition: having an understanding of trauma, as well as how to

provide a safe environment where students can feel free to share their emotions. Instead of the

teacher trying to change the behavior, the teacher encourages the student to try and understand

where that particular behavior is coming from.

7: Do you believe that students can control their own behavior?

-Yes

-No

8: Do you believe in teaching someone how to control their behavior rather than just preventing

it?

-Yes

-No
 43
9: Do you recognize when a student is going to have an outburst and help them process their

feelings rather than stopping them?

-Yes

-No

10: Do you use a token economy in the classroom as a way to reward good behaviors and

prevent unwanted behaviors from occurring? Examples of a token economy could include a

sticker chart, clip chart, and a marble jar.

-Yes

-No

11: Do you believe you control behavior in the classroom?

-Yes

-No

12: If you intervene quickly and carefully, can you prevent a child from exhibiting inappropriate

behavior?

-Yes

-No

13: Do you have classroom strategies that allow students to identify their emotions and feelings?

-Yes

-No
 44
14: When you are teaching do you allow students to take ‘mental breaks’ by their own choice if

they are exhibiting a behavior that is less than desirable?

-Yes

-No

15: Are you open to positive relationships with your students? This could include allowing them

to confide in you about their feelings outside of school and what is happening in their life.

-Yes

-No

16: Do you believe in providing consequences to student’s behavior?

-Yes

-No

17: Do you believe that students will work to avoid something that would punish them?

-Yes

-No

18: Have you heard of trauma-informed teaching?

-Yes

-No

19: Do you have any training in trauma-informed teaching strategies?

-Yes

-No
 45
20: What trauma-informed strategies are you using? Please explain below.

If you answered ‘No’ to question #19, you may choose NA (not applicable) for a remainder

of the questions UNTIL THE LAST QUESTION.

21: How was the material presented to you in your training of trauma-informed teaching?

-University/Online class

-Workshop at your school

-Conference

-Self-study

-Other

-N/A

22: When did you receive the training?

-1-3 years ago

-4-7 years ago

-8+ years ago

-N/A

23: Do you use what you learned about trauma-informed teaching in the classroom?

-Yes

-No

-N/A

24: Please provide any strategies that you use in the classroom. Explain below.
 46

Appendix B

Informed Consent
 47
Appendix C

Notice of IRB Approval

Name of Principal Investigator: Lori Garnes

Student Investigator: Sage Ballantyne
University Address: SPED
Title of Project: Teacher Awareness of Trauma-Informed Teaching
Protocol Number: 2045 April 8, 2020
______________________________________________________________________________
The above project has been reviewed and Approved Exempt by the IRB under the provisions of Federal
Regulations 45 CFR 46.
This approval is based on the following conditions:
1. The materials you submitted to the IRB provide a complete and accurate account of how human
subjects are involved in your project.
2. You will carry on your research strictly according to the procedures as described in materials
presented to the IRB.
3. You will report to the chair of the Institutional Review Board any changes in procedures that may
have a bearing on this approval and require another IRB review.
4. If any changes are made, you will submit the modified project for IRB review.
5. You will immediately report to the IRB Chair any problems that you encounter while using human
subjects in your research.
Good Luck with your research!

Dr. Linda Cresap

IRB Chairperson
irbchair@minotstateu.edu
 48
Appendix D

Open-Ended Raw Data

What trauma-informed strategies are you using? Please explain below.

• Promote consistency, build relationships, thoughtful interactions, don't exclude,

recognize areas of strength in students, reduce negative thinking

• Mindfulness, Deep breathing, journaling

• I don't know that I would call it a strategy, but when my students (high school) are acting

in a way that is less than desirable for me, I just try to consider all of the things that could

be going on in their lives that might be contributing to this behavior rather than just

assuming that they're bad kids or that they're acting this way just because they want to.

Considering all of the factors that may be contributing to their behavior, I then just try to

act accordingly. I might have the student come in later to talk or ask them if they need to

leave the room until they are better prepared to continue with whatever we are doing.

• I give students mental breaks positive assignments students can approach with needs

• I am not sure what it even is.

• I use a calm corner in my classroom and Zones of Regulation

• Trauma Sensitive Schools

• Growth Mindset, I have used love and logic in the past and the nurtured heart approach.

• Kindness and understanding at all times

• grounding, different ways to get out emotions, building relationships, prevention,

teaching of calming skills

• First and foremost, without a relationship no progress can be made. Teaching and

practicing correct/desired behaviors are more productive than a punishment, especially

 49
with trauma students. But, children also need to learn there are consequences to actions

which is often a fine line. I allow my students to talk out their frustrations and tell me

why they did what they did instead of "yelling" at them for their mistake. I want them to

grown and learn how to cope with the issue at hand. Students can control their behavior

but if there are trauma issues going on, those behaviors are likely happening for a reason

(ie. attention seeking, physical/emotional/mental needs not being met, etc.)

Please provide any strategies that you use in the classroom. Explain below.

• Choices, space for kids to decompress, consequences are not punitive in nature, focus on

the student and be aware of what they have going on, hit the pause button and come back

to what is happening in class AFTER CLASS when we can focus on something

individually... it all depends on the student and age level. Every kid is different.

• I try to be understanding, non-judgmental and available for the students to visit with.

Everyone is treated with respect in my classroom. It is a positive place and negativity is

left outside the door. I try it praise the strengths of students and ignore the weaknesses

when I see that they are trying hard and it is affecting them. I read body language and

perceive moods to determine how the student will respond to situations. I try to

extinguish any confrontations before they happen. I also stress to students that life is full

of challenges and we don't always feel like being around others or doing work but need to

attempt to carry on and communication with me in this situation is essential so that I can

understand how they feel and cut them some slack.

• I try to have rapport and make connections with my students.

• ABC data, observations

• I find Harry Wong’s get to know you approach to connect with students very valuable.
 50
• I usually ask the kids what they need from me? And then I try to provide them with what

said as closely as I can.

• Best I can say is if I see something by way of behavior and I can avoid it is confront the

student and talk with them to get them on tract.

• I am flexible in how I respond to undesired behaviors I believe that each situation

requires a different response. I can usually quell outbursts with a quiet that's enough or

even a look.

• I have set forth high expectations in my classroom. Depending on the behavior, there will

be consequences for their actions.

• Pieces of Whole Brain Teaching for classroom rules, pieces of Love and Logic, ideas

from Zones of Regulation, CPI (Crisis Prevention Institute) certified, Power of

Yet/growth mindset, explain the why as much as possible - for example one of our rules

are to follow directions quickly. Why? and then we discuss/explore why that's important

and how following that rule to the best of our ability allows for us to be successful,

first/then charts - started a pom reward system 1-on-1 for a kiddo where they had to first

fill their pom cup for constant positive feedback to then earn 10 minutes iPad time, have

worked with a 3 star/5 star velcro chart reward first/then system, routine routine routine,

visuals as much as possible - both whole class and on a 1-on-1 need, classroom schedule

for the day posted/reviewed each morning, 1-on-1 schedules utilized, sensory/brain

breaks - both whole class and on a 1-on-1 need, minimum flexible seating - ok with

sitting or standing, work with kick bands and seat disks on a 1-on-1 need, allowing

movement throughout the day, utilize fidgets 1-on-1, aware of classroom environment

being over-stimulated/under-stimulated, sticker charts - automatic sticker for

 51
remembering to bring folder from home and for bringing back letter homework. Can earn

bonus stickers as a class for good reports from specials, bonus sticker for going above

and beyond. Rarely have students remove stickers for tough choices but work to

recognize an action in the day to earn sticker back. Really am game to try any and

everything and try my best to research/reach out for different tools, resources, and

strategies that I can use to meet each students individual needs and a lot of my "yes"

responses I feel are and can be circumstantial and the way they are addressed is case by

case for what that may or may not look like

• I get a lot of help from the counselor. I haven't really encountered a student that acts out

so much that it's not something that can be handled in the classroom.

• Calm, clear expectations, kindness areas to take a break include trampoline, bean bags etc

• Talk with students and they confide in me because I am kind and considerate of their

feelings. I always have time for them. Night and day