Systemic Shifts in Inclusion: Neuroscience-Informed Practices for Transformation and Capacity Building

Please join us for “Systemic Shifts in Inclusion: Neuroscience-Informed Practices for Transformation and Capacity Building” with Angelina Zara and Nicole Keler.

Angelina Zara was born and raised in the heart of Washington, DC; Angie found her passion in education in 2015, serving students and caregivers in her hometown. Angie’s career includes the creation of the position of Social Emotional Learning Specialist in her previous school building, which subsequently expanded across the Local Educational Agency, ranging from elementary to high school campuses. Her experience includes implementing school-wide shifts through sustaining positive relationships, capacity building, addressing adult mindsets, and leveraging positive outcomes for staff and students. In the Spring of 2024, Angie made her transition to work for Washington, DC Public Schools to support schools across the city in implementing restorative practices to support the whole child. Additionally, Angie collaborated with the Office of the State Superintendent (OSSE) to create the first set of Washington DC Social and Emotional Learning Standards. In addition to working full time in the DC school system, Angie presents nationally on the topics of trauma accommodating principles and strategies, applied educational neuroscience, and adult wellbeing and nervous system regulation. Angie also serves as an adjunct faculty for Butler University’s Applied Educational Neuroscience Certification Program under trauma-informed trailblazer Dr. Lori Desautels. In 2023, Angie co-founded LiveWellEd, LLC, which supports caregivers, educators, and organizations responding to the needs of the post-pandemic education system by sharing best practices and systems design through consulting and coaching.

Nicole Keler is a passionate special education leader with nine years of experience working in the public charter school system across Washington, D.C. She is currently a Specialist on the School Equity and Effectiveness team at the D.C. Public Charter School Board. However, she started in the education system as a special education teacher, then transitioned to working as an inclusion manager to support families and students with diverse learning needs on a larger scale. She believes that home-school partnerships are the key to successful student outcomes. Rooted in trauma-informed practices such as Flamboyan and Conscious Discipline, Nicole works tirelessly to engage families throughout the special education process and has created systems to ensure team collaboration during the Tier 1,2,3 process. Her experience inspired her to establish LiveWellEd, with co-founder Angie Zara to bridge school and family best practices

Support the show

Episode Transcript

Unknown (00:16):
Well, hello and welcome to the alliance against
occlusion, restraint Liveseries. It is Thursday, March
13, and I am Guy Stephens, thefounder and executive director
of the alliance againstocclusion restraint, excited to
have you here today. We've gotanother great conversation in
store, and I think one that willbe really important.
Those of you that may not befamiliar with who we are and

(00:36):
what we do. The alliance againstocclusion restraint was formed
just about six years ago. Infact, March marks six years so
we were formed about six yearsago. Started the alliance after
a personal experience have aneuro divergent son who was
restrained, secluded andtraumatized, got me asking a lot
of questions, trying to figureout what we could do
differently. Never, never at thetime, planning to start a

(00:59):
nonprofit, or, you know, leavingmy career, but ultimately, kind
of took a deep dive into thisand realized that there were
things that we could do thatwere better, better, not just
for kids, but but also teachers,staff, families, communities,
and that's what this work isreally all about. So in that
vein, really excited to have ourguest with us today, who I will
introduce here in just a fewminutes, but we've got Dr Mike

(01:23):
Licklider here with us today.
And you know, what's reallyinteresting, this is going to be
a conversation with a schoolsuperintendent that did some, I
think, really meaningful workrelated to restraints seclusion.
And as you all know, part of ourmission here is, you know, how
do we influence change? And Ithink bringing people on that
have had journeys and donethings that have made positive
differences, is reallyimportant. So at any rate, we'll

(01:45):
get to that in just a momenthere, before we do a couple
things that I wanted to sharewith you. One, I wanted to thank
one of our podcast sponsors, andmany of you are familiar with
supportable solutions. They'vebeen a sponsor of ours for going
on two years for our podcast.
Supportable solutions, ofcourse, is a company that's run

(02:06):
by a friend and colleague,Connie persic. Connie does a lot
of work in educationalconsulting, and has developed
something called the whytoolkit. And the y toolkit is
really a way to get at thedeeper why, beneath behavior.
You know, many of you have heardof things like functional
behavioral assessments, and theY toolkit is something that's
very aligned with all the workthat we do here. You know, it's

(02:28):
aligned with kind of those fiveprinciples. And let me share
with you a little informationabout it. Here. Behaviors are
signals to the deeper Whys thewhy toolkit a tool built for and
approved by teachers, parentsand administrators that can both
assess and support individualsstruggling with behaviors.
Connie has created a documentthat turns typical behavioral

(02:50):
documents upside down andreplaces them with a deep dive
into what really matters, how tosupport each child within a
compassionate and relationalframework based on their
individual differences, the Ytoolkit was found to decrease
seclusion and restraint by 21%in a year long pilot study.

(03:14):
And we thank supportablesolutions for their support and
being a sponsor for our podcast.
And as you saw there, I mean,you know, doing things like
using the Y toolkit, they canhelp us to reduce and eliminate
practices like restraintseclusion. We're in a great
opportunity today to learn fromDr Mike about some of the things
that they've done to reduce theuse of restraint seclusion as
well. So stay tuned. One otherquick announcement before I

(03:35):
introduce our guest, I justwanted to share with you, many
of you know we are, of course, avery small nonprofit, although
we are kind of national, inreach here, you know, we're a
small organization. We're asmall organization trying to
influence change. You know, notonly here in the United States,
but elsewhere, and we've done alot of work to try to support

(03:56):
that. You know, our focus is oneducation, it's on legislation,
it's on individual support. Butas a small nonprofit, you may
imagine, you know, sometimesit's difficult, it's difficult
for us to find funding to do thethings that are really important
to us, to be able to supportfamilies, to be able to create
programs and do things to make adifference. And I'm always

(04:17):
encouraging people, if you'reinterested in the work we're
doing, think about joining us.
We have an option now to jointhe Alliance. And if you go to
our website, which is nseclusion.org, there's an option
to join by joining us, you cankind of help support our
mission, and you can do that ina number of ways. We have an
option, of course, to join us asa supporter. And what we're

(04:37):
looking for is people that thiswork resonates with and are
willing to, you know, make asmall contribution, and a
monthly contribution of even $5a month makes a difference and
helps us to do the work thatwe're doing. But a number of
options, there even volunteeroptions as well. I encourage you
to check it out. So check outour website if you're able to.
We really appreciate thesupport. Because, you know,

(04:57):
without help, without support,I.
You know, it's hard to it's hardto do this, and so at any rate,
thank you for considering that.
And let's get to why you'rereally here, because it's not
just that. You're here to hearme talk. You've heard me talk
enough. I want to introduce toyou somebody that is a
colleague, and you know, Mike,if you don't mind, I don't even
say a friend, because I feellike we've known each other for
a while, and I have a lot ofrespect for you, and I've gotten

(05:20):
to get to know you over over aperiod of years as well. Let me
read your bio here to givepeople an idea of who you are,
but we're really excited to haveyou here. And of course, you
know you are a superintendent,and you've been doing some
amazing work. So Mike ispassionate about the ability,
the ability of public educationto provide all students with

(05:40):
high quality education, and isproud to be the superintendent
of the Harwood unified UnionSchool District in Vermont. And
Mike's goal is to improveclassroom experience for
students and teachers and be achampion in the community for
public education. And that'ssomething I think is so
important. I often say, like, wecan improve outcomes for not
just kids but but also theteachers and the staff. And the

(06:02):
impact that can have on thecommunity can be so great.
Started your career in 1991 as amiddle school and high school
social studies teacher in thecity of York, Pennsylvania, and
following experiences as a highschool assistant principal,
middle school principal andassistant superintendent for
personnel. He was named assuperintendent of schools for
the Penn Manor School Districtin 2009

(06:27):
school system serving 5400students in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania. After finishingyour educational career in
Pennsylvania, you were drawn tothe Harwood unified Union School
District in Central Vermontthrough your travels in the
state, and that is a beautifularea. I've not I've not been
there much, but I had anopportunity several years ago to
kind of go up through Vermontand New Hampshire and so

(06:50):
beautiful, and particularlyduring the time that your
daughter attended the Universityof Vermont. You are a member of
the Vermont SuperintendentsAssociation and currently serve
as its representative on astatewide commission on the
future of public education inVermont. You are somebody that
enjoys the opportunity to learn,discover and help Harwood make

(07:12):
progress the school's desire forits students and communities,
and I just really appreciate allthat you do. And of course, you
know, I get to know you throughsome things that were happening
there in your school district.
And you know, we've gotten tocollaborate, I guess, a bit, on,
you know, the things that youwere working, you know, through
in your school district. And youknow, one point we even put a
proposal in to speak at aconference together.

(07:34):
Unfortunately, that didn't comethrough. But I'm always eager to
collaborate with people doingthis work. So Mike, thank you
for being here, and we're reallyexcited to have you here and to
kind of share some of thejourney that you've been on. So
thank you. Thank you guys. Ifeel the same way. I feel like
we've developed a relationshipin two and a half years, that I
consider you as a friend as wellas well as a colleague. So I

(07:56):
need to come visit you inVermont soon, because
it's beautiful area. I do wantto let people know if you're
watching live, and I know we'vegot a number of people that are
watching live. Let us know inthe chat who you are and where
you're from. It's always fun tosee where people are joining us
from and who's on you know, wetend to get a lot of people that

(08:17):
you know, kind of episode afterepisode are here with us, and
it's always great to see thefamiliar names. We also, believe
it or not, we get people fromall over the world. So, you
know, when we do these events,we get people from Australia,
New Zealand, the UK. And it'salways fun to see where people
are. I in fact, we have thepeople so often that I know the
time zones a little bit, and I'mlike, oh, okay, like, it's 730

(08:40):
something in the morning inAustralia. So it's already
tomorrow there. So anyway, ifyou're here with us, live, let
us know in the chat who you areand where you're from. Would
love to know who's joining ushere today. So Mike, we're gonna
have a conversation, but I justwant to kind of start with how
we kind of became connected. Andwant to talk about kind of your

(09:01):
work, your journey, the thingsthat you've been doing, really,
over the couple of years thatwe've known each other. But of
course, you have a career thatspans far longer than that,
which has certainly probablyinfluenced, you know, the work
that you've done. But you know,I guess we got to know each
other, because going back a fewyears ago, there were concerns
being raised. And in fact, I wastrying to think about how

(09:25):
Harwood first kind of got on myradar, and I think it was, there
was a board meeting that theissue of prone restraint and
seclusion was being raised. Andthis was actually before you had
started with the district. Ithink there was a current
superintendent who, I think atthat time was was planning to
leave, and you hadn't startedyet, as I recall, but there was

(09:46):
some discussion about pronerestraint and seclusion, and
that got on my radar. Andeducator in the area that I
connected with at some point aswell, but there were some
concerns being raised in thecommunity, so I.
My recollection, and you'regoing to help me with dates
here, but I want to say that wasaround the May time frame, and I
think you started a few monthslater, if I recall, in the

(10:09):
district. So this is always fun,right? You're coming into a new
position, and there's somethingbrewing that is going to be
something you're going to needto work with. So how did you
first become aware, as you werecoming into Harwood, how did you
first become aware that theissue of seclusion and restraint
was kind of on the radar there?
Well, guy, I don't think we evertalked about this level of

(10:30):
detail, but I'll give you alittle background, because it's
actually an interesting story. Idecided that I was retiring from
Pennsylvania and we wanted tomove To Vermont in the fall of
2021 so I researched schools. Iresearched other jobs too,
consulting jobs, jobs with stateagency, with some non profits
University. And I decided Iwanted to stay a superintendent,

(10:53):
because I believe in the work wedo. So I interviewed in Harwood
starting early January. I washired in February to begin July
1, 2022so after that point in time, I
started watching board meetingsas a good superintendent does,
just to understand the culture.

(11:14):
And I was literally in my familyroom in Lancaster, Pennsylvania,
watching the April and I can'tremember the date, but it was
April 2022, watching the boardmeeting, and at the beginning
there were citizen comments. Andthe educator you referenced
community member spoke up andsaid he was concerned with the
number of total number ofrestraints, use of seclusion and

(11:36):
particularly prone restraints,in the district, and cited
numbers for previous years thatin some cases exceeded 300 a
year. Now this for some othercontexts, the school district
Graham now has 1700 students, Kthrough 12. We also have pre
kindergarten. So when youinclude those students in it's
about 1850 the district I wascoming from was in a

(12:00):
geographically smaller area, buthad a population three times the
size. So I was very familiarwith restraint and seclusion. I
worked with the specialeducation director in Lancaster,
who had strong belief that weneeded to reduce those numbers,
starting around 2011 when USDepartment of Education, and I
think I'm right, on that yearwhen they started highlighting

(12:22):
some of the concerns nationwide.
So we had done work in myprevious district on
restraint, but I think a keypoint was in Pennsylvania, prone
supine restraint is notpermitted in public schools. So
when this community memberbrought that point up, I about
fell off my chair that thatprone restraints were something

(12:45):
that were permitted becauseVermont's a very progressive
state. It really surprised me,and the numbers also surprised
me. So I texted my currentspecial ed director and said,
What can you tell me about pronerestraints still being
permitted. It was something thatI was not connected with. So
that's how I learned about it. Icontacted the the superintendent

(13:06):
at the time to discuss thatissue, and at that point in
time, I knew that, in essence,the the early honeymoon was
over, because there was somereally serious work to be done.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Andabsolutely. And, you know, I
often when I think aboutrestraints, seclusion, there are
a lot of in fact, even at ahigher level, you know, as you

(13:28):
talk about being asuperintendent, one of the
things I think is havingattended a number of board
meetings, you know, in not onlymy home district, but across the
country virtually as well. Ialways think to myself, Wow,
being a superintendent is areally tough job. There are a
lot of people coming to you witha lot of concerns about a lot of
issues. And, you know, I'veoften thought to myself, even

(13:52):
the Board of Education. I mean,that can be a really tough place
to be as well. But nonetheless.
I mean, you know, when you thinkabout policies. And certainly
that's a big, a big part of whata board does, looks at policies,
looks at budget, things likethat. When you think about
policies, there are very fewpolicies in a school that can

(14:12):
result in death, right? Thereare very few policies that, you
know, if things aren't goingwell, that can have such a major
impact. So, you know, I alwaysthink about restraint and
seclusion in this context, it'sa really serious issue. And when
people begin talking about it,if, if issues like this come up,
there's, there's a lot of,obviously, there's a lot of
concern, a lot of passionand a lot of push, you know, to

(14:34):
bring about change. And it'sfunny, as you were walking
through that, I was rememberingone of the first times you and I
talked and kind of both had thesame response, you know, as you
probably know, I mean, there aremany states around the country
that have prohibited the use ofprone restraint, and this is not

(14:55):
universal. We don't have federallaw here. But.
Yeah, I was actually verysurprised that, you know,
Vermont was not one of thosestates that had already been
permanent strain at the time. Iwant to say it was like 37
states had. So, you know, Iwouldn't have suspected that,
you know, Vermont would havebeen on that list. But of
course, California, at the timewas on that list as well. So,

(15:15):
you know, sometimes these thingsdo surprise you.
So at any rate, you know you're,you're coming in. This issue is
has arisen. It's interesting.
You were talking about kind ofgoing back, because it was, it
was 2009that the GAO, the Government
Accountability Office, put outtheir, one of their, their
really big reports, which was aevaluation and look at
restraint, seclusion. And thatreport that was titled

(15:37):
seclusion, restraint selectedinstances of death and abuse in
public and abuse in public andprivate schools and treatment
centers. That report reallybegan a lot of dialog around
this, and in fact, there was aninitial effort to pass federal
law following that report. Thatreport highlighted hundreds of
instances of potential death andabuse due to the use of
seclusion and restraint. And itwas a couple years later, I

(16:00):
think, you know, they tried, in2009
to get a piece of federal law.
Moving forward, it made someprogress, and then then stopped,
as these things sometimes do.
And I think in 2012 then theDepartment of Education began
putting out more guidance aroundrestraint and seclusion. And I
think part of the the thoughtwas, you know, and I don't want

(16:22):
to speak for the people in thatroom, although we've had an
opportunity to meet with some ofthem at one point, but you know,
I think it was guidance, and itwas guidance intended to maybe
help states think about how tolook at these things. So they
came up with their their 15principles, you know, talking
about how, you know, thesethings should be only used in
certain situations and and infact, they even in that that

(16:44):
early document had talked aboutprone and supine restraint and
talked about, you know,restraints that could
potentially affect breathing,and recommended against using
those. And what happened at thatpoint is that states slowly
began, you know, updatingpolicies and bringing in new
laws. But it happened veryunevenly, and it didn't happen

(17:05):
everywhere. I mean, there weresome states were very slow. So,
you know, there's absolutely alot of history there. So I can
imagine, you know, kind of thatinitial coming onto your radar,
you know, following, you know,the GAO report, and there were
some news, in fact, Connecticut.
I mean, there were a number ofserious stories that came out of
Connecticut regarding thingslike restraint and seclusion. So
here you are getting ready to gointo a new district already

(17:25):
knowing there's going to besome, some things that are going
to be on your plate in terms of,you know, you know, policies and
issues to look at. And, ofcourse, it's, it's, it's a big
one. It's one that I think isreally significant. So, you
know, as you came in and youkind of had a little bit of
background, you know, I knowthere was some thought, and I

(17:46):
remember watching some someboard meetings, but it's been so
long that your memory isprobably far better than mine.
But there were some boardmeetings and discussions about,
kind of what to do about it.
About, as I recall, that wasthere a committee or something
that might have been formed aswell. Tell us a little bit about
the kind of the beginning ofthis, sure. Well, well, at the
time in April, when I mentionedspeaking to my at that time,

(18:10):
current special ed director,when I said, Well, it's per
minute in Vermont, and they useit in the district where I'm
going, her immediate comment,without missing a beat, was,
Mike, you got to stop it.
You can't continue with pronerestraint. That's just unheard
of. And this is only a year anda half after the George Floyd
killing. So this was very, verymuch in my mind at the time, and

(18:32):
I knew the dangers of pronerestraints, so I started in
July. I met with the person whowho brought the concerns
forward, very, very brave on hispart to speak out at that point,
he was working in the schooldistrict,
so I spoke with him, met withhim. I met with principals. I
met with people in thecommunity. In Vermont, we have a

(18:55):
citizen legislature, so it's apart time legislature, and the
there was particular school thatwas of concern for their
numbers, and she was therepresentative for that
community. I met with her. Shehad a background in mental
health, so I just gathered a lotof information. I had a very
supportive school boardwho this was a very serious
concern to them as well. And Iafter processing this through,

(19:19):
after meeting with our schoolsattorney, I approached the board
chair and vice chair and said, Ithink we need to put a
moratorium on the use of pronerestraint. So we did that in
August. If you, if you do aGoogle search on myself
and Harwood, andyou'll probably find that if

(19:43):
someone wants to reach outthrough you, guy, I'm happy to
give them some more informationon this, but we instituted that,
but I also knew we needed morework and training, because
teachers want to do the rightthing. This was not a fault on
the part of the teachers andwhat also.
Made this somewhat of an unusualcircumstance, is rather than

(20:04):
totally relying on our own stafffor support for students who may
have had needs that required ahigher level of intensity, we
have a unique relationship,where we would contract and
still do, in some cases, withoutside mental health agencies.
So in this case, the countymental health agency. And one of
the other issues that I'velearned is that they that agency

(20:27):
used one programHandle with care, and our school
district used CPI training. Sothere was this piece and kind of
the struggle with who'sresponsible from there, when
there's a high need of a studentwho may need either de
escalation, or, in the worstcase scenario, some level of
restraint. So that was one ofthose other pieces too. But

(20:48):
again, being a small state, thestate where I am now Vermont,
has 650,000 residents, which wasabout the size of just the
county that I used to live in,we don't have the same level of
educational resources andsupports that a larger area does
because of our morality and someof those other challenges. So I

(21:08):
reached out to a person that Ihad worked with who worked for
our Intermediate Unit, somepeople, some states called them
BOCES, but she was a behaviorsupport specialist, did a number
of jobs. Was one of the bestprofessionals I ever worked
with. Her name is Diane Carrera,and she happened to, at that
time, have retired and moved toMassachusetts. She's worked in

(21:30):
various states, includingVermont earlier in her career,
so the board supported me incontracting with her to consult,
but also do trainings with ourstaff to to improve the level of
services and to reduce our useof restraint overall.

(21:52):
So you you initially, you know,not long after getting there and
kind of getting in a goodassessment, you know, probably
with the words of your previouscolleague in your mind as well,
you pretty quickly put this ideaof, Okay, we're gonna stop doing
prone restraint right now andput that moratorium in effect.
Did you get at that point a lotof concern or pushback around

(22:16):
this? You know? I mean, one ofthe things that we often see,
and of course, you know you, youknow you were taking some
action, but of course, you knowthere's a bigger policy question
that has to work its way throughas well. And I actually really
appreciate that you, you tookthat action, not just, you know,
kind of waiting for all of thisto kind of work forward, but you

(22:38):
know, often when, when you knowthese changes are proposed,
there's, there's a lot ofconcern and pushback, and
people's, well, you know, if we,if we don't have that in our
toolbox, or we can't do that, xwill happen, or we'll have to
send kids the more restrictivesettings all these so talk to me
a little bit about that, as youfirst put that moratorium in
effect. You know, were you, wereyou hearing concerns and

(22:59):
pushback?
And again, I mean, some, somemay be very valid concerns,
right? You know, there'sconcerns about, you know, we
hear things about staffing now,of course, that shouldn't be a
reason that we're restrainingkids. But nonetheless, I mean,
some of these concerns can bereally valid and important in
influencing what people think.
What was your experience in thatkind of early phase of things?
There was concern. And it reallywasn't about controlling kids or

(23:26):
other things that you may thinkwould come up, but it was really
about we're talking about asystemic change. We're talking
about changing a mindset, andhow do we do that very quickly,
without having the supports andtraining in place? So that's why
we moved pretty quickly onreaching out with Diane. We had
some people internally who couldalso do some of that training. I

(23:48):
started alongside of JohnBerliner, who's now our special
ed director. He came in at thesame point, and interestingly
enough, and I'm not sharinganything out of turn, he shared
this publicly in a publicmeeting, but he was a behavior
interventionist before he was aspecial education teacher, and
was in the situation where hehad to perform restraints on

(24:08):
students and had his own traumaexperiences and physical
physical challenges. As a resultof that, he was injured. So he
was coming into it with, we needto do something different as
well. So he had those boots onthe ground type of experiences
that and credibility of havinglived through a circumstance

(24:31):
where he knew thatrestraint needed to be reduced
in our district. And I also wantto point out in the previous
year that I before I came whenthis was brought to light, I
think there were about fiveprone restraints. So that was
part of the piece, but a largerpart of the piece is what I
consider to be the overuse ofother types of restraint in our

(24:51):
school. So it was almost a twopronged approach, and then there
was also the concern withseclusions and.
Something else that we couldtalk about later, but, but there
were multiple pieces to thepuzzle. I think we allayed those
concerns just because ofexperiences and because also
there again, there was oneschool that was brought to

(25:13):
light, and those teachers wantto be doing the right thing
right. So they knew that theythey instinctively knew that
they needed to do thingsdifferently.
And I also think it's importantto note that the teachers in
most of the cases were not theones who were performing the
restraints. It was the outsideagency. So part of that piece

(25:34):
was, how do we collaborate withan outside agency to improve
those numbers as well, and howdo we put in essentially, de
escalation training so that wecan work with the students where
they are at the time withoutmoving to that most restrictive
form of intervention, right,right? Yeah, you mentioned a

(25:54):
couple of things there thatreally kind of jumped out at me.
I mean, in one, talking aboutJohn's, you know, experience,
you know. And this is stuff whenwe talk about a lot. I mean,
first of all, you know, nobodybecomes an educator because they
want to restrain or secludedkid, right? That's, you know,
we're talking about a professionwhere people become educators
because they want to help kids.
Not to say there's never anychance of a bad player out

(26:14):
there, but by and large, youknow, when we're talking about
educators, no, but nobody wantsto do that. And the other thing
that you said was that thesethings really are traumatic for
the staff. There is nothing atall pleasant about, you know,
being in a position where youthink you need to use a physical
restraint, and you use aphysical restraint, you know,
that can be a situation wherestaff are more likely to get

(26:36):
injured, but, but, but thattrauma can be very real for the
staff member as well. And one ofthe things that we talk about
quite a bit is kind of what Icall, kind of the, you know, the
trauma cycle that can happenrelated to physical restraint
and seclusion. And that is that,you know, we already know that
the people that are more likelyto find themselves being
restrained excluded oftenalready have a trauma

(26:57):
background. These, these areoften, neurodivergent kids, kids
with disabilities, kids that mayhave experienced other types of
trauma. And we know that traumachanges the brain. We know that
trauma leads to individuals thatare more likely to be hyper
vigilant, more likely to havekind of stress related
behaviors. And very often, wesee the cycle where, you know,

(27:19):
when these things are being doneto kids, they're further
traumatizing them, furtherleading to more behavior, not
less behavior. But we see thattrauma cycle also holds true
with staff like and, you know, Idon't know if you've had
experiences like this. I mean,we don't have to dig into
specifics, but where sometimes astaff member that might be doing
these things more, they continueto do them more because they

(27:41):
don't feel safe, you know. Andwhen a staff member doesn't feel
safe, they're more likely to gointo a hands on intervention,
perhaps, before that shouldreally happen. And you know,
that cycle just kind of feedsitself. And in their cases that
we see, you know, things likethis that happen around the
country where, you know, you'llfind it repeatedly happening to

(28:02):
a kid. And you know, of course,you know, the Office of Civil
Rights is kind of weighed in onthat and said, you know, like,
if you're doing this repeatedly,it's a failure. We need to
figure out what's going on andhow to meet those children's
needs. But you know, sure, thematter is, these things really
are traumatic. And you know,again, it's not just one side
that's traumatic on kids, butit's dramatic for staff as well.

(28:23):
So anything we can do to reduce,you know, is certainly work
worth doing, right, right? Yeah,so, and that's some of the
that's what we found, that onceyou move to that approach,
unless you have really goodprocedures in place, really good
evaluation and then support andlooking at what the needs of the
child are and how you have toadjust your approach that you

(28:46):
will continue to go down. Andthat's the data we looked at
with the with the explainingthis to the public was very
difficult, because they had thethinking that we had teachers
just restraining students, butwhen we looked at the total
number, it was pretty shocking.
In fact, I was just looking, amI able to present? Because what
I did, you should be able to ifyou go down to the present

(29:06):
option, down in the middle,you'll have a couple options.
And what you can choose is sharescreen. And if you choose Share
Screen, it might pop up a thingto ask you for permission. And
if it does, tell it Yes, andthen it should give you a screen
that says, screen sharing worksboth best with multiple screens.

(29:27):
If you hit okay, it should showyou an option of things you can
share. And if you click on oneof those and hit Share,
hopefully we'll see it okay. Sowhat I am sure,
and I just okay, I'm going tobring it up, but now and share
it. Okay, perfect. Yep, okay, Ihad so any in Vermont

(29:48):
restraints, seclusion is coveredby a rule 4500 which defines
what we can and can't do andwhat the reporting is. So I
review now every singlerestraint that occurs, and this
is just a history.
Be from the beginning of theschool year through today, of
our use of restraint andseclusion, and then the number
of students involved. So whatwas striking to me and back in

(30:13):
the 2021 2022 school year, whichis when this was first brought
up, I think at the end of theyear, the total use of restraint
was somewhere in theneighborhood of 130 restraints
that year.
But what this shows me is thatwe have about the same number of
students who who have thoseconcerns. But to your point you

(30:34):
made during that time, duringthis time period, in the 2021
2022 school year, there wereseven students with 86
restraints, wow. And sosomething's not working.
Our numbers came down as aresult of the work we've done.
We're still looking at about thesame number of students. I think

(30:58):
even this year, 11 is too high.
But I am far more, I am lessalarmed with that number than I
was looking at seven studentswith 86 restraints total, right,
right, right, yeah. I mean, Imean, and that's significant
progress. Significant progress.
Yeah, absolutely. So let me, letme back up for a second. And you

(31:23):
know, at some point we went fromkind of your initial prohibition
on prone restraint, but it gotbroader than that, and you know,
you were looking to eliminatethe use of seclusion as well.
Tell me a little bit more abouthow kind of that came to be, how
things began to shift from justthis concern around prone
restraint, but also, you know,seclusion and reducing restraint

(31:46):
overall. What were the catalystsfor that? So for the seclusion
piece, that's something I had noexperience with. Seclusion was
not permitted. We did not use itin my previous school. What
complicated it in Vermont isjust to remind everyone that the
time period we're discussingoccurred during COVID. So there

(32:07):
was guidance from the Vermontagency of education, which
oversees the process, sayingthat in cases during in cases
where restraint may be needed,seclusion was the preferred
option,which doesn't necessarily make
sense to me. I understandwhether that guidance was really
concerning when it came out,well and for a lot of reasons,

(32:28):
because seclusion is involuntaryconfinement, right? How do you
get someone to a seclusion roominvoluntarily? You restrain
them. I mean, that's whathappens in practice, kids are
restrained and then put intoseclusion first. It's not an
either or. It's often a both,but, but even to say one is
preferable to the other, we'veactually had even, even entire
state agencies that have somehowcan't come to believe that like

(32:52):
seclusion is It's better. It'sbetter to put a kid in seclusion
than to restrain them. Yeah.
Anyway, I'm the aiming to catchoff, but that, when that came
out, I just almost blew a headgasket. I was like, What are
they saying? This didn't makesense to me, right? I can, in a
kind of strange way, I canunderstand where the logic came

(33:14):
from, right? But in a practicaleducational manner, it just,
it's nonsensical.
Yeah, and, you know, for oursake, you know, I, you know, we
had,you know, kind of gotten some
awareness of what was going onwith the situation there. And
the, the educator you mentioned,Brian, Brian delamer, who has
actually written a couplearticles for us as well. You

(33:36):
know, Brian had reached out tome, and we had a couple
conversations, and we publish acouple pieces as well. And, and
kind of, you know, from at thatpoint, kind of from the outside
perspective, like, or would youshould do something about this?
You should eliminate seclusion,eliminate prone restrain. But at
some point, you know, you and Iconnected, and I'm, I'm, I'm not
even remembering the exactcircumstances, but you and I

(33:57):
connected for a phone call, and,you know, had a couple
opportunities to chat. And youknow, one I, you know, you know,
I was really just pleased thatyou were willing to take a few
minutes and chat with me.
Because sometimes you might bein a position of a
superintendent go this personfrom the alliance against
seclusion restraint wants totalk to me, but you were, you

(34:17):
were willing to have aconversation, a really honest
conversation, and that kind ofstarted the relationship that we
had. Do you recall kind of someof that initial, I do okay and,
and that was also at a timewhere we were looking for, we
were looking for anyone whocould help us, right? And I
think I did some research, verybrief research, before I called

(34:38):
you back. And I think we're alllooking at solution oriented
approaches, and that's what'simportant. And I think, you
know, you are about, not thegotcha, but the, how do we make
this better for kids? That'sright. That's right. So the, you
know, the focus begins to alsoinclude.

(35:00):
That overall idea of reducingrestraint and eliminating
seclusion and so. So where doesthat go with the board? So the
board begins some discussionabout this. And I know there
were some meetings that thiswas, was a topic of discussion.
Where do things go with theboard? And I remember, actually,
you know, kind of having someinvolvement talking to you when

(35:20):
that situation was reallyactive, but talk us through that
a little bit, if you would, ofkind of what the what came next,
sure, and we live in a veryprogressive community. So I had
a board who felt we needed to dosomething, and we do something
yesterday. So I had a lot ofsupport, and I had resources to
be able to work with our staffand make those changes. And the

(35:42):
board also really wanted to lookat the policy. We used the model
policy from the state. And theboard felt very strongly that
they wanted to just outrighteliminate the use of prone to
Pine restraint and seclusion andwhat? And that's that's also
what led to my decision for amoratorium, because what I said

(36:04):
to them is, you know, there's alot of there's a lot of things
to unwrap in this puzzle, and weknow it's not the right thing to
do, but before we enact a boardpolicy, a formal policy, which
has implications, legalimplications, let's move to the
route of putting a moratorium onthis, and then let's, let's

(36:25):
study this so you fullyunderstand what the implications
are, what the what the potentialrisks could be, even though, I
think,educationally, morally, legally,
that we needed to stop doing it.
If you're in a state that says,yes, you can, and you're working

(36:46):
with partners that havedifferent methods, you have to
understand what those risks are,because we live in a we live in
a society whereit's best to be informed on what
you're going to do movingforward because of those legal
ramifications. So the board puttogether a committee,
and we had some really goodboard members. In fact, the

(37:08):
there was one new board memberand one fairly new board member
who joined the committee, whoare now our board chair and vice
chair, and I think part of thereason our board eventually
elected them in those positionsbecause they provided a lot of
strong leadership for our boardat the time. So they we spent
time. We examined the data, weshared the data of what we found

(37:29):
for previous years, and that'ssomething else we could talk
about. Some of the challengeswith that data.
We alsotalked to various experts. We
had advice from legal counseland really looked at the policy
for the first couple of months,and then my memory is not
entirely clear on exactly whenwe started writing the new

(37:51):
policy, but I think it wasaround the January time frame.
So they started working on thatnew policy, sharing it with the
board, and then adopted thepolicy in May, which effective
immediately eliminated the useof restraint seclusion, I'm
sorry, eliminated the use ofprone restraint, and put an end
date on seclusion, which was atthe end of the following year.

(38:13):
And there were some variousreasons for that, and some
advice that the board received.
I'm happy to say that eventhough there was some criticism
of keeping that seclusion pieceopened a little longer, we were
still committed to not usingseclusion. And in fact, did not
have any instances where we hada case of seclusion under Rule

(38:35):
4500 for for that school year.
Yeah, and you and I talked a bitabout that as well, and we were
very supportive of what you weredoing, and understood that need,
kind of, that need to sunset,and, of course, at the end of
the day, as you said, you endedup not even doing it at all in
that year. And I absolutelyunderstand the desire, like,
let's get rid of this right now.

(38:55):
But I think you, you know,ultimately, the board crafted a
policy that was significant. AndI think one of the things that's
really interesting to me aboutit, and, you know, I sometimes
use you as an example, and it'sin a positive way, but I talk
about the fact that, you know,people often will fall back on,
well, this is what our statesays. So this is what we have to

(39:16):
do. And I always kind of comeback to, and of course, there
are attorneys that will say thatas well. You know, I come back
to the state is setting thefloor here. You have to, you
have to meet these standards,but if you are going to exceed
these standards, if they say youcan do this, but you decide that
you're not going to do this,absolutely, that is a
possibility. But there's,there's often that idea that you

(39:37):
can't do that, that you can'thave something that's different,
and we're seeing it more andmore. In fact, in Virginia, just
about two weeks ago, anotherdistrict in Virginia, you know,
passed the prohibition on theuse of seclusion. It is allowed
at the state level. They're notthe first one in Virginia to do
that, but I think that'simportant, and I'm sure that

(39:57):
that, in fact, I have somerecollection of that being a
little.
Bit of a challenge for you. Youknow, what would your advice be
to superintendents that might bein a similar position? Thinking
about this,my advice is to do your
research, but in the end,to go with what you think is
best educationally. And in thatcase, I think the research is
pretty clear on what's besteducationally. There's various

(40:19):
reasons in Vermont and you wereinvolved in some of this. Our
state representative, TeresaWood, who I mentioned,
introduced legislation to banprone restraint, and
unfortunately, that did not makeit out of committee.
But I still think in the end, weknow that that's the right thing

(40:41):
to do. Yeah, yeah, absolutely,you know, at the beginning of
this year, kind of, I guess, onon his way out, the Secretary of
Education, Cardona, put out someguidance around restraint and
seclusion. And really, you know,took a deep dive into, you know,
kind of the impact and thetrauma. And it was, it was, you
know, I think, the strongestguidance to date that we've

(41:03):
gotten from that level. And, youknow, again, I agree with you. I
mean,just because you can doesn't
mean you should, and, you know,it may be a little bit more
difficult. So I want to talk alittle bit more specifically.
You mentioned Diane earlier, andDiane somebody that I've had the
privilege of getting to know aswell. And have, you know,
actually interviewed Diane, and,you know, she wrote a book

(41:25):
called the reset process, hasdone a lot of fantastic work,
kind of, in the trauma informedand neuroscience, kind of a
behavior space. Can you talk tome a little bit more you
mentioned earlier? Kind of, youknow, reaching out and dying
coming into the district, buttalk to me a little bit more
about that work. You know, whatit looked like and and, you
know, again, change isdifficult. So, you know, as

(41:47):
you're bringing in, and this is,this is a really important thing
that I think that you did thatprobably goes to a lot of
success. You can't just say,don't do these things. You've
got to say. And here are thingsthat we can do instead, and
here's a different way of doingthings. So can you tell me a
little bit more about the workthat Diane did and what she
brought into the district andhow that was received? Well, we

(42:08):
brought that in immediately, butwe also our district, we have an
early November full day staffdevelopment for pre K to 12
teachers. So one of the piecesthat we wanted to lay out was
the why. So why is thisimportant work, and why do we
need to re examine ourpractices? And Diane did a

(42:29):
really good jobbringing that trauma informed
lens of the harm it does tochildren long term, and went
through a really goodpresentation for, you know,
kindergarten teachers, teachersof special ed, high school, you
know, high school, Englishteachers, phys ed teachers of
the whole process. And I alsohave learned from being a

(42:53):
superintendent that no matterwho you put in front of a
professional developmentsession, they number one, have
to have to have credibility,and they also have to understand
what it's like to be in theclassroom and some of the
challenges. And Diane met allthose criteria, and she's just a
very warm and caring person,very passionate person, but also
extremely knowledgeable. Iworked with her when I was I

(43:15):
first connected with Diane whenI was a middle school principal,
and she worked with us when wehad a student, probably one of
the most challenging students inmy 34 year career at this point,
and she came in and broughtinsights to our team,
child centered insights thatreally transformed how we worked

(43:37):
with that with that student. Soshe didn't come in and tell us
what we had to do. She just camein with the approach of, here's
what I'm going to share withyou. Here's some other things to
consider, and let's talk aboutthis as a team. And that's how
she did this with a large group.
So we had a large group session,which, as any teacher who's
watching, or anyone who's beenin the classroom, knows that one

(44:00):
person talking in front of youknow, however, 100, 200 300
faculty members is not alwaysthe best approach, right? So we
paired that then with somesmaller workshops in the
afternoon that really targetedthe audience. And then we
brought her back into the schoolthat had particular concerns,
and she focused thatconversation number one with a

(44:21):
smaller group who really workedwith our students, our students
who had needs that that mayresult in restraint. And then
she worked with the largerfaculty on the reset process,
and different pieces in herreset process research based
that they could implementimmediately. And then we brought
her back in a number of timeswith with that group, and then

(44:44):
some other smaller groups totake a look at what's the next
step? What questions do youhave? How do you take this
information and make itapplicable to the students
you're working with right now?
So that was a piece. We alsobrought her into our.
There schools that may not havebeen experiencing the same level
of difficulty, but how can welook at what we're doing in

(45:06):
those settings differently toreally focus on student need?
And I think the fact that wewere also at the kind of the
tail end of COVID and some ofthe challenges that all students
were experiencing there, wastransferable skills to other
pieces.
And she made that very clear,that and she gave very practical

(45:27):
pieces of advice for classroomteachers. And she said, you may
not ever have a need forrestraint, but you do have the
need to work with students whohave challenges, who may
actually benefit from some ofthe strategies we're using, de
escalation strategies. So shegave very practical tips,

(45:48):
very practical advice, and westill continue to have a
relationship with her. One ofthe other pieces that grew out
of this, again, because we are asmall state, we don't have the
same level of resources,professional resources in our
schools,and we're in a state where we
really try to emphasize keepingstudents in their home school

(46:09):
mainstreamed with otherstudents. Sometimes there's, I
found there's a reluctance tosay, you know, we really need to
consider a different kind ofplacement for the student. So we
worked on a program that we haveat one of our elementary schools
now, which is that next level,when you're looking at the least
restrictive environment, if astudent needs that next level of

(46:30):
support, a smaller, moreinclusive classroom, then
this is the kind of program. Wecall it rivers, which, if you
think of the thought of aflowing river and kind of the
velocity and how it moves andhow it changes, that's kind of

(46:52):
why we chose the name, becauseyou have to meet the different
needs of students. But shehelped establish that program.
We have an excellent teacherthat we hired who has some
experiences with studentswith histories of trauma, neuro
diversion, students who need alittle extra support.
So we've established that, andhave made some really good

(47:15):
progress with that program. Thisyear, one of our first bits of
advice is be very specific, andin your first year, do not
exceed a small number a handfulof students, do not exceed three
or four students in thatclassroom, until you establish
that program and make itsuccessful. So we have, think
we've had some success with thatprogram, and we hope to again.

(47:38):
We don't want to expand it interms of numbers, but we want to
expand it in terms of qualityand how it serves students that
may have that higher levelneeds. So she's been involved
with that process as well. Soit's been multifaceted,
depending on the need, but Ithink we've tried to
bring a different lens to thework we're doing with students.

(48:00):
Yeah, no, that's great. And Ishared a link to Diane's book
here in the chat as well.
You know, kind of thinking backto that change again, I've often
said, and not to say that thisis the rule here, but I mean,
you know, change is hard, and itcan take a few years to kind of
go from the beginning ofsomething to really getting to
where you want to be. And evenlooking at your data, it's like

(48:22):
there's a progression, right?
And you're looking at the data,and it's so far better than
where it started. But as I heardfrom you, like, you know, we
still want it to be better,right? But that process of
change can be really difficult.
And of course, bringing inDiane, having training, you
know, certainly a good step. Butanytime you you propose changes,

(48:43):
there are some people that areready to jump on board, some
people that are resistant, and alot of people that kind of wait
to see how things are headingand where things are going,
having, you know, a trainingagain. You know, great, great
step. Were there other thingsthat you did to kind of get
people on board and to to, to,you know, I mean, even, even
feeling heard, I guess isimportant for people is they're,

(49:04):
you know, kind of looking atthings that are going to change.
And it can be a frighteningtime. I mean, you know, I have
worked with districts that have,you know, for instance, come
under investigation for theiruse of restraints seclusion. And
suddenly, you know, they knowchanges are coming. They don't
know what you know. And even asthings get in the news, you
know, you might be an educatortrying to support kids, but

(49:27):
suddenly feel like, oh gosh, youknow, like people think that
we're terrible people, or thatwe're harming people. What other
things that you do to try to,you know, one reassure educators
and help bring them on board, toget them kind of really moving
in this direction of change.
I just also think that thatsupport is a piece of that we

(49:47):
really tried to, kind of likeyou did with us, that this is
not about a gotcha. This isabout a what do you need? How
can we be supportive? And Ithink once teachers understood
that, that we were looking tosupport, especially coming out
of.
Very difficult time foreducation in general. Yeah, I
think there was a greatercomfort that we're not looking
to to discipline, punish, hurtadults or kids. We're looking to

(50:12):
say, what are those pieces thatwe don't have in place? What do
we need to do, and whatresources do we need to provide
for you? Right? Right? And Ithink that's been a big that was
a big piece of people acceptingthat change and also being a
part of that is also animportant part. Yeah, you know,
it brings me back to the thequote that's in almost every

(50:33):
presentation I ever give, whichis the Maya Angelou quote,
right? It's the do the best youcan until you know better than
when you know better, do better.
You know, none of this is aboutjudging, but it's about, you
know, are there opportunities toknow better? Can we do better?
And, you know, I think when itcomes to, you know, supporting
children, you know, it shouldn'tonly be aspirational. I mean, we
really should be driven by that.

(50:53):
You know, let's do better and,and ultimately, I mean, again,
I'm a big proponent of the factthat I think that, and I'm going
to ask you a question in thisvein in this vein in a second,
but I think that the same thingsthat you can do to improve the
outcomes for kids very often canresult in better outcomes for
everybody. And it can be hard tosee when you feel like you're in
the middle of a fire and thingsare really difficult. But

(51:14):
ultimately, I think there's alot of benefit to doing the
things that you've you've donehere. Well, I think back to my
first year as a teacher, andwhat I did as a first year
teacher just because I didn'tknow, I didn't have the
experience, I didn't have thetraining. And I I think every
year that we're in theprofession, we try to be better
at what we do. Yeah, sometimeswe're successful. Sometimes we

(51:36):
make a bigger jump than anotheryears, but I think we're always
trying to do something betterthe next year? Yeah, no, I hear
you. So let's talk about, youknow, a few years out from when
this all started, and knowingthat again, you know, it's all
about kind of continuing tostrive to do better. And you
know, I know you've beeninvolved kind of at state level,

(51:58):
you know, talks here as well.
But, but can you talk to me alittle bit about, you know, what
are some of the benefits you'veseen so, you know, kind of
coming out of this, and, youknow, bringing in the training
that you brought in, and, youknow, making some changes to
help support this work. What aresome of the benefits that you've
seen in terms of, you know, thestaff, in terms of, you know,

(52:19):
the school, the students, theleadership. Could you tell me a
little bit about kind of whatpositive things have come out of
this well, and some of this isjust from talking to teachers
and principals in schools thatwere more heavily impacted,
just the overall climate, I'mtold, has changed. I do not have

(52:40):
the benefit of having seen thatduring the periods of higher use
of restraint, but I can say thatthat from what I'm told, there's
a more a more relaxed andconfident feel in some one
building in particular, but justother pieces, I would say we

(53:01):
still rely on outside agencies,not to the same degree, and
we've tried to pull that back,but again, we're in an kind of
under resourced area, and Ithink our relationships have
improved, and our training andour collaboration has improved.
As a result of that, we havemuch clearer definitions of who

(53:24):
should be taking the lead incertain situations. I think a
lot of times, if you don't havethe training, even though you
may be the teacher in theclassroom or the principal, if
you don't have the training andknowledge and confidence,
sometimes you'll let otherpeople lead. As educators, it's
our school, it's our program,it's our students. We need to be

(53:45):
the one taking the lead. So theschool that I'm speaking about,
elementary school in Waterbury,there was that first year,
especially, I had principalswere going through a training
that they would be out of thebuilding for a day. So I
committed to being thesubstitute principal for the
day. So I had the ability tokind of visit the observe, but

(54:05):
also to observe work with thestudents. And there was one
student in particular who washaving a challenging day, and I
was the person with the teacherand a paraprofessional who stood
in and help the student to deescalate. And I was told
afterwards that thatcircumstance, they would have

(54:27):
probably moved to a restraint,and that was a case where we did
not have tothere's a lot of challenges, a
lot of emotion for that student,but we were able to use those
skills that we've learned tohelp de escalate that particular
child and and in a situationwhere that child was back in the
classroomand restraint was not needed. So

(54:48):
it takes patience. It takes sometime. It takes some
understanding and need of this,in need of what is, what.
Is useful in that particularsituation. But I I just, I think
that sense of patience andconcern has has come down a

(55:11):
little bit since, since Ientered the school district.
That's great. So I'm going toask you now the opposite
question. Sometimes we hearwhen, when the topic of
eliminating prone restraint orthe topic of eliminating
seclusion come up, sometimes wehear all the terrible things
that are going to happen as aresult of getting rid of these

(55:34):
things. Now I happen not togenerally believe that that's
true, but I could ask you thequestion anyway, what terrible
things happen when you got ridof seclusion and prone
restraint? Nothing? Okay,you know, we had, we hadn't
talked about that question. ButI'm glad the answer went the way
I was hoping it would go. But,yeah, that's great. I mean, you
had no ill effects. You've hadno, you know, increases in other
things that are concerning, or,you know, other, you know,

(55:59):
incidental side effects fromfrom doing this? No, and I would
say too, though, thatour problems disappear.
The challenges in the thecomplexities that students are
coming into school with, it havenot gone away. Right? What it's
required us to do is to thinkdifferently. Sometimes we've

(56:21):
been successful. Sometimes wehave not.
It has forced us, in a good way,forced in a good way, to look at
what resources we do need toproperly serve students. And I
think that's also an importantpart of this journey that we're
on.
In the resource vein, you know,you set the stage for kind of

(56:43):
talking about, you know, being asmaller district without as many
resources and and honestly,what's interesting to me is, if
you look at these issues, youknow, restraints, inclusion, for
example, we often find it'ssmaller districts that are that
are really struggling with thesethings. And that's, that's
that's often what you hear.
It's, well, we don't have theresources. We don't have the
resources of this district overhere. So, you know, we can't, we

(57:05):
can't necessarily entertain theidea of, of prohibiting this or,
you know, changing our policyhere, any any advice that you
would have for, you know, othersmall districts that may not
have the resources, in terms ofthe journey that you've had,
anything you might share withthem to

(57:25):
help, kind of in thinking aboutthat resource issue, what I
found is that there are peoplewho want to help. So
there's a superintendent,principals have networks in
their region in the state. And Ithink if you look and are
creative in the solutions thatyou will find people who will

(57:49):
contribute, whether it'sfinancially, we haven't had that
need, but their own expertise.
For example, when this came tolight in our community, there
was a person who is apsychologist by training, who
has private practice, whoreached out and said, Hey, I'd
like to have a conversation.
This is something that I think,this is work that your school is
doing that's important. We needto do things differently. Let's

(58:12):
sit down and have aconversation. And I'm willing to
help as a resource or just a,you know, informal consultant.
So I think being honest aboutwhere you are,
trying not to be defensive aboutwhat you've experienced, and
looking in ways to move forwardthat build on those community

(58:35):
resources, I think you find thatthere's a lot of people out
there who want to do the rightthing and want to help or they
can, yeah, yeah, no, I hear you,you know. And you know,
organizationally, you know,that's one of our hopes as well,
you know. You know, as we talkedabout earlier, you know, we,
we've worked, you know, we'veworked with you. We work with
other leadership teams andschools across the country,

(58:59):
and we've reached out, we'vesent letters, we've done other
things to try to offer support.
And, you know, certainly therehave been some really positive
examples of that. And I alwaysthink about you when I think
about this, because I felt likewe had a really positive
relationship. We talked aboutquite a bit of this is, is, you
know, you were, you know,looking at policy changes and
other things, and always veryreceptive.

(59:23):
But there are others that arejust not, you know, they
probably see alliance againstinclusion restraint. They don't
take the few minutes that youtook to go do some due diligence
and figure out who we were. AndI'm just kind of curious. I
mean, you know, we're alwaysreaching out, and we always want
to help. Would you have anyadvice for a superintendent that
got a letter from the Allianceor maybe hasn't, but is

(59:44):
interested in reaching out, youknow, any advice for that?
The advice is just to be honestand say, this is, this is where
we are right now, and this iswhere I see that we need to go.
And can you brainstorm some waysto get there? And that's.
You and I did, we talked aboutsome things, I think at points.
We didn't always necessarilyagree on the immediate next

(01:00:10):
step, but we always agreed onwhere we should be five steps
from there and then we couldfind a way to to get there.
Yeah, I think that's true inthis case, or any case involving
education, or you pick the area,that's how you do it.
Your idea isn't necessarily thebest idea, right? You being me,

(01:00:31):
where you get the best idea istalking to 1234, people, problem
solving, and then coming up witha solution. And
it can't be about youindividually. It has to be about
what's the end goal, what's bestfor kids, and how can we get
there, in a way that is,that is that works within the
constraints we have, whateverthat system is, right, right?

(01:00:52):
Well, in fact, I remember youand I talking about the idea of
sun setting, because ourdistrict, our local district,
you know, which is where myjourney began. That was one of
the things that we ended updoing. We put into effect the
policy that would sunsetseclusion. And while, you know,
in all honesty, at the moment weput that policy in effect, I
would have far preferred thepolicy that ended at that moment
in time. But I think as anoption, it was a good option,

(01:01:15):
and one that got us moving inthe right direction. So I think
by having those conversations,listening to other ideas,
listening to perspectives forthings that might be happening
elsewhere, sometimes those ideascome and it can lead to a
solution. And you know, I thinkit's important in that case,
with the administrativeprocedure that we put together,
required that if there was arequest for seclusion, that it

(01:01:37):
had to come with medicaldocumentation, and it had to be
approved by the superintendent,so we put some checks in place
that and we just didn't havethat need. But it was, it was
some people, again, it was somepeople who were concerned, who
had honest fears, but fears thatmany of us believe probably

(01:01:59):
would not need to move to thatextreme kind of
intervention. Yeah, yeah. Sotalk to me about the at the
state level. So you have Rulefour to 500
which to date, still allowsprone restraint and seclusion.
You, of course, have put apolicy in effect that you know

(01:02:19):
does not I know that you've hadsome involvement at the state
level as well. Can you talk tome a little bit about that? And
you know what your hopes mightbe in terms of seeing changes
happen at the state level aswell.
In the meantime, betweenrestraint, seclusion and today,
the initial concerns, Vermonthas gone through a huge concern

(01:02:43):
with funding. It's the part ofthe commission I'm on right now
of how we fund our schools,property tax. Property taxes on
a pretty considerably last year.
We're a smaller state that'sresidential and tourist based.
We don't have a huge commercial,industrial tax base. So that
issue has kind of supplantedother more pressing educational
issues, in my opinion, but atthe same time, it's still on the

(01:03:05):
table. I would say the biggestdisagreement is from some
educators who've seen that wecan do things differently,
versus people who work in theoutside mental health realm. I
think just the fact that youhave,

(01:03:26):
you have agencies using one formof
intervention versus another kindkind of tells you that there's,
there's philosophicaldifferences. So I think we've
done we've had someconversations
to try to move closer togetherin those areas. And as I said,

(01:03:46):
our local state representativeis also the chair of the House
Human Services Committee, so Ithink she has some ideas of how
to move through again, ratherthan going to the the immediate
ban of seclusion, prone supplyand restraint, of how to get
there in a stepped process, andwe're in conversations with with

(01:04:08):
how we could make some headwayin that area. So it's actually a
lesson you taught me earlier on.
Sometimes, when you can't takethat huge step, some smaller
baby steps will may eventuallyget you there, because people
realize that you can make changewithout
the horror stories that I thinkpeople dream up,

(01:04:29):
right, right, right. And it isfrustrating sometimes, because
you want it to come sooner. Youknow that it can come sooner.
You know the legislative processwas nothing I had any experience
with until these you know, thiscame into my life, and I began
working at the local level,state level, the federal level.
And, you know, I've got my ownimpatience with how long it

(01:04:50):
takes to get those thingsmoving, but at the same time,
I'd rather see some progressthan no progress. And sometimes,
you know, sometimes legislativechange is incremental.
Right? And, you know, ratherthan continuing to push for, you
know, the same thing over andover again and not be able to
move forward, sometimes taking astep can be a step in the right

(01:05:11):
direction. And you know, thesethings can impact lives. So I
mean, when you're able to make achange at you know, I was, I
would say, you know, people youknow, will say, Well, what about
changing this level or thatlevel? Change it at any level
you can, you know, if you canchange it in a classroom, change
it in that classroom, you canchange it in a school, change it
in that school, you can changeit in a district. And I think

(01:05:32):
about, you know, the number ofchildren, families and educators
that are in a better positionbecause of those changes. You
know, wherever you're able tohold that influence, I think
it's so important to do that.
We're getting near the end ofour time here. This goes by
quickly, but I want to give achance here, because I've been
monopolizing all your time. Ifanybody here that's watching
live has any questions orcomments, feel free to put those

(01:05:53):
in the chat, and we'll try toget to a couple of them before
we wrap up here. If there areany questions that come in. But
I have just kind of a couplemore things I wanted to talk to
you about, as we kind of wrap uphere. One, I'm going to go back
to, kind of this idea of, youknow, superintendent to
Superintendent. So, you know,I've not walked in your shoes.

(01:06:15):
I've not and I told you before,I actually have a bit of a lot
of respect. And, you know, Ilook at a job like a
superintendent job, and think,Ooh, that looks like because you
get it from all anglessometimes, in terms of, you
know, trying to, trying to run aschool, do the best thing. And
everybody has their their uniqueconcerns, but as a

(01:06:36):
superintendent, you know,speaking to other, you know,
school leaders andsuperintendents out there. You
know, this is an issue, again,that I think is very important,
but sometimes it's not even onsomebody's radar. Or, you know,
they know that these thingshappen, but, you know, kind of
the way it's got to be right. Doyou have any advice for somebody

(01:06:56):
out there that might be kind ofin your shoes, and, you know,
maybe they have some issues withrestraint and seclusion
happening in their district. Youknow, what? What advice might
you offer to somebody that is,you know, kind of walking in the
journey you're in. I would justsay in, I think I mentioned it
in some way, when you, whenyou're a superintendent, you

(01:07:20):
have a network of people who arein your in the same shoes that
you're in. So I think we allhave people that we trust, that
that we know have expertise incertain areas. And I would say,
if you're a superintendent,reach out to someone that you
trustwho's also a superintendent and
talk through that process. I'vebeen fortunate, just because of

(01:07:44):
the experience we've had here,to have a couple of people reach
out to us. We've had someconversations of how to
make changes in your school andyour particular context. So I
think that's an important pieceof it. And
I also think it's important toothat that when you're dealing

(01:08:07):
with those challenges, if it issomething that's very public,
like ours, was is to acknowledgethat we want to do better. And I
think that's also an importantpart of that process,
professionally and personallythat that, I think when people
see that you're open and honest,that they're more willing to

(01:08:30):
extend some graceto make those changes happen and
give that support in theprocess. You know, I always
think about you as a really goodexample of that, of that idea,
you know, what I'll tell you ishaving had the opportunity to,
you know, in some way, you know,work across the country with,
with various situations andschools and districts.

(01:08:56):
You know, there are, you know,your your approach to that, I
think, is really important. Andyou know, what I'll say is that
there are a lot of places where,when these things become issues,
you kind of see the the wagoncircling and going into
protective mode, and, you know,not, not acknowledging kind of

(01:09:16):
the issue or the desire to dosomething better and different,
and that can be really difficultplace for, you know, those that
are advocating for change. Andyou know, it's funny, because,
you know, you know, I think youprobably know this, but in the
work that we do, we've got a lotof people in our community.

(01:09:37):
We've got a lot of parents andcaregivers, but we have a lot of
teachers, administrators,related professionals. We've got
a really broad community,because our ideas here, like,
how do we do better foreverybody? Right? How can we
come together and do better?
This isn't just about beingcritical and saying you're doing
all these things wrong, but youknow, still there can be

(01:09:57):
resistance. But you know, wealways believe that, you know.
Even if a family comes to us andthey're having an issue like we
start out with, can wecollaborate? Can we work
together? Can we, can we offersome ideas here? Can we, you
know, bring in, you know, can wemake some suggestions? But
again, not, not everyone is isopen to that. And you know, I
think that especially if you'vegot families or others that you

(01:10:21):
know. And again, they may havebeen through things that are
very difficult. They may be veryupset, but if you can clear the
table for collaborating, there'ssuch better outcomes that can
come from it. And you know,rather than, I mean, you know,
let's face it, when thingsescalate then, okay, well, now
we have complaints that arefiled, or federal complaints, or
attorneys or other things. Ithink that that importance of,

(01:10:44):
you know, really, just tryingfor all parties to collaborate
out of the box, is so importantwell. And I also think too, and
I've just learned this fromexamples. I've been involved in
all those kinds of circumstancesI've had. I've been in two
school districts where we've hadcomplaints filed for various
things. We've been in situationswhere we've had students with
IEPs who parents bring in anadvocate. And I think that's a

(01:11:08):
good thing. I think sometimesyou need a third party. A lot of
times, what I've found, and I'vebeen a superintendent for 16
years now, a lot of times, I'vefound that when an issue gets to
me, things are pretty difficult,and you really are trying to
manage that process, to bringresolution in a way that that

(01:11:32):
you can come up with a win, win.
In the end, it may not beeverything you want, or we're
envisioning. It may not beeverything the parent wants, but
having someone coming in withthat outside perspective,
neutral perspective, who isn'tinvolved, I found is helpful.
And I found that with withworking with parents as a
principal, that sometimes youyou see your child in one way,
and I also have, by the way, achild who's neuro diverse, you

(01:11:55):
see your child in one way, andyou see the solution in one way,
and when you're bringing in athird party, sometimes they've
had experiences that teach themthat there's other ways to get
to that sameresolution. And I think parents
in many cases,are open if it's someone who is

(01:12:16):
who they perceive is on theirside, saying, look what the
school's telling you in thatcase is correct.
Why don't we look at it in thisway and try to resolve the
situation in this perspective?
We got to that solution fasterwhen somebody from the outside

(01:12:38):
is involved, whether it's anadvocate or an attorney, right,
right, right. Yeah, you know, Imean, and this is a discussion
for a whole another day, but youknow, the, you know, I wish we
could re engineer some of theIEP process, because I think,
unfortunately, it sometimes setsup somewhat of an adversarial
process, and it shouldn't be. Imean, we should all really be

(01:12:59):
around the table for the samepurpose. But unfortunately, I
think the process sometimesitself makes it a little bit
more, you know, kind of kind ofadversarial, and, you know, at
the end of the day, when we'reall able to kind of come
together, work together, knowthat we're there to, you know,
ultimately, you know, you know,support a child and, you know,

(01:13:21):
improve outcomes, but, but it'shard. It's hard. I mean, I've
been through, I've been throughthat, you know, myself, and been
with many families that havegone through that as well, and
had some really positiveexperiences. You know, I
remember, in fact that, you knowmy son for the last four years,
who actually went, we were in anon public but we still had the
IEP process. Andafter many years of some really
difficult meetings, we had thisteam that we were just all so

(01:13:44):
aligned that the meetings werelike pleasant, and they were,
you know, that we would problemsolve and work together. But,
you know, it's a challenge. AndI think, you know, realizing the
humanity and everyone I think isimportant. And you know, again,
you know, I mean, nobody'sbecoming a teacher, restraint
and seclude. Nobody wants to notsee your child to be successful.

(01:14:06):
But at the same time, you know,there's all these different
things out in the universe thatmay be affecting you know what's
happening? You know, givinggiving ourselves grace, giving
each other, grace that's alwaysworth doing, yeah, and I found
the same thing I talked aboutfrom the parent perspective, but
from the school perspective,I've changed my mind on the way
we've approached situations andeducational programming based on

(01:14:29):
what I've learned through theprocess and just being open to
listen. Yeah, yeah, that'sgreat. Well, I think on that
note, we will wrap up, because Ipromised you that I would have
you out of here by 445 and weare just about there, so we will
go ahead and wrap up, but Ireally appreciate you joining me
for this time and and our hopehere, when we do these is, you
know, we get a number of peoplethat watch these live, and we

(01:14:49):
always encourage people sharethese. You know, I think that
this is a really important onefor for leadership and for
people that might findthemselves in a situation.
Collaboration, where they'rethey're going through some of
these things, and I reallyappreciate your, I mean, one,
your collaboration, because Ireally do value, you know, the
collaboration we had as you weregoing through this process. And,

(01:15:13):
you know, I appreciate thechanges that you've helped to
bring about for your districtand really make it a positive
difference. So I want to thankyou for being here today. Do you
have any final word you want toleave us with as we we end
today? No, I appreciate everyonewho is watching and who's
passionate about this topic,because it's it's important,
especially with some of thechallenges we're facing moving

(01:15:35):
forward with with resources forschools, I think absolutely, we
need to stay more in tune tothis now than ever, absolutely
well. Thank you so much on thatnote, we are going to let
everybody go. I'm going to askyou to stick around for one
minute, and then I will let yougo as well. But I want to thank
everybody for being here today,and we will see you again next
time. Thanks, Mike, thank you.
You.