It is a part of the nature of education that teachers may be placed in situations where they experience secondary trauma. This is concerning because not only does this impact on the quality of their teaching and their ability to teach, but has broader implications, including their own mental health and wellbeing. This study seeks to explore how teachers, particularly teachers working in detention centres are impacted by trauma.
Teachers in Queensland are working with a growing number of students who are victims of trauma which they can share with classmates and teachers during classes. This sharing of their experiences with trauma results in secondary trauma.
Secondary trauma can be defined as the emotional stress a person feels when they hear about the firsthand trauma experienced by another individual. Occupations where there is a high exposure to traumatic material or the sharing of lived experience by clients increases the likelihood of secondary trauma. A study conducted by Johnson et al., (2005) compared the experienced of occupational stress across a large and diverse set of occupations. The study found that of the twenty-six occupations included in the study, there were six occupations that reported worse than average scores for physical health, psychological well-being, and job satisfaction. These six occupations included ambulance workers, teachers, social service, customer services-call centres, prison officers and police. What we can take from studies of these types is that occupations, including teachers that work in youth detention centres, are at an elevated risk of experiencing secondary trauma.
Research conducted by Dr Stathis and his colleagues in 2008 at Brisbane Youth Detention Centre showed 75% of boys and 90% of girls showed high levels of metal health challenges indicative of trauma (Stathis et al., 2008). A follow up study in 2012 found that 94% of boys and 100% of girls were showing even higher levels of trauma. However, there is little known about secondary trauma and its effects on teachers, working with these students. Research by Hatcher et al.,(2011) found that teachers working in youth detention centres, “were highly likely to be exposed to traumatic events through their work with traumatized populations.” (p. 214).
The lack of current research into the effects of secondary trauma on teachers, especially those working in youth detention centres is of key concern as it impacts their effectiveness, can lead to mental health issues, stress, compassion fatigue, and burnout.

We are in crisis in Aotearoa, if not in the world, child abuse, masked feelings, parents and teachers repeating the same patterns that they endured, resulting in the same repressed emotional states, and therefore continuing child rearing and educational practices that undermine our children’s ability to thrive. Not only is thriving critical for wellbeing, it is also a fundamental skill needed to navigate an increasingly complex, intersectional, and climate challenged world.
We are a country of quick fixes and individualistic targeted approaches. This individualistic approach to change perpetuates the current theories and actions of the delivery of programmes to ‘target groups’. Often these target groups are sent ‘to be fixed’ in the aftermath of a crisis yet the situations and triggers remain unfixed, so returning to the same environment where no one else has changed or grown perpetuating the same experiences. When we move to a ‘everybody’ rather than an ‘individual’ perspective, we enable social and emotional skills for all. In doing so we develop increased awareness, break down barriers and enable those who are not seen as the target group to develop empathy, social skills and demonstrate genuine belonging.
How do we get to a place of comfort and fluency with the entire range of emotional responses? How do we work together, across complex relational spaces, to interrupt the ‘cycle of trauma’ perpetuated by dominant punitive, behaviourist parenting and educational pedagogy?
Children/tamariki, parents/whānau and teachers/kaiako need agency, resources, and coaching in a sustainable way, using multifaceted inclusive practical applications that reflect their authentic value. For empathy, respect and kindness to have equal focus and support to that of physical development these values and structures need to be actively braided throughout our education system and not just targeted at those who are seen as a problem ‘to be fixed’.
A organisation wide programme to address these challenges was co-designed as part of a Masters research and developed from within the unique environment of Aotearoa/New Zealand by 29 kaiako/teachers.
Participants attending the workshop will explore a reflective practice tool that was developed during the co-design process called Nō rere. It is used to encourage kaiako/teachers to expand their own repertoire of responses and beliefs about behaviour with a culturally responsive, trauma informed lens and lift the weight of responsibility to change off the child. Participants will have an opportunity to reflect and grow through a safe and fun process.

Background: The school environment can provide critical support for children who have experienced trauma, with school-based trauma interventions demonstrating substantial potential in addressing posttraumatic stress symptoms. However, selecting and creating effective school-based programs proves challenging, due to the heterogeneity in design, implementation, and efficacy of existing interventions. This review and meta-analysis aims to identify school-based trauma interventions targeting PTSD and distinguish the common and effective practice, process, and implementation elements of these programs.

Methods: A literature search in the databases PsychINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, and Pubmed was done using a search-criteria based on keywords of interest. Eligible studies described a school-based intervention designed to reduce PTSD symptoms in students. Participants receiving the intervention must be diagnosed with PTSD or have been exposed to a traumatic event that has caused ongoing distress. Emerging practice, process, and implementation elements were tallied, and Cohen’s d effect size was calculated to determine the effect size of each study.

Results: A total of 44 studies were included in this review and 46 datasets were usable for analysis. Common practice elements included psychoeducation, cognitive behavioural therapy, and creative expressive therapy. Common process elements included group therapy sessions, with 10 to 12 sessions, 30-60 minutes in length, run by mental health professionals. Common implementation elements included supervision of facilitators, review of recorded sessions, and collaboration with school principals. The more effective components included creative-expressive therapy, relaxation techniques, and problem-solving skills (practice elements); individual therapy sessions facilitated by a mental health professional (process elements); and facilitator supervision sessions, collaboration with school staff, and use of a manual (implementation elements).

Conclusion: These findings indicate certain therapeutic modalities delivered in the school setting tend to be more effective in reducing PTSD symptomology among students. Similarly, specific process and implementation elements identified that may improve the efficacy of a school-based trauma intervention.