Tag: teaching

Emotionally Based School Avoidance

Words matter. The terms we use shape how we understand problems and how we respond to them.

When we talk about students who stuggle to attend school, our choice of language matters more than many realise. Terms like ‘school refusal’ and ‘school can’t’ each carry certain assumptions that can narrow our understanding and in turn our avenues for support.

The long used ‘school refusal’ is often problematic as it suggests a level of wilful defiance or opposition to attending school. It can imply that a child is simply choosing not to attend school which risks framing the student as difficult, uncooperative or resistant. This thinking can lead towards support approaches with focus on pressuring or coercing students into attending with compliance-focused responses.

The term ‘school can’t’ emerged as a more compassionate alternative, acknowledging that many students are not refusing school out of choice but are experiencing genuine distress. This term was intended to disrupt the framing provided by the term school refusal and this disruption is important, however the term can still oversimplify the issue. Not all school avoidance reflects a complete inability to attend. Many students can, an indeed want to attend. Sometimes this is only possible under certain conditions, for certain periods, or with significant but meaningful support.

The term Emotionally Based School Avoidance (EBSA) recognises that school avoidance is often driven by emotional distress, linked heavily to feelings of anxiety, overwhelm, fear, shame or social stress. Importantly, it highlights the function of the behaviour. Avoiding school often provides immediate relief from the distress. When a student is unable to attend school, the absence often reflects underlying distress or unmet needs where school is concerned rather than being the core problem itself.

This distinction matters because it shifts the focus from “How do we get them back to school?” to “What is making school feel unsafe, overwhelming or unmanageable?” That questions steps up our responses to ones that are grounded in understanding, collaboration and meaningful support.

It’s time to address the gap…

There’s been a gap on this page for quite some time – a gap in what ‘Taylor Behavioural’ is currently working towards. That’s because I’ve been busy trying to contribute to another gap, one that’s much bigger and one that will take a whole lot more than just me to fill.

For over seven years, I’ve worked on trying to understand and find ways to address the fragmentation that currently exists in the literature on how best to support students with school refusal, in particular, autistic students. My interest in this area started when I was tasked with supporting a seven year old girl who refused to attend school and, despite the efforts of her mum was missing over 90% of her school week through various combinations of late arrivals, early departures or entire day absences. This was the first time I’d encountered this story but I’ve come to learn that it’s far from unique, and that it will require a national response to resolve.

Last August, the Senate Inquiry into the national trend of school refusal handed down a series of recommendations. Among these recommendations were; the funding of more research into the effectiveness of interventions for school refusal, work by government child health departments to improve early identification of conditions such as autism, ADHD and anxiety, which are all closely related to the increase in school refusal, collaborative work between education departments and school sectors towards earlier identification of students with school refusal (among other school attendance problems such as school withdrawal) and enhanced flexibility in education options, and improvements to supports currently available to families. The recommendations point to several of the factors that are likely to influence school refusal in young people and were viewed by many as a positive sign.

Last month’s response, or lack thereof, by the federal goverment has underwhelmed many in the field of school refusal. Failure to adopt the recommendation to provide a national action plan means the fragmentation is set to continue. Obviously, education is a state responsibility but there is not enough known about the complexities of school refusal to presume that this widespread problem can be addressed without significant collaboration and planning. Nevertheless, the fact is that the gap remains one that is important to address.

Currently, my attempts to understand and address the gap have led me to conduct a program of research with the goal of developing an intervention package that supports teachers in both the early identification of school refusal and the selection of early strategies to support autistic students who may be headed towards more chronic forms of school refusal.

I’m always happy to share information about what I’m up to so if you’re interested, get in touch!