Helping children learn: the legacy of violence: children's brains may be deeply affected by ongoing violence. There are many techniques schools can use to improve the learning capacities of these students.

Some kids just can't seem to learn. As schools are increasingly held to national and state standards, educators will need to examine why. Who are these children? They are that in between group of students in our schools whose lack of success has defied explanation--the kids who break their teachers' hearts; the kids whose parents feel that they've tried everything. Meeting the learning needs of this significant population will be central to raising school performance.

Experts explain much of these children's inability to learn with something that is not even addressed in most districts' content standards: violence. As a high school counselor in a large, urban school district, students frequently canto to my office and ask to use the phone--not only to ask a parent to bring a forgotten lunch or permission slip, but to call hospital emergency rooms to see if a shot cousin, brother or uncle had been brought in after a neighborhood fight.

I will never forget the year our school district lost a long list of students to community violence. One while skate-hoarding to the corner store. Another at a party. Drive-bys. Walk-ups. The students became weary of seeing the trauma counselors appear at their schools. Teachers who had nurtured students for years only to attend their funerals instead of their graduations were staggered by the losses.

Nationally, young people are highly represented as perpetrators and victims of violence. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2000), people under the age of 25 are victimized more by rape, sexual assault, robbery and aggravated assault than those from other age groups. From 1990 to 1997, nearly 29,000 young people 18 and under were victims of homicide. In 1997, 1,700 youths under age 18 were implicated in 1,400 murders. This figure is 21 percent above the average number of perpetrators in the mid 1980s. Violent deaths run the gamut of community sizes, income levels, racial and ethnic make-up and locales. Figures from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999) show that youth crime rates rose steadily from 1965 to 1985, then more than doubled from the mid-'80s to mid-'90s.

Overt violence is only the tip of the iceberg. The rest of it, often hidden or not taken seriously by adults, is characterized by threats, intimidation and bullying. In 1999, according to the CDC, 4.9 percent of students--about 1 in 20--who participated in a Youth Risk Behavior Survey reported carrying a firearm at least once in the previous 30 days. Some 17.3 percent reported carrying a weapon during the previous month. In the 12 previous months, 35.7 percent reported having been in a physical fight at least once; almost 9 percent said they had been hit, slapped or physically hurt by a boyfriend or girlfriend on purpose during that same time (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000).

How are children affected by ongoing violence?

Dr. Bruce Perry, chief of psychiatry at Texas Children's Hospital and faculty member at the ChildTrauma Academy, has studied the brain development of children exposed to chronic violence and neglect. Perry (1997) explains that children who grow up to be violent in the streets are likely to be products of violent homes and communities. They have learned that violence is defensive--justifiable protection from persistent and pervasive threats. Under siege, "I'll pop him before he pops me" becomes an act of perceived self-care.

The brain: use- and state-dependent

Perry (1999) explains that the brain changes in response to how it is used. If a child overuses the primitive, life-preserving parts of the brain, they become overly developed, at the expense of the cognitive and social learning areas. The brain's "alarm system" is more easily activated. This is why children who live in neighborhoods where gunshots are commonplace may "hit the dirt" at the sound of cars backfiring, firecrackers, or even books dropping. But even ongoing, low-level violence, such as yelling and belittling, can change the brain over time.

Children who live in persistent threat have highly sensitive triggers for their bodies' defensive mechanisms. Once activated, their bodies are flooded with chemicals designed to achieve extreme strength, intense survival-oriented focus, pain resistance and euphoria. It takes a while for them to return to a less aroused state and focus on anything more than survival, let alone algebra.

Because the cognitive and social learning parts of the brain are underdeveloped, meaning attribution that could interpret the stimuli and modify the response are less able to be used. The motor-vestibular functions (the ability to write, type, ride a bike) and state-regulation capacity (resting heart rate) are also negatively affected (Perry, 1999).

This means that children who live with violence have a harder time sorting out what is truly dangerous and what is not. They have a harder time learning coordinated motor skills that require concentration. They feel more easily threatened by looks, words and situations than other kids. Once their guard is up, they are less able to focus on what's going on in the classroom, and they take longer to return to a relaxed, learning-ready state.

The brain internalizes, stores and retrieves information in a "state-specific" fashion. Information offered while the child is in a state of anxiety cannot be easily assimilated or retrieved; we must provide relaxing learning environments if we expect children who grew up in violence to learn.

These children may spend virtually all their time in a classroom either in a state of arousal and anxiety or dissociation--a defense against extreme stress. They may never achieve the state of "relaxed alertness" that makes a child receptive to learning.

Children raised in violence are sometimes considered learning disabled: smart but unable to learn. In tact, their other faculties may be even sharper than usual, but this can get them into trouble: they are hyper-vigilant, always on guard, expecting the worst.

Fight or flight

Children like this tend to misinterpret "neutral cues"--a look or an action not clear as to its intent. Whereas another child might assign neutral or even positive meaning to such cues, a child who is living "under fire" will tend to interpret them as threatening, assigning hostile intent to benign looks and supportive touches (Perry, 1997).

Perry explains that this "fight or flight" state of readiness was originally adaptive and protective. Now, however, it has become misplaced and maladaptive. That is, although it once protected the child from real danger, now it kicks into action even when there is no threat, and causes problems in the child's life. How many teachers have been confronted by students who "went off" on another student over a look? How many teachers themselves have been challenged by students who want to know, "What are you looking at?"

And that leads to another problem: teachers under fire. Much teacher stress call he traced to unpredictable student reactions leading to conflict. And just like their students, teachers cannot be at their creative best when they feel they have to be constantly on guard.

Kendall Johnson, a continuation school teacher, therapist and trainer in school crisis response, found a positive correlation between childhood critical incidents and later maladaptive behavior in his study of 203 adolescents (1998). This study helps us to look at a student's current behavior in school with a more comprehensive way of understanding, and with more intervention options.

A student identified as having attention deficit disorder, for example, may be in fact showing a traumatic stress response related to one or more overwhelming critical incidents. When referring students for help, be aware that the problem behavior may stem from a neurological response to danger.

Beyond individual referrals

Schools today are leaning away from heavy dependence on individual assessment and treatment. This leaves the classroom teacher with even greater responsibility for managing serious behavior problems, in schools where many of the students have been subject to violent incidents, there is much that administrators, teachers and support personnel can do.

What can educators do?

* Be clear--eliminate neutral cues

When talking with students, be sure the intent of your message is clear. Use calm and congruent words, looks and gestures to clearly convey your meaning.

* Decrease arousal levels

Structure a classroom environment that soothes and relaxes overcharged students. Choose music and classroom decorations with the goal of creating an emotional mood: calm it down and jazz it up as needed. Have a predictable routine. After unexpected loud noises or disturbances, use relaxing activities as transitions between learning modules to help students settle back down.

* Don't be provoked

Children subjected to violence will sometimes try to provoke a reaction, in a misguided attempt to make anticipated abuse somewhat controllable and predictable. Don't follow the script, Recognize that this is not about you. Respond calmly to provocations, using "I" statements such as "I need you to sit back in your seat now." Your reasoned reactions help to "reeducate" the child's nervous system and challenge his or her view of the world as a dangerous place.

* Take care of yourself

School administrators, teachers and others in helping professions are subject to "compassion fatigue" (Figley, 1995), signs of stress as a result of helping others. I lave a personal stress management plan that builds in good nutrition, moderate exercise, rest and relaxation, and spiritual and professional renewal.

* Seek help

Use school based mental health resources when available for more specialized attention to troubled students.

What can schools do?

Promising practices and interventions mentioned by the CDC include a parent- and family-based strategy; home-visiting strategy, social-cognitive strategy, and mentoring strategy (Full information about programs mentioned in this article and other exemplary programs is available online at www. cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/bestpractices.htm.)

* Parent- and family-based strategy

Recommended practices include actions that empower parents, target high-risk families, and teach positive child-parent interactions and non-aggressive discipline. Among effective programs cited by the CDC are the Adolescent Transition Program, Nurturing Program for Parents and Children 4 to 12 Years, the Effective Black Parenting Program, and Parenting Adolescents Wisely.

* Home-visiting strategy

The CDC recommends arranging home visits for young expectant mothers and teens with young babies. Nurse home visits help to improve the mother's health, develop effective parenting skills, and improve her financial situation by helping her transition back into the workforce. Home visits are also effective for families with evidence of child abuse or maltreatment. Exemplary programs include trials based in Elmira, N.Y. and the Healthy Start Program.

* Social-cognitive strategy

Recommended actions can target youngsters who have shown violent tendencies, or can be offered to all students. Interventions teach skills that include negotiating, identifying and coping with feelings, anticipating the consequences of one's aggressive verbal and nonverbal behavior, finding nonviolent alternatives to conflict, and moral reasoning.

Suggestions include using role-playing and small-group exercises to help children practice pro-social, non-violent behaviors and develop automatic positive responses; training in intercultural understanding; and teaching students about the risk factors or triggers that can lead to violent confrontation.

Exemplary all-school programs include Resolving Conflict Creatively Program, PeaceBuilders, PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) Curriculum, Second Step: A Violence Prevention Curriculum, Conflict Resolution: A Curriculum for Youth Providers, and the Violence Prevention Project.

Programs recommended for at-risk and high-risk youth include BrainPower Program, the Anger Coping and Coping Power Programs, and Positive Adolescent Choices Training. The FAST (Families and Schools Together) Track Program blends a social-cognitive curriculum with parent training and home visits.

* Mentoring strategy

Mentoring has been shown to improve school attendance and performance, decrease violent behavior, protect against drug use and improve youngsters' relationships with parents and friends. A positive adult in the life of a child has been recognized as an important protective influence. More systematic research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of mentoring programs. Nevertheless, some community-based, school-based and institution-based programs have produced positive effects. Those mentioned by the CDC include the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program and Norwalk Mentor Program.

What can communities do?

* Enlist the support of your town's organizations

Ask local businesses to support your efforts. Other public, private and professional organizations, such as community service, religious, health care, educational institutions and the news media, can be approached for assistance. They may provide volunteers, meeting sites, free publicity and training programs. Community groups may also want to participate in multi-tier efforts launched by the schools. Examples of such CDC-recommended programs include the Metropolitan Area Child Study and the Yes I Can curriculum.

* Address violence in the media

Life-like, "recreational" violence portrayed in TV, movies, video games and news programs has escalated in type and frequency over the years. It has been shown to increase violent behavior in children (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999), and is a serious concern for educators. Let your public officials and media representatives know where you stand on promoting such products among children. Help children become "media-savvy" so they will be able to look beyond the violent messages they are bombarded with daily.

These strategies are not alternatives to a curricular focus, nor are they something to do just to be nice to kids. Rather, they are the answer to raising the lagging performance of students suffering the impact of violence. With this population, these are the best practices tot teaching toward achievement.

Violence has left us a challenging legacy in our schools. Our children--all our children--are born innocent and deserve a chance at having meaningful, productive lives. As we press forward in addressing the educational issues so important to improving school performance, we must not wait to prevent and remedy the problems created by ongoing violence. This we must do so that no child will be left behind.

References

Figley, C.R. (1995). "Compassion fatigue as secondary traumatic stress disorder: An overview." In Figley, C.R., Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Grossman, D. & DeGaetano, G. (1999). Stop teaching our kids to kill. A call to action against TV, movie and video game violence. New York: Crown Publishers.

Johnson, K. (1998). Trauma in the lives of children. (2nd Ed.) Alameda, CA: Hunter House.

Perry, B.D. (1997). "Incubated in terror: neurodevelopmental factors in the 'cycle of violence.'" In Osofsky, J. (Ed.), Children, youth, and violence: The search for solutions. New York: Guilford Press.

Perry, B.D. (1999). "Memories of fear: How the brain stores and retrieves physiologic states, feelings, behaviors and thoughts from traumatic events." In Goodwin, J.M. & Attias, IK. (Eds.), Splintered reflections: Images of the body in trauma. New York: Basic Book.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2000). Best practices of youth violence prevention. A sourcebook for community action. Atlanta, GA: Author.

Joanne Tortorici Luna is an assistant professor if counselor education at California State University, Long Beach, a former school counselor, and a consultant in school violence prevention and intervention. She is co-author of the United Nations Children's Fund book "Children in war: A guide to the provision of services," and is author of other publications on the subject of peace education and school crisis response.