# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The hidden homelessness among America’s high school students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Roughly 700,000 students ages 13 to 17 have experienced homelessness in the last year. An education researcher says the obstacles that these students face can threaten their college dreams.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The effects of trauma on children are far more pervasive than adults imagine. The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence found that over 60% of children surveyed experienced some form of trauma, crime, or abuse in the prior year, with some experiencing multiple traumas. Often, children and adolescents do not have the necessary coping skills to manage the impact of stressful or traumatic events. As such, as many as one in three students who experience a traumatic event might exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Following a child's exposure to a traumatic event, parents and teachers are likely to observe the following symptoms:

Reexperiencing - constantly thinking about the event, replaying it over in their minds, nightmares.

Avoidance - consciously trying to avoid engagement, trying not to think about the event.

Negative Cognitions and Mood - blaming others or self, diminished interest in pleasurable activities, inability to remember key aspects of the event.

Arousal - being on edge, being on the lookout, constantly being worried.

Traumatic Events and Learning

Symptoms resulting from trauma can directly impact a student's ability to learn. Students might be distracted by intrusive thoughts about the event that prevent them from paying attention in class, studying, or doing well on a test. Exposure to violence can lead to decreased IQ and reading ability. Some students might avoid going to school altogether.

Exposure to violence and other traumatic events can disrupt youths' ability to relate to others and to successfully manage emotions. In the classroom setting, this can lead to poor behavior, which can result in reduced instructional time, suspensions, and expulsions. Long-term results of exposure to violence include lower grade point averages and reduced graduation rates, along with increased incidences of teen pregnancy, joblessness, and poverty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The effects of trauma on children are far more pervasive than adults imagine. The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence found that over 60% of children surveyed experienced some form of trauma, crime, or abuse in the prior year, with some experiencing multiple traumas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The School of Education, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom

This article examines how domestic violence impacts the lives and education of young children, children, and young people and how they can be supported within the education system. Schools are often the service in closest and longest contact with a child living with domestic violence; teachers can play a vital role in helping families access welfare services. In the wake of high profile cases of child abuse and neglect, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of multi-agency responses to children living with abuse. In the United Kingdom, the case of 4-year-old Daniel Pelka who died in 2012 following abuse and starvation by his mother, who experienced domestic violence, and her partner, led to a serious case review. It found recording systems in Daniel's school were not used consistently, and details held by different agencies were not collated to enable the formation of a coherent assessment. The lack of integrated working cited in the report echoes findings from previous serious case reviews. A strong correlation exists between domestic abuse and child abuse, with approximately half of all domestic violence situations involving direct child abuse. Children can also be affected indirectly by violence occurring in their home by seeing or hearing it taking place. This article examines the impact of domestic violence on the mental health of children, and the impact on their education. Violence in children's lives often causes disruption to their schooling and harms the quality of their educational experiences and outcomes. The abuse children experience can result in emotional trauma, physical and psychological barriers to learning, and disruptive behavior in school, while the underlying causes of these problems remain hidden. Knowing when and how to seek advice from multi-agency professionals is an essential part of effective practice among school staff. Despite their vital role in identifying signs of abuse and signposting referral pathways, research indicates teachers often lack confidence and knowledge for such work. The article examines how the professional learning and professional confidence of teachers can be developed, and how recent policy and practice developments in the United Kingdom have the potential to influence work in this area.

Introduction

Every school is likely to have children affected by domestic violence. The aim of this article is to examine how domestic violence impacts the lives of young children, children, and young people, and the potential role that schools can play in helping to address their needs. Wellbeing and healthy relationships are the foundations of learning. The immediate and long-term costs of domestic violence can thus be high, affecting children's education as well as having long-term developmental consequences.

While the term domestic violence is used in this article, a number of terms are present in literature such as intimate partner violence and inter-parental violence, and sometimes terms are used interchangeably. Since there is a governmental definition of domestic violence, and also for consistency, I will adopt the term domestic violence predominantly here. The terms intimate partner violence and inter-parental violence will be used when referring to studies that specifically adopt these terms.

Domestic violence and child protection is a complex, multifaceted area. It is common for domestic violence and, as specified in this case, intimate partner violence (IPV) to co-occur with other problems: 'children's experiences of and responses to IPV exposure cannot be viewed in isolation from other adversities and inequalities' ( Etherington and Baker, 2018, p. 70). The co-occurrence of stressful problems in early life is often referred to as adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). ACEs is a construct emerging from a long line of studies into traumatic events occurring in childhood such as domestic violence, sexual, physical and emotional abuse, household dysfunction, and neglect ( Felitti et al., 1998; Dube et al., 2001). Research studies find that having these ACEs has long-lasting effects into adulthood. ACEs can be a source of long-term psychological distress as well as having longitudinal effects on physical health, substance misuse, interpersonal violence and self-harm ( Hughes et al., 2017). The 'toxic trio' of domestic violence, substance misuse, and parental mental health problems can render children at risk of harm and complex trauma. Poverty all too frequently intersects with ACEs. Although poverty is viewed as a social marker regarding the distribution of domestic violence risk, the association is not causal ( Ray, 2011). Domestic violence cuts across all socio-economic groups and all backgrounds. Victims of all backgrounds, predominantly women, face common difficulties when leaving an abusive partner. Research demonstrates that it is at the point of leaving, or after she has left, that a woman is in most danger ( Calder and Regan, 2008). It is not uncommon for victims of domestic violence to remain living with perpetrators, even risking their own safety, rather than risking themselves, and their children, becoming homeless.

Teachers are well placed to play a pivotal role in identifying and responding to domestic violence since they have contact with children more than any other service. As emphasized by Sterne and Poole (2010, p. 17), 'although staff in schools may not be able to stop the violence at home, they are in a position to make a considerable difference to children's lives.' Statistics from the Department for Education [DFE] (2017a) show that of the 646,120 children referred to children's social care in England 2016-2017, the highest number of referrals, 27.5%, came from the police. The second highest percentage of referrals came from schools at 17.7% followed by health services at 14.4%. School referrals combined with education services referrals of 2.6% means that education accounted for 20.3% of referrals overall. Once referred and assessed, statistics show the percentage of children in need according to identified factors. In 2016-2017 ( Department for Education [DFE], 2017a) the most common factor was domestic violence which applied to 49.9% of children in need; this incorporated violence directed at children or adults in the household. The second most common factor was mental health at 39.7% which likewise encompassed mental health of the child or adults in the household. The prevalence of domestic violence is not only high among children in need but also among the wider population with as many as one in six young people in the United Kingdom reporting experiencing it during their childhood ( Radford et al., 2011).

Exposure to domestic violence generates a multitude of responses and needs and it is important for children and young people not to be regarded as a homogeneous group or lacking the capacity for posttraumatic growth and recovery: 'it is wrong to stereotype all children as inevitably and permanently damaged by living with domestic violence' ( Mullender et al., 2002, p. 121). Although some children experiencing domestic violence will exhibit difficulties in their schoolwork, the education of others will not be adversely affected: 'some children living with domestic abuse achieve highly in school; throwing themselves into school life and work can provide an escape' ( Sterne and Poole, 2010, p. 23). Similarly, while some students affected by domestic violence will experience educational settings as a source of continuity and security, others will experience them as challenging. It is therefore essential to take into account the range of responses to domestic violence among children. This article firstly looks at how domestic violence is conceptualized with regard to children, and how it affects them across different ages. This is followed by an examination of multi-agency working between schools and other organizations. The importance of recognizing individual and family contexts is considered before analyzing prevention education in schools. Finally, recent developments in policy and practice in the United Kingdom are examined in terms of both the challenges and opportunities they pose.

Conceptualizing Domestic Violence in Relation to Children

Domestic violence is manifested in various ways and has been conceptualized by some as taking direct and indirect forms. Indirect abuse can result from inter-parental violence where children are not the subject of direct abuse. However, children witnessing inter-parental violence, and hearing it without necessarily seeing it, can still feel its effects: 'While often characterized as witnesses to inter-parental violence, which implies a passive role, children actively interpret, attempt to predict and assess their roles in causing the violence' ( Baker and Cunningham, 2009, p. 199, emphasis in original). Indeed, the terms direct and indirect abuse have been interpreted as potentially misleading and perhaps simplistic. Callaghan et al. (2018, p. 1566) argue it is too restrictive to view domestic violence as abuse between partners in an intimate dyad whereby children are perceived as 'affected by' the abuse: 'Far from passive witnesses, they are not "exposed" to violence and abuse; rather they live with it and experience it directly, just as adults do.' Regarding children as 'affected by' domestic violence diminishes its impact on them. Instead, Callaghan et al. (2018) call for children to be recognized as direct victims of violence and abuse which in turn could improve professional responses to their needs.

Impact of Domestic Violence on Young Children, Children, and Young People

Domestic violence occurs at all ages. Sterne and Poole (2010) point out that the duration of children's encounters with domestic abuse has a greater bearing on their stress levels than the severity of the abuse. Harm caused by domestic violence can be physical, emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and social, and effects are usually overlapping and interrelated. Although harm can be present across all age phases, I will differentiate by three age groups, namely young children aged 1-4, children aged 5-10, and young people aged 11-16 since challenges and issues arising from domestic violence are different across these ages. It should be noted, however, these age groups are approximate and children's experiences and responses will be influenced by individual needs and context.

Impact on Young Children

Impact on Children

Impact on Young People

Research With School Teachers

Domestic Violence, Schools and Multi-Agency Working

Recognizing the Child and Family Context

Parental non-disclosure of domestic violence coupled with wariness toward social services have a deep-rooted history, due in part to feelings of guilt, shame and fear of children being taken into care. Young people themselves have expressed fears of being removed from home ( Ellis et al., 2015). Research shows that making a disclosure to professionals or other adults can be traumatic for children, with instances of family members becoming angry and upset and holding the child responsible for consequences ( Children's Commissioner, 2018). Cultural taboos can render disclosure of domestic violence, including 'honor-based' violence, even more difficult for members of certain communities. Interventions by social workers are sometimes perceived, if not directly experienced, as punitive rather than supportive. In order to facilitate identification and disclosure of domestic violence victims must be treated in a non-judgmental way and their complex needs recognized. Professionals, including teachers who are the Designated Safeguarding Lead in their school, require knowledge, training and strategies for inquiring about abuse, and how to manage both disclosures and non-disclosures.

The range of needs among those living with domestic violence requires a professional response informed by victim context. Welfare services need to adopt an intersectional approach to domestic violence and its attendant issues ( Ramon, 2015) whereby disability, race and ethnicity, gender, age, socio-economic status, immigration status, and sexual orientation of children and parents alike are taken into account. Immigration status, for instance, can be a factor in non-disclosure. In recognition of the importance of intersectionality Etherington and Baker (2018) advocate service providers engage in reflexivity by examining whether their provision ignores or attends to children's multiple social locations. The needs and access to resources of a middle-class child, for example, will differ to those of a child living in persistent or recurring poverty. An intersectional, child-centered approach is promoted by Etherington and Baker (2018), one which takes into account the specificity of children's individual experiences, and is sensitive to the characteristics shaping their experiences. Where interconnected factors such as domestic violence and mental health problems affect a family's context, they need to be understood and documented in conjunction with each other rather than in isolation ( Lloyd et al., 2017).

School Engagement With Domestic Violence Prevention and Education Work

In addition to making referrals to social care 'Schools also have an essential role in educating children about domestic abuse' ( Ofsted et al., 2017, p. 28). Yet research has revealed a lack of work in school on domestic violence. A survey commissioned by the domestic violence charity Refuge (2008) involving 513 young women aged 18-21 revealed that just 13% had learned about domestic violence while at school and nearly 70% responded they would have welcomed such lessons.

Prevention programs in school are more effective when promoted through whole-school policies and practices than through single-component programs or individual teachers ( Harne and Radford, 2008). Program evaluations also show that while one-off education initiatives have some value in raising awareness of domestic violence, attitudinal change is better sustained when learning is revisited and reinforced in subsequent years ( Harne and Radford, 2008). Adopting a gendered approach is another preferred format for changing attitudes as it underlines that domestic violence is rooted in unequal power relations between men and women; although men can be victims too, the majority are women and they are subject to domestic violence in more severe and repeated forms ( Women's Aid, 2009). Furthermore, where prevention programs in schools include a male facilitator, there is a higher likelihood of boys changing their attitudes ( Ellis et al., 2006).

For prevention and support work in school to be effective, teachers themselves evidently need to feel supported by school processes and management ( Sterne and Poole, 2010). When addressing the needs of children living with domestic violence school staff should be prepared with information about services, signposting to external agencies, ensuring student safety, and knowing what to do next following disclosure. Without this information, students could be put in a worse situation than before ( Howarth et al., 2016). Just as teachers need to have a clear understanding of their role in safeguarding children, so too they need to know the boundaries of their role. Research warns of the dangers of teachers acting beyond their professional scope such as asking a child to talk about their experiences without being suitably qualified which can have a traumatic effect on the child ( Swanston et al., 2014). A sensitive approach is needed to help both students and their parents already living with domestic violence. Yet teachers' responses to research reveal they often lack the professional confidence and expertise to provide domestic violence prevention education and intervention support, highlighting the need for effective staff training at both initial and continuing professional teacher education, and to include school nurses ( Refuge, 2008).

The content, manner and personnel delivering domestic violence education in schools clearly require careful consideration to enhance student engagement and handle student vulnerability ( Fox et al., 2014). Different models of educational program delivery have been employed in school. Some entail teachers delivering school-based initiatives themselves, others favor delivery from external specialists, while some opt for collaborative implementation. Although external facilitators have specialist knowledge, expertise and experience of discussing sensitive topics with young people, teachers have more in-depth knowledge of students and their individual circumstances ( Fox et al., 2014). Working in partnership with external facilitators provides a way for teachers to develop their professional learning and confidence. The respective strengths of external specialists and teachers can be complemented through collaboration:

...preventive interventions when co-delivered with specialist organizations might offer the possibility for school staff to increase their skills in dealing with disclosures and subsequently help improve the health and well-being of children and young people. ( Ellis et al., 2015, p. 60)

The need for effective professional learning and training of school staff applies to the issue of interpersonal violence too. Cross-national European research in secondary (high) schools found that teachers frequently had limited confidence and knowledge to address the problem of interpersonal violence and abuse ( Barter et al., 2015). Findings from the study echoed domestic violence program evaluations in that rather than interpersonal violence and abuse being left to the efforts of an individual teacher championing the cause, the issue should be addressed at institutional level as a whole-school concern. Schools have an essential role to play, then, in tackling domestic violence and the following section examines how recent policy and practice have the potential to influence work in this area.

Developments in Policy and Practice

Following long-running campaign calls for the introduction of mandatory relationships and sex education (RSE) in schools, the United Kingdom government announced in March 2017 it will introduce compulsory lessons in all schools in England (in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland RSE is expected but not compulsory). Current guidance on sex education in England was introduced in 2000 but content has not kept pace with social change, especially in respect to social media, online pornography and 'sexting.' While parents will still have the right to withdraw their child from sex education, draft government proposals have suggested parental withdrawal should only be possible until three terms before the child is aged 16, after which the child should be able to decide to attend ( Department for Education [DFE], 2018). Subsequent to a consultation period schools will be required to teach the new RSE content from September 2020 ( Department of Health, and Social Care and Department for Education, 2018). Statutory curriculum content in schools promoting healthy relationships, and raising awareness of unhealthy relationships and the unacceptability of violence in relationships, is a positive step toward equipping young people for modern-day life.

Another move in the right direction is the United Kingdom government's consultation document which proposes the implementation of a designated senior lead for mental health in every school and college ( Department of Health, and Department for Education [DOH and DFE], 2017). Educational settings present a valuable opportunity to promote mental wellbeing and prevent mental ill-health since half of all mental health conditions start by the age of 14 ( World Health Organization, 2013). Although 61% of schools currently offer counseling ( Department of Health, and Department for Education [DOH and DFE], 2017), concerns have been raised about schools' ability to resource such support coupled with the length of time students sometimes need to wait. There have also been long-standing concerns around high referral thresholds for external support services such as Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) which some children affected by domestic violence have not been accepted for due to referral criteria ( Swanston et al., 2014). Long waiting times to access such services have been a further source of distress; the average waiting time is 12 weeks but the longest is up to 100 weeks ( Department of Health, and Department for Education [DOH and DFE], 2017) during which time problems can escalate requiring more intensive and more costly support. The government's consultation document proposes a 4-week waiting time for National Health Service mental health services for children and young people, and recommends content on mental wellbeing be part of the Personal, Social, Health and Economic education syllabus in schools. The government's aim to implement training for the designated senior lead for mental health to all areas by 2025 has been criticized for being too slow. Concerns have been raised about the added pressure these proposals would place on an already overstretched teaching workforce facing recruitment and retention difficulties, and about the level of funding needed to ensure teachers have well-developed training for the vital role of designated senior mental health lead ( Education and Health and Social Care Committees, 2018). While training programs can improve teachers' confidence and skills to deal with children's emotional needs ( Place2Be, 2015), budgetary and workload pressures mean training opportunities are unlikely to be available in all schools, discussed further below. With the number of young people with a diagnosable mental health condition standing at one in ten ( Department of Health, and Department for Education [DOH and DFE], 2017), strategies aimed at addressing the causes and symptoms of mental health problems must be adequately resourced if they are to be effective.

Another area for consideration when tackling domestic violence in children's lives is the role of school nursing. The number of school nurses has been reduced in recent years. They are not always represented at child in need meetings, nor is relevant information always shared with them ( Ofsted et al., 2017). Furthermore, term time working arrangements for school nurses mean they are not available during school holidays. Their restricted availability was referred to in the SCR of Daniel Pelka. School nurses attending relevant meetings and being employed during school holidays could facilitate greater consistency of care, better informed assessments, and improved multi-agency working.

Paramount to effectively supporting students is the adoption of a holistic, child-centered approach. If teachers are aware of issues in students' home lives, they will be better informed to provide tailored support to meet the individual needs of students regarding their learning, and social and emotional development. School staff need to be able to confidently ask students if anything is wrong at home and take appropriate action ( Mullender et al., 2002). Research with young people affected by domestic violence found they valued teachers, tutors, learning mentors and school counselors in helping to identify abuse and access support ( Howarth et al., 2016). In terms of educational attainment, additional learning support, perhaps in a one-to-one or small group context, could help improve the educational outcomes of students. This would require a sensitive approach, however, particularly as students get older and may not wish to be singled out from peers.

Early intervention strategies to help children and young people experiencing domestic violence can be strengthened through organizations engaging in joined-up thinking and working. An illustrative example is Operation Encompass, an early intervention initiative being piloted in selected areas of the United Kingdom which entails police notifying a school by 9 am if a child has witnessed or experienced a domestic abuse incident the previous evening. A key adult at school (the Designated Safeguarding Lead or Deputy) is informed of the case and cascades information to teaching staff to allow immediate and ongoing support to be given to the child. As a trauma-informed charity Operation Encompass takes into account the child's past trauma, where applicable, and the child's responses and coping strategies. Operation Encompass can explain to the school why a child is absent or has been dropped off at school by someone else. The initiative is enabling police and schools to work in partnership to mitigate the impact of abuse and has the potential to be an exemplar of collaboration.

The Freedom Programme is another initiative being run, including in schools, to teach and empower victims of domestic violence to recognize signs of abuse and make positive changes in their lives. Organizations interested in the program need to make a commitment in terms of ensuring their staff are trained in the program and have time for implementing it. The Freedom Programme can also work with children due to start school and has proved effective in bringing about positive change in women's and children's lives.

Schools play a role in providing help when dealing with the fallout of domestic violence in others ways too, such as setting up practical arrangements to minimize the risk of child abduction by the offending parent following parental separation ( National Children's Home, 1994). Volunteering at their children's school, where appropriate, can serve as a way of non-abusive parents spending more time with their children and helping to protect them ( Hamby, 2014).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, some teachers feel overwhelmed dealing with issues facing both children and their parents. Pressure on teachers to address problems among children and parents, such as increasing mental health issues, have left some feeling they are becoming like social workers. Mullender et al. (2002, p. 219) emphasize the importance of teachers listening to children vulnerable to domestic violence and offering emotional support:

This is not the same as becoming social workers, which teachers understandably fear in an already over-stretched working life and without the necessary training. Rather, it means being an effective channel for children to gain access to welfare services outside of school, by opening up an early opportunity for them to confide that something is wrong.

The Paradox of Greater School Autonomy and Working Together

Difficulties documented in research and governmental reports concerning inter-organizational working may be exacerbated by government policy devolving greater power to individual schools. Previously, state schools were funded by government and run by the local authority. Academy schools, initiated under the Labor government, and free schools under the Coalition government and subsequent Conservative government, are still state-funded but are not overseen by the local authority; they receive funding directly from central government affording them increased budgets. With budgetary independence and increased autonomy for their own governance these schools are able to set the pay and conditions for staff rather than abiding by national teacher pay and conditions required of local authority-run schools. Academies and free schools are attended by over two-thirds of secondary school students and a quarter of primary school students ( Department for Education [DFE], 2017b). Despite academy and free schools still being expected to liaise closely with local authorities on matters such as child protection and safeguarding, they have greater self-determination in shaping the relationship they have with local authorities ( Baginsky et al., 2015).

Greater school autonomy has additional implications for Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs) whose role is to coordinate local work to safeguard children. As a multi-agency body LSCBs are attended by representatives from the local authority and relevant organizations such as health services and the police. However, research by Baginsky and Holmes (2015) indicates that increasing fragmentation of educational services has seen academy schools (including free schools), and private fee-paying (non-state) schools being represented on less than half of LSCBs. While over 80 percent of boards were represented at senior level by local authority schools, the same was true of only 20 percent of boards attended by academy schools ( Baginsky and Holmes, 2015).

Domestic Violence and Student Wellbeing Within an Attainment-Driven Education System

Given the spectrum of behavioral responses to domestic violence teachers need to be attuned to changes in children, some becoming withdrawn, others disruptive. Confrontational responses can, however, be difficult to account for: 'If underlying contributory factors are not obvious or understood, those children are likely to be labeled as problematic' ( Ofsted et al., 2017, p. 14). This can lead to school staff misinterpreting students' behavior and disciplinary action might ensue. Indeed, data show a growing number of students excluded from school have mental health needs ( Education and Health and Social Care Committees, 2018), and children impacted by domestic violence ( Ofsted et al., 2017) and/or living in poverty ( House of Commons Education Committee, 2018) are more likely to be excluded from school in comparison to their peers. This is worrying in the context of schools focusing on examination results and league tables. Teachers and educationalists lament the marketization of education whereby examination results have become a key measure by which schools define themselves and are defined by others, and schools are set in competition with each other in the form of league tables ( Berry, 2016; Berry, 2017; Scott and Scott, 2018). Research with teachers shows such changes are negatively impacting teacher-student relationships and student wellbeing, with teachers reporting having less time to attend to the needs of individual students, and reporting that their own stress levels sometimes adversely affect their interaction with students ( Hutchings, 2015). Baginsky et al. (2015, p. 358) discern tension between the prioritization of examination results and children's wellbeing:

Potentially there may be an inherent conflict between, on the one hand, pressure on institutions to demonstrate high levels of academic attainment and discipline by pupils in a competitive educational "market" and, on the other, the role of schools in recognizing and meeting the pastoral needs of children who are vulnerable or disadvantaged.

Where teacher performativity and student outcome measures in the form of examination results are at variance with the more holistic nurturing of students, efforts to support those impacted by domestic violence could be hampered and diminished. Concerns about schools becoming 'exam factories' have led to calls for a rebalancing of the education system whereby schools do not give precedence to academic outcomes at the expense of student wellbeing and personal development.

Conclusion

What happens in childhood and adolescence has profound implications for wellbeing in adult life. The prevalence of domestic violence as the most common factor cited in cases of children in need in England in 2016-2017 ( Department for Education [DFE], 2017a) emphasizes the need for addressing this enduring problem through prevention, early intervention and education. So too is wider attitudinal and social change needed whereby domestic violence is no longer trivialized as 'just another domestic' or portrayed as the fault of, predominantly women, victims, as evidenced in our earlier research into media representations ( Lloyd and Ramon, 2017). Domestic violence must be addressed as a public health concern and not only as a privatized, individualized problem. The ways in which gender violence is based on and reinforced through women's wider structural inequality and lack of power in relation to men needs to be recognized if violence within the domestic sphere is to be tackled effectively.

Encouragingly there is some evidence of domestic violence research in the context of education, though it remains relatively under-investigated. The continuing fragmentation of the United Kingdom school system and plurality of school types highlight the need for increased research to evaluate schools' engagement in multi-agency working and to gain insight into effective practice. Some teachers and school support staff are themselves victims of domestically violent relationships and workplace support would be beneficial both for individuals and the school setting as a whole. Future research could usefully ask teachers and support staff their views on their professional learning and training needs in this important area of work.

Too frequently blame, shame and guilt cast a shadow over lives affected by domestic violence. Multi-agency working and in-school education and support can help prevent abuse and optimize outcomes for children, young people and their families living with the consequences of domestic violence.

Author Contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Footnotes

1. http://www.operationencompass.org/

2. http://www.freedomprogramme.co.uk/

References

Calder, M. C., and Regan, L. (2008). "Working with mothers in situations of sexual and domestic abuse: reframing resistance as restricted choices," in The Carrot or the Stick? Towards Effective Practice with Involuntary Clients in Safeguarding Children Work, ed. M. C. Calder (Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing), 249-276.

Children's Commissioner (2018). " Are they Shouting Because of me?" Voices of Children Living in Households with Domestic Abuse, Parental Substance Misuse and Mental Health Issues. London: Children's Commissioner for England.

HM Government (2015). Information Sharing, Advice for Practitioners Providing Safeguarding Services to Children, Young People, Parents and Carers. London: HM Government.

HM Government (2018). Changes to Statutory Guidance: Working Together to Safeguard Children; and New Regulations, Government Consultation Response. London: HM Government.

House of Commons Education Committee (2018). Forgotten Children: Alternative Provision and the Scandal of Ever Increasing Exclusions. London: House of Commons.

National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers [NASUWT] (2018). Special Educational Needs (SEN), Additional Learning Needs (ALN) and Additional Support Needs (ASN) Survey Report. London: NASUWT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Frontiers | Domestic Violence and Education: Examining the Impact of Domestic Violence on Young Children, Children, and Young People and the Potential Role of Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article examines how domestic violence impacts the lives and education of young children, children, and young people and how they can be supported withi...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The purpose of this position statement is to highlight the impact poverty has on students and their ability to succeed in the classroom as well as offer policy recommendations on how to best support the academic, social, emotional, and physical success of these students.
Each day countless students come to school, each with their own set of unique gifts, abilities, and challenges. Recent data has found that students living in poverty often face far more challenges than their peers. According to the National Center of Education Statistics, 19 percent of individuals under 18 lived in poverty during the 2015-16 school year. Furthermore, 24.4 percent of students attended high-poverty schools during that same year. The data also show that higher percentages of Hispanic, African-American, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Pacific Islander students attended high-poverty schools than white students, underscoring that poverty is also an issue of equity that must be addressed.

These data show the reality of what our public education system is facing today. Nearly one-fifth of students nationwide are either living in poverty, attending a high-poverty school, or both. Poverty negatively impacts students in a variety of ways within K-12 education and beyond. This can be through a variety of different factors that are often symptoms of poverty, like health issues stemming from a nonnutritional diet, homelessness, lack of food, or the inability to receive medical treatment for illnesses. These factors often place more stress on a student, which can negatively impact the student's ability to succeed in a school.

Students living in poverty often have fewer resources at home to complete homework, study, or engage in activities that helps equip them for success during the school day. Many impoverished families lack access to computers, high-speed internet (three-fourths of households currently have access to high-speed broadband), and other materials that can aid a student outside of school. Parents of these families often work longer hours or multiple jobs, meaning they may not be available to assist their children with their schoolwork.

Furthermore, in many high-poverty school districts, resources are sorely lacking in schools. Nearly every state has its own division of funding for school districts and education based on property taxes. Unfortunately, this system unfairly affects individuals living in poverty and the students attending school in those areas. Because property taxes are often much lower in high-poverty areas, schools in those areas receive much less than their more affluently-located counterparts. Recent data from the U.S. Department of Education state that 40 percent of high-poverty schools are not getting a fair share of state and local funds. This often leaves schools with limited budgets to address a multitude of issues, including hiring educators, updating resources for students, preparing students for postsecondary education or the workforce, dealing with unsafe infrastructure, and much more. There are often instructional gaps for those attending high-poverty schools as well. Data from the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey show that students from low-income families "are consistently, albeit modestly, more likely to be taught by lower-credentialed and novice teachers" (Garcia and Weiss). Research has also shown that many teachers in high-poverty schools are inexperienced and often less effective than their more experienced peers who are often targeted for hire by higher-income schools and districts. The lack of high-quality instruction serves to only further separate academic achievement levels for students in high-poverty schools from peers in high-income schools or districts.

All students, regardless of income level or background, are capable of and should receive the support and resources necessary for success.

Students from low-income families often face additional barriers that can impede academic success compared to their peers from higher-income households.

Principals provide leadership for instilling a culture of success and support within their school and should strive to provide each student with the supports necessary to achieve this success. Principals should strive to achieve this through all available avenues, including through strategic partnerships.

The 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders state that effective educational leaders strive for equity of educational opportunity and culturally responsive practices to promote each student's academic success and well-being.

NASSP has previously adopted position statements on the achievement gap and preparing all students for postsecondary success that offer policy recommendations to promote equitable support for all students and adequate preparation to enter the workforce or a postsecondary institution following high school.

NASSP developed the Building Ranks™ framework to reflect the principal's responsibility for building culture and leading learning to foster lifelong success for each child in a rapidly changing world.

Recommendations for Federal Policymakers

Advance policies that incentivize and support well-trained teachers, principals, and other educators to work and remain in high-poverty schools.

Provide additional federal funds and resources for programs, such as Title I and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, aimed at supporting students from low-income families.

Ensure federal funds are divided equitably so that high-poverty districts are guaranteed a fairer share of federal dollars.

Invest in school leadership required to hire and retain well-trained school leaders, recognizing the critical role principals play in establishing a culture and learning environment that students need to be successful in a global society.

Prioritize school improvement strategies-such as community schools-that include resources and supports to address the barriers poverty creates to student success.

Provide additional resources and invest in programs for students from low-income families to enter postsecondary education or the workforce.

Enact legislation aimed at improving school infrastructure, with a particular focus on buildings in high-poverty districts that pose potential health threats to students, educators, and other faculty in the school.

Expand the maximum allowance of Pell Grants, and share information with states, local education agencies, and universities on application eligibility and processes.

Fully fund federal programs that increase connectivity for all students, like the E-Rate Program which provides discounted telecommunications services to schools.

Recommendations for State Policymakers

Ensure state funding formulas are properly balanced so all districts receive an equitable and sufficient share of funds based on student poverty levels, property tax revenue per district, or other evidence-based indicators of poverty.

Reevaluate state investments in education to ensure school districts are receiving the funds necessary to promote student success.

Prioritize school improvement strategies-such as community schools-that include resources and supports to address the barriers to student success that poverty creates.

Invest in curriculum that prepares students for 21st-century employment and participation in a democracy. This will prepare students for life beyond secondary education and better enable them to be successful in the workforce and financially secure.

Prioritize and invest in state financial aid for school districts based on need instead of merit, which disproportionately helps high-income and white students.

Make investments over a long-term basis rather than short term, as long-term investments have a proven track record of improving high-poverty school districts.

Recommendations for District Leaders

Make sure that your district and school funding systems ensure equal access to core educational services for each student in K-12 education.

Ensure that school funding systems provide additional resources for low-income students to ensure they have a more level playing field for achieving success.

Use per-pupil expenditure (PPE) data to evaluate district funding decisions and make changes based on this data when inequities are presented.

Support ongoing learning for school leaders, recognizing that their role is changing and that the demands of a high-poverty schools are expanding, requiring continual development.

Advance policies that ensure highly-qualified educators are working in high-poverty schools.

Urge state policymakers to reevaluate unfair funding practices that negatively impact high-poverty districts.

Recommendations for School Leaders

Instill a culture of growth and success in your school that effectively educates all students about the opportunities available to them following secondary education.

Provide benefits and resources within schools to all students so those living in poverty have the necessary supports to succeed, with the assistance of outside partners such as internet providers, food suppliers, or healthcare organizations. Examples include: free breakfast, extended library or lab hours after school, allowing students to take home wifi hotspots, etc.

Provide professional development for teachers and staff to assist them in working effectively with students in poverty and address the impact of associated trauma and chronic stress.

Provide students with access to college admissions, scholarships, financial aid information, and personnel to help students with these discussions so students are properly educated on postsecondary education opportunities.

Ensure that budget discussions and requests are conducted in a transparent process that allows for input from a variets of groups and stakeholders in the school community.

Amerikaner, A., & Morgan, I. (2018, February 27). Funding gaps 2018: An analysis of school funding equity across the U.S. and within each state. Retrieved from https://edtrust.org/resource/funding-gaps-2018/.

Carey, K., & Harris, E. (2016). It turns out spending more probably does improve education. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/nyregion/it-turns-out-spending-more-probably-does-improve-education.html?_r=0.

Carr, S. (2013, February 26). The real reasons many low-income students don't go to college. Retrieved from https://hechingerreport.org/the-real-reasons-many-low-income-students-dont-go-to-college/.

College for America. (2017, June 7). Addressing the college completion gap among low-income students. Retrieved from https://collegeforamerica.org/college-completion-low-income-students/.

Dynarski, M. (2017, March 1). It's not nothing: The role of money in improving education. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/its-not-nothing-the-role-of-money-in-improving-education/.

Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2019, March 26). The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought: The first report in 'The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market' series. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/publication/the-teacher-shortage-is-real-large-and-growing-and-worse-than-we-thought-the-first-report-in-the-perfect-storm-in-the-teacher-labor-market-series/.

Jensen, E. (2013, May). How poverty affects classroom engagement. ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may13/vol70/num08/How-Poverty-Affects-Classroom-Engagement.aspx.

Johnston, K. (2019, June 20). 7 ways poverty affects education. Retrieved from https://moneywise.com/a/ways-poverty-affects-education.

Jackson, K., Johnson, R., & Persico, C. (2016). The effects of school spending on education and economic outcomes: Evidence from school finance reforms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 131(1), pp. 157-218.

LaFortune, J., Rothstein, J., & Schanzenbach, D.W. (2016). School Finance Reform and the Distribution of Student Achievement. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 22011, February 2016.

Martin, C., Boser, U., Benner, M., & Baffour, P. (2018, November 13). A quality approach to school funding. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2018/11/13/460397/quality-approach-school-funding/

McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Wang, K., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Forrest Cataldi, E., and Bullock Mann, F. (2018). The Condition of Education 2018 (NCES 2018-144). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018144.pdf.

National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2019, March 19). Using PPE data to advocate for your school. School of Thought blog. Retrieved from http://blog.nassp.org/2019/03/22/using-ppe-data-to-advocate-for-your-school/.

Parrett, W., & Budge, K. (2016, January 13). How does poverty influence learning? Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/how-does-poverty-influence-learning-william-parrett-kathleen-budge.

Pascoe, M.C., Hetrick, S.E. & Parker., A.G. (2019). The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, DOI: 10.1080/02673843.2019.1596823.

Taylor, K. (2019, July 25). Poverty's long-lasting effects on students' education and success. Retrieved from https://www.insightintodiversity.com/povertys-long-lasting-effects-on-students-education-and-success/.

Turner, C., Khrais, R., Lloyd, T., Olgin, A., Isensee, L., Vevea, B., & Carsen, D. (2016, April 18). Why America's schools have a money problem. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/474256366/why-americas-schools-have-a-money-problem.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poverty and Its Impact on Students' Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The purpose of this position statement is to highlight the impact poverty has on students and their ability to succeed in the classroom as well as offer policy recommendations on how to best suppor...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Did you know that the human brain is still developing in a person's twenties? In fact, it does not fully mature until about age 25 - around the time you finish college, start a full-time job, and begin making longer-term plans for life. Anything you do up until this point can affect your brain's progress, for better or for worse.

The brain is especially susceptible to change during adolescence - the years most often spent in the classroom, on the field, and validating friendships. This is the time in which a person's learning capacity is at its greatest. It is also the time in which the brain is most vulnerable to disruptions in cognitive development.

Drugs and alcohol are some of the most detrimental, yet most common disruptions in teenage brain development. They manipulate the brain's wiring and affect the way the brain processes and retains information - including the way a teen thinks, focuses, learns, remembers, and concentrates inside and outside of school.

Despite the risky nature of early substance use, drug abuse in schools and among adolescents is an all too common occurrence. Studies show that by senior year in high school, nearly 50 percent of teens have already tried an illicit drug. And this is just the beginning. About 66 percent of teens have drank alcohol by the end of high school, too.

If you are a parent of a high schooler, or even middle schooler, there is a great chance that your child will be (or has already been) exposed to drugs and alcohol. On average, teens choose to try drugs for the first time around 13 or 14 years old - around the start of high school. As a parent and role model, educator and caregiver, you have the ability to prolong or sway your child's desire to try drugs during his or her school years.

In fact, some of the greatest factors in keeping adolescents drug-free are parental figures themselves: having strong, positive connections with parents and having clear limits and consistent enforcement of discipline established by parents, can help reduce teens' willingness to try drugs. Combined with open education about the reality and risks of drug abuse in adolescence, parents can truly influence their child's choices regarding drugs.

This especially crucial today, when drug abuse in schools is prevalent and drugs in high school are increasingly easy to get. A survey from the Center on Addiction found that 60 percent or more of teens attend "drug infected" high schools, meaning drugs are used, kept, or sold right on school grounds. Even more scary, almost all high school students report that they know classmates who drink, smoke, or use drugs during the school day.

Drug abuse in schools, particularly illicit drugs in high school, has long been a topic of concern. And recent articles published by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) confirm that it is still an ongoing issue. Last month, the NIDA disclosed the current frequency of non-medical opioid and heroin abuse among high school seniors. They found that, among 12th graders, 11 percent had abused prescription painkiller drugs. And among the 819 seniors that used heroin, 77 percent also abused prescription opioid drugs while in high school.

Now, this is just high school seniors. The survey's research does not take into account the other students - high school, middle school, and college students - that also use opiate drugs. With the opiate epidemic coming at us full-force, high school seniors only make up a subset of the number of students and individuals abusing drugs.

While drug abuse in schools and among teens has declined in recent years, its predominance can still be seen across all grade levels - starting as early as middle school. The 2016 Monitoring the Future Survey, for example, shows that 5.4 percent of 8th graders have already tried an illicit drug such as marijuana or inhalants. Even more, about 23 percent of middle school students have already drank alcohol.

About 10 percent of high school sophomores have also used an illicit drug in the past year, with marijuana being the most common. Notably among these 10th graders, the perceived risk of drugs like marijuana, inhalants, crack, and Vicodin has diminished. High schoolers are seeing less and less harm in trying potentially-dangerous drugs.

This is especially true of the drug marijuana, which has been deemed a gateway to other, more threatening substances. Adolescents and young adults no longer see a great risk in smoking marijuana regularly. They are also using it more regularly. This past year, daily marijuana use exceeded cigarette use among high school sophomores and seniors.

College students are also at risk. A recent national survey found that students who attend college are at a significantly higher risk of initiating marijuana than their non-college counterparts. More than half are now likely to initiate marijuana use in school (prior to 2013, that number was around 17-22 percent). This makes sense, with marijuana becoming increasingly accessible. Especially in college, where students are transitioning to a life all on their own, trying marijuana (or any drug) may seem like the right thing to do at that time and place.

Some college and high school students are also avid users of what they might call "study drugs," prescription stimulants that are misused by many students to help boost performance in school and enhance focus on school assignments. Most commonly known by the brand name Adderall, these stimulant pills are often conceived as harmless drugs with the "right" intent, which further downplays their skyrocketing risk for abuse and addiction.

With proper education about the dangers of early drug abuse in school years, however, your teen can come to understand that there is no right time or place to use drugs. Knowing the long-term impact drug use can have on his or her brain, as well as his or her academics, can far outweigh the "fun" your teen may have giving them a try. Reality is, substance abuse and academics are directly correlated. Not only can drugs impair teens' cognitive development, they can also affect students' performance in school: their ability to memorize things, concentration in the classroom, prioritization of assignments, likelihood to attend class, and even their overall IQ.

If you are concerned about your teen's exposure to drugs in high school, middle school, or college, you are not alone. But know that now is a crucial time for your teen and his or her brain, and any suspicion of drug use should be acted on. Adolescent drug use can have a lasting impact on the brain, but early intervention, proper education, and tailored drug treatment can put your teen on the path to success. For more information about drug abuse in schools, view our "Missing the Mark" infographic or call Turnbridge young adult rehab center at 877-581-1793.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Drug Abuse in Schools | Drugs in High School | Turnbridge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Did you know that the human brain is still developing in a person's twenties? In fact, it does not fully mature until about age 25 - around the time you finish college, start a full-time job, and begin making longer-term plans for life.