By: David Mendez, Associate Director – Resource Development
A few weeks ago, I attended a parent-teacher conference for my 1st grader. Recently, she’s been experiencing big emotions and outbursts at home, and my wife and I were curious how this was showing up in the classroom. The teacher shared that some students were dealing with behavioral challenges, and that the school has a separate room across the hall specifically for such students. While she didn’t suggest our daughter be placed there, she wondered if the yelling from that room might be affecting her at home.
That meeting sparked a conversation at the dinner table about the broader issue of how schools respond to challenging behaviors. As an educator myself, I know how tough it can be to manage a classroom with diverse needs, but I’ve also seen how schools sometimes resort to harmful practices like isolation and restraint. In Washington state, schools are legally allowed to restrain and/or isolate students when there’s a perceived risk of harm. This raises critical questions: Are these practices truly supporting students? Do they align with our goals for creating safe, inclusive learning environments?
The Problem: Isolation and Restraint in Schools
Isolation refers to the confinement of a student alone in a room they cannot leave—often small, padded spaces with locked doors. Restraint involves physically restricting a student’s movement through holds or devices, or even chemicals like pepper spray. These are legally allowed practices in many schools, and while intended to keep students and adults safe, they are deeply concerning and do the opposite. It’s hard not to compare this to policing practices in schools.
According to data from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), nearly 25,000 incidents of restraint or isolation occurred in Washington state, affecting 3,866 students—an average of 6.4 incidents per student per year.
The students impacted are overwhelmingly those with disabilities, male students, and students from low-income families. For example, while students with disabilities make up only 15% of the student population, they account for 84.5% of those subjected to restraint and 90% of those isolated. Black students are almost twice as likely to be restrained as white students. These disparities demand our attention, and we must do better. (source linked here)
A Better Way: Alternatives to Isolation and Restraint
As a former public school teacher and a member of a family of educators, I empathize with the challenges teachers face—large class sizes, diverse student needs, and limited resources. But I also know that there are proven, more effective strategies to address student behavior and ensure emotional well-being—without resorting to harmful practices like isolation or restraint.
At the True Measure Collaborative (TMC), we’re demonstrating that alternative approaches are not only possible, but they’re making a real difference. TMC is a non-profit organization that provides professional development in inclusive practices across Washington state. We support educators—teachers, special educators, and paraeducators—in expanding their toolkit of strategies to support both the academic and behavioral needs of all students, including those with disabilities and multilingual learners. We train educators to identify ways they may unknowingly escalate student behaviors, and equip them with strategies to prevent situations from escalating to the point of restraint or isolation.
This school year, TMC has been involved in OSPI’s Reducing Restraint and Eliminating Isolation project, which was funded by the state legislature. Through this initiative, we’ve seen significant improvements. School districts have eliminated isolation rooms, refined data collection on restraint and isolation, and equipped staff with proactive strategies to prevent these practices altogether.
In one district we partner with, the incidents of restraint and isolation dropped from 187 last year to just 7 this year. Additionally, students in the district have moved from restrictive special education placements into more inclusive, supportive environments. This is a testament to the power of training, support, and a shift in mindset.
A Call for Change: Legislation and Continued Support
While these steps are encouraging, we still need more funding for professional development to ensure all educators have the tools they need to support every student. But if we are truly committed to creating safe and welcoming spaces where every student feels included and valued—we must do more.
It’s time for legislation that bans isolation and significantly reduces the use of restraint practices. These methods should never be part of our schools, and it’s time we prioritize the mental and emotional well-being of students by removing them entirely.
I agree with my daughter’s teacher—these practices don’t only harm the students directly affected; they negatively impact the entire school community. Now is the time for us to advocate for policies that promote inclusion, safety, and dignity for all students, creating the kind of learning environments we all want for our children.