Students have been restrained or isolated hundreds of times in ACT public schools but experts say use of the practices may be under-reported.
Schools have been required to report any instances of restrictive practices since 2019, but figures provided to The Canberra Times show that not all cases have been passed on to the office of the Senior Practitioner.
It comes after an autistic child at a Canberra public school was inside a school bike cage when it was locked.
The case was not reported to the relevant authorities nor were the child's parents notified until after the Education Directorate received a media inquiry.
Numbers 'a bit low'
Institute of Child Protection Studies director Professor Daryl Higgins said a restrictive practice was anything that could limit a person's right to freedom of movement, including administering drugs, physical restraints or isolating a person in a particular space.
"The Human Rights Act makes it clear that you can only do this if the actions are, in fact, reasonable and clearly justifiable," Prof Higgins said.
"And most legislation makes clear that this is where there's an immediate risk to somebody's safety, and where the action taken is in the least restrictive way, which usually says that you've tried other things first, so you don't go straight to a restrictive practice."
The Education Directorate's restrictive practices unit is responsible for receiving reports from schools.
A directorate spokesman said the team decided whether each case met the definition of a restrictive practice under the law and passed reports on to the Senior Practitioner.
In 2021, all but four cases were reported to the Senior Practitioner but in following years, fewer cases made it to the regulator.
In 2022, 126 cases were not reported and in 2023, 221 cases never made it to the Senior Practitioner's office.
Figures prior to 2021 were not reliable due to duplicates and inconsistencies in the reporting system.
An ACT government spokesperson said the Education Directorate was required by law to report all incidents involving restrictive practices.
"The [Office of the Senior Practitioner] is working with the Education Directorate to ensure that this requirement is understood and is met for every incident," the spokesperson said.
Professor Higgins said collecting data on restrictive practices could uncover "hot spots" and help the regulator target their work.
"If data can help unpack where some of these practices are more likely to be occurring, that can assist with those better prevention and intervention efforts to reduce its use," he said.
Australian Catholic University inclusive education researcher Dr Matthew White said the data was "a bit messy" and figures seemed low.
"There's probably a desensitisation to restrictive practices in some settings, which means that probably a lot are being reported and maybe a lot aren't being reported because of the investigation required," Dr White said.
He said the decrease in reporting over time could mean schools were becoming aware of the practices and aiming to reduce their use or there could be fewer reports.
"That may mean that schools are trying to avoid using those restrictive practices, or it may mean that they've raised the bar on what restrictive practice might mean," Dr White said.
"My feeling is that those numbers are a little bit low, and that maybe they've raised the bar, and they're the significant ones that require investigation."
Dr White said restrictive practices could be traumatic for the students and were used more frequently in specialist disability schools.
He said many teachers were put in difficult positions where they had no choice but to isolate the student because other students and staff were at risk.
Schools had a duty of care to report the incidents to parents and carers at a minimum and should ideally do an internal investigation to avoid situations escalating in the future, he said.
"Sometimes it's not the fault of the teacher, it's the failings of the structures and systems to support teachers," Dr White said.
"It becomes like a vicious cycle, really, where the restricted practices just continue, but they're not being reported, because of the desensitisation to managing or trying to regulate students' behaviour."
School visits
The Senior Practitioner is able to visit schools as part of monitoring the use of restrictive practices.
A Senior Practitioner Visits to ACT Public Schools Guideline document provided to The Canberra Times states visits were at the discretion of principals, unless part of an investigation.
The Education Directorate and office of the Senior Practitioner jointly agree on up to four schools per term for one-hour visit.
But a list of visits in schools since 2018 provided to The Canberra Times shows the Senior Practitioner has not visited four public schools per term.
A government spokesperson said some of the visits were postponed due to extenuating circumstances, including COVID and the availability of staff.
The guidelines state that "observations and questions that arise as a result of the visit are invited to be submitted to the Directorate via email so that formal responses can be given where required."
However, the spokesperson said during visits questions were asked directly of staff at the school, with further follow-up advice emailed to the Education Directorate if required.
The visit guidelines state: "The emphasis of this model is not about laborious monitoring for lapses in risk management or other incidents and increasingly focussed on educating and empowering regulated providers to undertake their own self-monitoring activities."
Providers who use restrictive practices illegally or do not comply with directions of the Senior Practitioner could face fines under the law.
- Do you know more? Contact sarah.lansdown@canberratimes.com.au
