When a student’s behavior turns aggressive—throwing, bolting, yelling, ripping things up—what they need most is an adult who can stay connected and regulated while holding firm, safe limits. That’s not soft; it’s neuroscience and it’s equity. When schools default to isolation, seclusion, exclusionary discipline, or off-loading students to separate placements, we often place kids on trajectories they were never meant to be on—lower achievement, lost instructional time, disengagement, and increased justice-system contact (APA Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008; Bell, 2023). 

Connection and belonging aren’t “nice to have”—they’re protective factors that buffer stress, expand access to the prefrontal cortex, and predict academic and well-being outcomes (Allen et al., 2018; Korpershoek et al., 2020; Davies et al., 2025). When a human is included, safety and belonging come naturally. 

This poses a challenge when teachers first meet students who have walls up, and who are disrupting aggressively. Safety plans are crucial. What tends to happen in most situations, however, is that adults begin reacting to big feelings and behaviors in unregulated ways and in ways that are not brain aligned. These reactions are focused solely on the behavior itself and getting it under control. Students who lack executive functioning skills, who are neurodivergent, and who are in a brain state of fight, flight, or freeze, (Porges, 2022) will feel threatened by reactions focused on control and compliance. 

Adults who are exposed to brain aligned ways to respond and connect during these challenging moments are learning that students settle in and undesired behaviors subside. When adults seek connection and place safety and belonging as the goal in the moment, they are providing the greatest and most powerful interventions. When correction, control, and compliance are the priorities, behaviors will most likely not change or worse, increase in frequency and intensity.

The Science You Can Use (Fast)

• Polyvagal Theory (Stephen Porges): Students’ nervous systems constantly scan for safety (neuroception). When we broadcast cues of safety—calm voice, soft face, proximity with permission—defensive states down-shift and co-regulation becomes possible (Porges, 2022; 2025).
  
• Applied Educational Neuroscience (Lori Desautels): Classroom routines, relational micro-interventions, and co-regulating adult behaviors create cultures where stressed brains can learn (Desautels, Butler University; Revelations in Education).
  

Belonging + Connection (Brené Brown): Shame disconnects; belonging and vulnerability practices repair it. Classroom cultures that normalize imperfection and invite voice grow courage, empathy, and connection (Brown, research program; TED). 

What Too Often Happens When Behavior Is Big (and Why It Backfires)

• Isolation, seclusion, restraint: Still used across the U.S., often disproportionately with students with disabilities and students of color, and associated with injuries and trauma (U.S. ED/OCR guidance; K-12 Dive analysis of CRDC; Brookings). (U.S. Department of Education, 2025; CRDC, 2020-21).
  
• Exclusionary discipline (suspensions/expulsions): Linked to declines in achievement, higher dropout, and increased incarceration risk—without improving safety (APA, 2008; Bell, 2023; Minnesota DOE brief).
  
• Mislabeled and off-track: Over-reliance on punishment or placements undermines belonging and escalates behaviors long-term (CDC restorative practices overview; DOJ Anchorage case).
  

Bottom line: Inconsistent, punitive reactions—by individual teachers or across a school—teach unpredictability, amplify threat detection, and increase aggression. Consistency, connection, and clear limits teach safety. 

Teachers work so hard to plan engaging experiences for their students, and when disruptive behavior occurs, those experiences are derailed. This places a heavy challenge on the teacher to think quickly and make many decisions that are best for everyone involved, yet the system normally does not equip teachers with the knowledge and skillset to do so. Teachers are the adults who make the greatest impact—IF we prepare them! Simply telling them to “build a relationship” with a troubled student will not suffice. We have to show them HOW this looks in the most difficult situations with students.

Co-Regulation: Empathy + Assertiveness = Connection With Boundaries

Use these moves in the moment and consistently across classrooms. (Porges, 2022; Desautels, 2020s; CDC RP, 2025). 

1. Regulate you first (30–90 seconds). Exhale longer than you inhale, soften your shoulders, lower your voice. Stand at an angle, not head-on (signals of safety; Polyvagal). (Porges, 2022).
   
2. Name and normalize. “Your feelings are big and you’re safe with me. I’m here.” (Brown, 2010s; Desautels).
   
3. Offer regulated choices. “Do you want to sit by the door or the bookshelf while we figure this out?” (teaches agency within limits).
   
4. Use brief, concrete next steps. “First water, then we’ll look at the ripped paper. I’ll help.”
   
5. Protect peers without shaming. Move class attention elsewhere (quiet signal/transition) while one adult stays connected to the student.
   
6. Touch only with consent & policy alignment. Prioritize verbal and environmental de-escalation. Reserve physical restraint for imminent danger only and follow state/district guidance; avoid seclusion (U.S. ED, 2025).
   
7. Repair after regulation. Short, private debrief: “What did your body need? What helped? Next time, what could we try first?” Log triggers and co-create a plan (Desautels; AEN).
   

Teacher language you can use (micro-scripts):

• “I won’t let anyone get hurt. I’m going to help you feel safe.”
• “You don’t have to be okay to belong here. Let’s slow down together.”
• “Here are two options that keep everyone safe—pick one, I’ll back you up.”
• “Want to stand, pace, or press hands on the desk while we talk?”

Why Consistency Matters (School-wide)

• Neuroception likes patterns. When every adult uses similar calm tone, brief choices, and safety-first scripts, students’ bodies learn “this place is predictable,” reducing defensive states (Porges, 2022). It takes hundreds, even thousands of moments of experiencing co-regulation with adults for a young person’s nervous system to experience felt safety. The question we have to ask is, Are the most vulnerable students given opportunities throughout a school day to experience co-regulation?
• Inconsistent responses = intermittent reinforcement of aggression, inequitable discipline, and mistrust. Restorative, relational approaches implemented coherently reduce disruptions and suspensions and improve climate (CDC, 2025; Lodi et al., 2021; Darling-Hammond et al., 2023).  In other words, we must address the pockets of inconsistency within a school, and equip adults with the skillset they need to be the consistent adult.

Scenarios Where Connection Beats Correction

Elementary (Grade 2: Throwing markers; yelling “Leave me alone!”)

• Teacher move: Steps to the side, low voice: “You’re safe. I’ll stand right here.” Offers a regulation choice: “Squeeze this ball or push the wall with me for ten counts.” After 30 seconds: “Ready for ‘first water, then drawing’?”
  
• Why it works: Cues of safety + proprioceptive input reduce threat, re-open social engagement system (Porges, 2022; Desautels).
  

Middle School (Grade 7: Slams locker, storms into class, swears)

• Teacher move: “You’re not in trouble for feelings. Sit by the door or walk with me to the hall—your call. We’ll circle back in two minutes.” After brief walk: “What did your body need? Let’s plan how to enter next time. You still belong here.”
  
• Why it works: Preserves belonging and autonomy while protecting safety; reduces need for exclusionary responses (Brown; CDC RP).
  

High School (Grade 10: Crumples test, curses, heads for exit)

• Teacher move: Positions near door, calm: “I won’t let you leave angry; it’s not safe. Stand here with me. Breath count: 4 in/6 out. Then I’ll give you two choices for finishing.” Quick repair after class; logs trigger and adjusts conditions (e.g., chunking, extended time).
  
• Why it works: Adult nervous system co-regulates; boundaries are assertive and predictable; academic access restored (Porges; Desautels).

Practices That Grow Safety & Belonging (Daily, Not Just During Crises)

• Predictable entry/exit rituals: greeting at the door, temperature check-in, posted plan (belonging meta-analyses). (Allen et al., 2018; Korpershoek et al., 2020).
  
• Co-created regulation menus: water, walk, push-wall, chair pull-downs, doodle pad; teach and rehearse during calm times (AEN).
  
• Restorative routines: circles, quick check-ins/repair; implemented consistently reduce suspensions and improve climate (CDC; systematic reviews).
  
• Strength-based language: “You fight hard when it’s hard; let’s aim that strength.” (Brown; shame-resilience).

What to Avoid (and Replace)

• Seclusion & restraint except in imminent danger—shift to proactive, positive supports and FBA-informed plans (U.S. ED, 2025). Replace with co-regulation spaces without locked doors and with adult support.
  
• Inconsistent rules across rooms—replace with a simple, school-wide Safety–Respect–Learning language set and the same three de-escalation moves.
  
• Public shaming / sarcasm—replace with private redirects and repair (Brown).

Fast Co-Regulation Playbook

1. When behavior escalates:
   

• “You’re safe. I’m staying with you.”
• “Two options that keep everyone safe: ___ or ___.”
• “First ___, then ___.”
• “We’ll repair this together after your body settles.”

2. After:
   

• 2-minute private debrief (what helped, what to try first next time).
• Log triggers, adjust instruction/environment (chunking, movement, sensory breaks).
• Communicate with caregivers through a dignity lens, not a deficit label.

If Your School Wants Different Outcomes, Do These Things Now

1. Adopt a school-wide co-reg regulation routine (3-step script, choice set, repair flow).
2. Retire seclusion and limit restraint to imminent danger; train in restorative and de-escalation practices (U.S. ED; CDC).
3. Track belonging & discipline data together (by classroom and subgroup) and coach for consistency.
4. Develop a universal language for expectations across shared spaces, revolving around big ideas such as safety, respect, and responsibility.
5. Seek professional development and reading on neuroscience, restorative conversations, collaborative problem solving, and trauma invested practices
6. Develop a student success team to help identify the greatest needs in the building

Final Thought

You don’t “fix” aggression by isolating a child from the very relationships that heal nervous systems. You co-regulate, teach, and repair—with consistency and dignity. That’s how we protect learning and belonging, especially for the students who need school to be their safest place. By empowering adults with the right skills, they and students will feel more prepared to face difficult moments that will no doubt occur within the school days. Humans are emotional beings, and to thrive we must have felt safety and a sense of belonging. Otherwise, all we are doing is whatever it takes to survive.

Summary of References (Also Embedded)

• Porges, S. W. (2022). Polyvagal Theory: A Science of Safety. (open-access review).
  
• Porges, S. W. (2025). Polyvagal Theory: Current Status, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions.
  
• Desautels, L. (Applied Educational Neuroscience; Butler University program; Revelations in Education).
  
• Brown, B. (Research on connection, vulnerability, belonging; TED Talk).
  
• Allen, K., et al. (2018). Meta-analysis on school belonging. (cited in REL Midwest brief).
  
• Korpershoek, H., et al. (2020). Meta-analysis: belonging and outcomes in secondary education. (cited in REL Midwest brief).
  
• Davies, C. A., et al. (2025). Systematic review/meta-analysis of interventions for connectedness/belonging.
  
• APA Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008). Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in the Schools?
  
• Bell, C. (2023). Exploring the relationship between school punishment and outcomes.
  
• U.S. Department of Education (2025). Secretary’s letter & resources on restraint and seclusion alternatives.
  
• CDC (2025). Promoting School Connectedness Through Restorative Practices.
  
• Brookings (2024). Restraint and seclusion: policy has failed to curtail use.