Schools are using isolation practices more than ever — mostly for 'disruption'

SALT LAKE CITY — Nearly a year ago, the Utah State Board of Education told KSL Investigators it was working "almost daily" to figure out why "disruption" was the most common reason for secluding students — a category that does not meet the legal threshold for Emergency Safety Interventions.

New data shows not only has disruption remained the number one reason, but cases have hit a new record high.

In 2024, Utah schools reported 1,008 uses of seclusion, with disruption accounting for 53.5% of cases — far outpacing physical assault at 17.2%, according to the Utah State Board of Education Disciplinary Report.

This year, the numbers climbed again: 1,148 seclusion incidents, nearly half (45.7%) attributed to disruption, compared to 21.1% for physical assault.

That's a sharp increase from 2022, when seclusion was used 526 times, and disruption represented just 16% of cases. The trend raises questions about whether the board's promised reforms ever materialized.

"It's something that we talk about again, almost on a daily basis. And we're looking at every opportunity that we can in order to improve that reporting," said KrisAnne Lewis, Student Services Coordinator at USBE, in a January 2025 interview.

But nearly a year later, the data suggests little has changed.

Legal threshold reporting

State law is clear: seclusion may only be used when a student poses an immediate danger to self or others, and only after less-restrictive interventions fail. Yet "disruption" — the top reason cited — does not appear to meet that threshold.

Schools have more than 20 reporting codes to choose from, including physical assault, fighting, harassment and threats. Experts say that makes the repeated use of "disruption" even harder to justify.

"If they're reporting it as a disruption — a disruption doesn't meet the legal threshold for when restraint or seclusion could be used," said Guy Stephens, founder of the Alliance Against Seclusion and Restraint. "When you're using them in ways that they're not intended, they're not different from abuse. And the impact of abuse can really be significant on children."

Stephens questions whether the board's explanation — that disruption often follows unsafe behavior — holds up.

"Show me the evidence that suggests that, in fact, it was misreporting," Stephens said. "How do you know it was misreporting? Did you interview the people that filed these reports and find out that it was a greater reason? Or is this a guess?"

We asked Utah State Board of Education for answers

On Wednesday, KSL Investigators requested an on-camera interview with the Utah State Board of Education. Instead, on Friday, the board sent a written statement from Ryan Bartlett, director of strategic communications:

"There is not a definitive single cause for the increase in ESIs, but we believe multiple factors are contributing: improved data reporting protocols, clarified definitions, and enhanced training and support. For example, the new reporting system requires schools to indicate the stated purpose of the ESI, alternative interventions attempted, and duration."

In many cases, 'disruption' appears in the data because a brief unsafe action is followed by longer disruptive behavior, and schools must choose one primary reporting code."

This does not mean ESIs are used for minor misbehavior — state law is clear that they may only be used when there is an immediate safety risk after less-restrictive interventions have failed, and with continuous staff supervision."

USBE has provided updated technical assistance, including a revised Least Restrictive Behavioral Interventions manual, ESI policy checklists, and foundational and comprehensive staff training on de-escalation and behavior support. These supports aim to prevent incidents, minimize the need for ESIs, and ensure reporting accuracy."

Going forward, USBE will continue working with LEAs to use the more detailed data to identify emerging patterns, tailor supports, and improve both clarity and student safety. We remain committed to transparency, continuous improvement, and ensuring all Utah schools are safe, respectful, and effective learning environments."

After receiving the statement, KSL Investigators responded with follow-up questions:

• How did the board verify its explanation for disruption?
• Why did disruption replace physical assault as the top reason?
• How does the board plan to address unreliable data?

The board did not respond.

New law adds requirements

After KSL Investigates first raised concerns in late 2024, lawmakers passed a new law banning seclusion for kindergarteners and requiring schools to contact parents immediately when a child is secluded. Kindergarteners had the fifth-highest rates of seclusion prior to this law. The law also mandates documentation of the stated purpose of each ESI, alternative interventions attempted and duration.

KSL Investigators will continue to track whether these promised changes lead to fewer seclusions — and more accountability.

Related topics