Incorporating Brave Practices at School

October 2025

Dear Selective Mutism Community,

Students in the United States spend approximately 35-40 hours per week at school. This highly social and verbal setting is often difficult for students with SM to comfortably navigate. Students are asked to share their answers, explain their thinking, and ask questions when they are confused. Staff greet them in the hallways, they must navigate busy cafeterias and playgrounds, and connect with their peer group.

Given the high rate of opportunity for students with SM to avoid speaking with others,
school is a critical setting in which they must be given the necessary tools and support to instead consistently practice brave speaking.

Many families, educators (and students themselves!) recognize the value of in-context brave talking practice while at school. Furthermore, many schools try to offer students with SM support in doing so. In a survey of 230 parents of youth with diagnosed (or suspected) SM, Boneff and colleagues (2023) found that approximately 61% of their survey sample received some type of school-based accommodations and/or services (e.g., informal supports, a 504 accommodation plan, an IEP). This study also explored the reported frequency of use of SM-specific intervention strategies at school. The highest rated strategies included the use of exposures (16.3%) and stimulus fading (8%).

While the authors of the study denote its limitations (including sample composition/size and impact on generalizability), its results still highlight the importance of expanded research and exploration along this line of inquiry. What types of services/supports are students with SM receiving at school? Are schools adopting and implementing evidenced-based strategies tailored specifically for SM youth? And if there are significant gaps in service delivery and/or treatment approach, what are the barriers school staff encounter and how can they be circumvented?

While these questions need to be examined further, we can still be mindful of the barriers we suspect exist. Here are common barriers schools might encounter in supporting students with SM, and ideas for navigating them.

Limited knowledge of SM and lack of resources/trainings in SM support strategies

● Share SMA’s “Understanding Selective Mutism: A Closer Look” video to help
introduce school staff to SM
● SMA’s free Educator’s Toolkit provides a great overview of SM symptoms and quick
tips/recommendations for teachers
● SMA’s Educator’s Webcourse provides educators (and support staff) a more in-depth
training in best practice assessment and intervention for students with SM. Use code
SMAware for a 20% discount in celebration of October being SM Awareness Month.
● Treating providers who specialize in SM often offer school trainings and consultative
services. Search for a local SM provider here.

Lack of Staff

● Identify 1 school staff member who can serve as the student’s key worker. The key
worker can serve as “team quarterback” and help coordinate communication amongst
key stakeholders, as well as be the primary “brave coach” and interventionist for school-based exposure practices
● Be mindful when selecting a keyworker; make sure this staff member has consistent
availability to meet with the student, is a good personality fit for the student, and has
interest in learning SM support strategies. And be creative—anyone can be trained to be a keyworker!

Lack of Time/Resources

● Create an easy communication log that all key stakeholders (e.g., caregivers, teachers, keyworker, therapist) can use to share information, collaborate, and celebrate the student’s progress towards goals. Some older students can also take the lead on tracking their own goals and progress!
● Consider exposure goals that align with the curriculum. If the student really needs to
work on their presentation skills, but presentation projects aren’t scheduled until second semester, consider alternative goals to focus on in the meantime (or unique ways the student can still practice presentation skills—such as Pair and Share activities, reading of the morning announcements, participating in a debate or drama club, etc.)
● Transform daily, routine activities into brave talking practices. For example, what
classroom jobs or school leadership roles could the student practice? What tasks are
currently nonverbal, that could easily be changed into verbal tasks?
● Be specific when goal setting. Instead of expecting teachers to facilitate brave work for the student throughout their entire school day, focus on 1 specific goal during 1 specific subject/lesson. A more targeted focus will likely help increase a teacher’s ability to implement the intervention and support the student with a higher degree of fidelity and consistency. Building confidence and effectiveness during a specific lesson, for both the student and teacher, will help both parties feel more comfortable and confident in expanding these skills over time.
● Instead of feeling the pressure of squeezing in additional brave practices into the
student’s schedule (as well as the keyworker’s busy schedule), consider what activities
are already naturally occurring during the student’s day/week/month that would serve as a good brave practice opportunity. For example, if the upcoming Science Unit includes a lot of partner work/projects, it might be a good time to focus on peer collaboration goals. If the school hosts Bagel Friday every week, in which students can purchase bagels before school, that might be a great ordering practice (or your student could help staff take/fulfill orders!)

What is your favorite tip for effectively building in brave practices throughout the school day? Visit SMA’s Instagram and Facebook pages and comment on today’s story to share!

Sincerely,
Dr. Taylor Hicks-Hoste
SMA Board of Directors, President-Elect

Reference:
Boneff-Peng, K., Lasutschinkow, P.C., Colton, Z.A., & Freedman-Doan, C.R. (2023). An
updated characterization of childhood selective mutism: Exploring clinical features,
treatment utilization, and school services. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 56(3):683-695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-023-01589-8