Simulated Trauma in the Classroom

To prepare students to interview victims of traumatic events, journalism schools are using simulations and role-play. This guide shows educators how it's done.

Journalists who cover traumatic events such as violent crimes, horrific accidents, natural disasters and other situations in which they witness human pain and suffering are often required to approach and interview survivors of trauma or their family members.

Unfortunately the skills needed to interact with people under such stressful and unpredictable conditions do not usually come naturally. Without proper training, journalists may find their interviews with traumatized victims to be awkward, uncomfortable and, in extreme cases, even re-traumatizing.

Regardless of the reasons for a "bad interview," the end result is usually a poorer story than could have been written had a better interview been conducted. Interviewees may be reluctant to speak candidly — or at all — to an insensitive interviewer or to share treasured mementos such as a photograph of a deceased loved one. More importantly, interviewing survivors of trauma with sensitivity and professionalism demonstrates ethical behavior on the part of the journalist because it shows respect and empathy for the interviewee.

Dramatic interactions in journalism classes can help prepare students for real-life traumatic events they likely will face as journalists by allowing them to hone their interviewing and other social interaction skills in a realistic but practice environment. If student journalists can make their mistakes (or observe others making mistakes) during a simulation and then have those mistakes pointed out to them in a constructive way during a debriefing period, they are less likely to make those mistakes on an actual reporting assignment, where they could potentially (albeit unwittingly) harm their interviewees. Conversely, their "good habits" as interviewers can be reinforced through acknowledgement and praise. In either case, they come away with a better sense of how it looks and feels to interview people under traumatic circumstances.

At the University of Washington, professors use actors to help teach advanced reporting students about interviewing victims of trauma. Four actors from EffectiveArts, a Seattle-based simulation-based training and development company, portray survivors of a fatal apartment fire. After an introductory exercise, the actors are stationed around the classroom, each with important information to reveal and each in a state of shock, anguish, confusion, rage or some other emotion typically exhibited after a traumatic experience. Small groups of three to five student journalists work their way around the room, giving each student at least one opportunity to approach and interview a source while the others listen and learn.

An instructor or faculty coach accompanies each group and silently observes the five-minute interaction then facilitates a short discussion of what went well and what could be learned from each encounter. At the end of the exercise, the student journalists reflect on their own experiences, and receive feedback from the actors, who tell the class what they felt and observed as the interviewees. Feedback from those who have participated in these exercises has been positive, many expressing surprise at how real the simulation seemed to be. (For details on a sample curriculum for an exercise of this type, see Migael Scherer's Training Steps.)

The UW journalism collaboration began in 1997 between communications professor and Dart Center founding director Roger Simpson, who used interactive scenarios to teach trauma interviewing, and then-doctoral student Jim Boggs, who initiated a program that trained drama students to perform as actors for experiential learning exercises. Boggs has continued to develop the concept with EffectiveArts, which uses simulations to “help people be really, really good at high stakes interactions” in many arenas, including extremely sensitive conversations about organ donation.

Deep character development is the key, says Boggs. Rather than playing a role or learning lines, an actor steps into the skin of his or her character, and knows literally everything about the fictional person’s life. “It’s not acting; it’s being,” he says, and it quickly pulls the interviewer into the character’s world as well.

Boggs does not think it is necessary to use professionals, but he strongly recommends recruiting the actors from outside the journalism classroom. Working with the campus drama department is a win-win, he says, because it gives journalism students highly believable encounters and it gives drama students opportunities to perform profoundly significant roles. “It’s a profound gift to student actors to give them an opportunity to make a difference with their art,” he says.

Acting training helps actors “go into and [more importantly] out of ugly places,” he says. Not only are actors more believable than peers, they are free to push the student journalist in ways that a peer should not. There also are more emotional risks for untrained actors.

When untrained graduate students were used in the first trauma simulations at the UW, some complained of traumatic stress resulting from their inability to effectively separate their real emotions from those of the characters they were playing. Even with professional actors, Boggs carefully screens for recent, unhealed trauma that hits “too close to home” and would make a role emotionally inappropriate.

Peer role-playing also can play a part in classroom learning about trauma interviewing. It will not — and should not — have the same emotional impact on the interviewer or the interviewee, but it can help students practice approaching and interviewing a “victim” and it also can show them how it feels to be on the receiving end of a press encounter.


How to Plan a Trauma Simulation: Tips for Educators

Simulations and role-plays can play an important role in helping journalism students become more sensitive and sophisticated interviewers of trauma victims, but it takes considerable planning. The following suggestions come from educators who have used this powerful pedagogical tool in their classrooms:

1. Find out whether an acting group exists on campus (the drama or speech communication departments are best bets) and schedule a classroom performance. If none exists, improvise! Find a group of students who like to act and will dedicate sufficient time to preparing for an interactive drama.

2. Work closely with the student actors on developing a scene for presentation in the classroom. Remember, this is not theater or television. The scene should lend itself to interaction with the audience (i.e., the students in the class). Actors can "freeze" the scene and engage students' comments or suggestions before continuing on, or wait and give their feedback at the end. Developing a scene also requires deciding how much and what kind of audience participation is desirable or feasible. Will audience members be incorporated into the scene, or will they simply be engaged observers? With careful planning and guidance, audience members may even create and act out scenes.

3. Clearly explain the purpose and nature of the exercise to students. Because interactive drama is not a commonly used pedagogical tool, most students are not accustomed to this learning format and may feel self-conscious and uncertain at first, even with some orientation. They need to know that in some instances, such as interviewing trauma victims, entering into a simulation is a highly effective way of learning the relevant course material. Students may need to be encouraged to think "outside of the box"- i.e., to be open to new ways of learning and to be actively engaged in the process.

4. Before heading into a simulated traumatic event, students should be armed with traditional classroom knowledge about how best to enter these situations as a journalist. For example, at UW, Randal Beam instructs students to read Chapter 1 of Covering Violence (Simpson & Coté, 2006) and then assigns Classroom Study Questions prior to the simulated interviews in his advanced reporting class. Professor Migael Scherer offers another set of Training Sessions to prepare students.

5. Feedback is essential. When possible, have students critique each other, have a coach or facilitator critique students in small groups (see sample Faculty Coaching Reminders), and have the actors (in their roles as interviewees) critique the students (in their role as interviewers). Focus on what was done well as well as what needs improvement. Some students will forget everything they've learned about taking notes, asking follow-up questions and probing for details. If you can, point out to these students after round one that they will have to write a story from their notes, and if they failed to get correct spellings of names, ages and other identifying information, they won't be able to. This is a great teaching moment, says Cindy Simmons, UW journalism lecturer. “The reality of reporting is that you can't just be empathetic. You must make sure you get the information you need to write your story.”

6. Allow sufficient time after the exercise for debriefing and for students to talk. This is especially important for sensitive topics such as sexual assault or a hate crime. Some students in class may have direct experience with the traumatic event being depicted, and their discomfort or re-traumatization should be acknowledged in a general way. A statement like this might be helpful: "What you observe and experience might be especially difficult for some of you because of your own exposure to trauma. Come see me if you would like to talk about this or about the effect that today's exercise has had on you." Know where students can get professional mental health counseling on campus should it come to this. Make sure you have free time immediately after the trauma training to talk to students who may be upset. Debriefing may take half or all of your next class. Some students will have strong emotional responses to this exercise. Although you can prepare them for that, they only really understand the role of the journalist in reporting on trauma after they've done the exercise.

7. Don't be surprised if, as a result of the training, a student decides that he or she doesn't want to be a reporter, or only wants to do entertainment or sports writing. That’s okay. In fact, it’s a good thing for them to figure out early. However, they should know that in a true emergency, such as a school shooting or other large-scale event, everyone ends up doing trauma duty.

Simulations and role-plays can be both informative and memorable. It is hoped that after going through the process even once, students will be better equipped to interact with trauma victims in the course of their professional careers.


Classroom Study Questions

Before heading into a simulated traumatic event, students should be armed with traditional classroom knowledge about how to deal with traumatic events. The following classroom study questions can help prepare journalism students for a trauma training exercise:

Read Chapter 1 of “Covering Violence” (Simpson & Coté, 2006) and answer the following questions:

1.) If you are at the scene of a crime, accident or natural disaster, what are overt signs that an individual may be having an immediate psychological reaction to a traumatic event? In other words, as a journalist, what "symptoms" should you look for?

2.) Assume that you have been assigned to cover a traumatic event like a violent crime, fatal auto accident or natural disaster. In a couple of sentences each, answer the following questions:

  1. How should you decide whether to interview a person experiencing one of the situations described above? Briefly explain.

  2. If you do interview an individual who has experienced a traumatic reaction, how should you begin this process? How should you start the interview?

  3. If the person breaks down and starts to cry as you interview him or her, how exactly should you respond? What should you do?

  4. If the person asks if you know the condition of a loved one, and if you know the loved one has been seriously hurt or injured, how should you respond?


Faculty Coaching Reminders

The following faculty coaching reminders show facilitators what to tell journalism students when helping them to debrief and critique each other in small groups after a trauma training exercise:

One goal of a simulated trauma training is to reaffirm the customary things that reporters need to tell sources whom they’re interviewing in situations like this.  So, to that end, make sure to remind students of the following when they are role-playing as a journalist interviewing a traumatized person:

Essential (I hope every student does this):

  • Identify himself/herself at the outset by full name

  • Identify at the outset the organization for which he/she works (The Daily, the UW campus newspaper)

  • Describe the reason that he/she needs to talk to the subject now (i.e., “I’m writing a story for tomorrow’s Daily about the fire.”) 

Ideal (I hope at least a few remember to do this):

  • Go back over key details – reaffirm that the reporter has listened carefully

  • At the close of the interview, repeat reporter's identification and tell the interview subject how to contact him/her

Other common omissions, problems to be alert for:

  • Subject isn’t asked for his/her full name

  • Subject isn’t asked to confirm spelling of name

  • Reporter isn’t candid about plans to use the subject’s name in story

  • Reporter isn’t really listening – obsessive note-taking

  • Reporter fails to follow up on obvious leads, inconsistency in accounts

  • Reporter makes promise that can’t be kept (i.e., “I’ll find out what happened and tell you.”)

Dealing with the student journalist interviewer

  • Sometimes students get caught up emotionally in what’s happening; if you need to stop the process so the student can recover, do so.

  • Some students feel inept immediately after the interview because they haven’t handled the situation as well as they think that they might have; be encouraging and point out a success or two – remind them that this is a difficult task even for the most seasoned journalists.

  • When the interview is over, immediately ask the student to do a brief self-evaluation – what went well, what do you wish you could do over.


Managing the Discussion After a Trauma Simulation

General Tips

Every class context and group of students is unique, so no single pattern of post-trauma discussion will be equally acceptable or effective for everyone. Thus, in this tip sheet, I outline possible perimeters and suggestions that can assist instructors in creating a helpful and contained learning environment for students participating in a trauma role-play exercise or trauma-based learning experience.

It is important to presume that students are experienced at coping and competent in implementing strategies that have been effective for them in the past. With this perspective, research conducted by Orner, et al. (2003) on early post-trauma interventions in the workplace shows that it is appropriate to allow people who have experienced a trauma event the time to self-monitor their reactions, build a sense of personal control through returning to routines and normality, and talk with colleagues and close friends about their reactions before formally meeting with a group to discuss the experience.

There is also evidence that people deliberately relax, release feelings (e.g., use of humour), and after an incident, talk about it in more general terms (versus details). These findings are important to consider when proceeding with any formal discussion with the class group; having time to mentally and emotionally digest the event can increase the learning experience related to trauma reporting. This may also lead students to understand and work more effectively with their own responses.

The purposes of post-event classroom discussions are manifold. Primarily, instructors should maximize the learning potential of the event, assess how the training exercise prepared students for future work, note any gaps in learning, and evaluate what students need to further master when engaging in trauma reporting or photography. Secondarily, discussions make students’ thought processes available for them to evaluate; decrease potential feelings of isolation in processing their actions and reactions; give instructors a chance to teach about natural reactions to the trauma, and encourage students to accept and appropriately manage their responses in ways to facilitate learning. Finally, instructors can also identify students who may need further help.

Preparation for Discussion

Structuring the Discussion Class

In a successful discussion, the instructor actively structures the class by orienting students to the discussion, having a lucid, competent personal style, and a consistent and coherent group process.1 In the best possible world, the most open structure for a discussion is a circle in a good-sized room that allows for a closed door. This type of spatial boundary invites students into an intimate, open, and contained space to work well. It will add to the stability if no one leaves the room suddenly or unexpectedly during the discussion process.

It’s important that the instructor be firm, explicit, and decisive. Primarily, the instructor must step in to exercise control over who has the floor. Since class time is generally shorter than is needed for this type of discussion, make sure that the whole class is always working, and conversations are effective and on track with the subject at hand. If discussions only involve one or two people, the instructor can direct the students to have the conversation outside of the classroom. With a good orientation to the perimeters of the discussion, and a core period of conversation, the discussion process can end with a summary review of key learning experiences and plans (including time allotments) for any unfinished discussions that still need to take place. 

Orientation and Perimeters of Discussion

It is important to build cohesion among the student group by making explicit their implicit needs for trust, safety, and inclusion in the discussion process. This is done by building a unique set of agreed-upon guidelines for the discussion process long before the discussion takes place (i.e., at the onset of the course, or in the worst case just before the post-event discussion takes place).2 Soliciting students’ ideas about what makes an open discussion possible provides the basis of the guidelines. For example, students may need honesty and openness from classmates and instructor, respect for their diversity, inclusion in decisions and goals in the class, their boundaries respected by being free not to speak, or freedom to learn through their mistakes. Clear information about grading also helps students understand if and how their participation in a trauma scenario will affect their evaluation. In most cases, students should be assured that they won't be negatively evaluated for emotional reactions and responses. Although this may seem time-consuming (give it about 15 minutes), it will bode well if or when the discussion brings up difficult issues (e.g., strong emotionality, conflict, competitiveness, value-based issues). 

Introducing the discussion

A good introduction about how the class will run can increase the motivation of students to participate. The instructor must take the lead in managing the discussion (e.g., making sure that everyone has equal time to talk, presenting discussion questions, containing emotional reactions), emphasizing the voluntary nature of the discussion (e.g., the right of students to decide what they disclose), outlining and maintaining the agreed upon guidelines for open discussion (i.e., applicable to everyone including the instructor), and maximizing every learning opportunity.

Knowing Normative Responses to a Stressor

It’s important at the onset for students to understand the normative response to a stressful or dangerous situation. A quick overview of these types of responses can provide context for the post-trauma discussion, offer a way for students to understand what happened to them personally, and add information for dealing with similar circumstances in the future.

Recognizing Stress Responses and Effects3

Once a perceived danger or stressor subsides, it takes about seven minutes to resolve the build-up of chemical responses in the body and return to a normal state. Symptoms that resolve include such experiences as an increased heart rate, tightened muscles, increased blood pressure, quickened breath, and sharpened senses. These physical changes are necessary to increase strength and stamina, speed reaction times, and enhance focus as a preparation for a fight or flee response from a danger at hand. In the truest sense, a person is physically on “automatic” for survival, and cognitive decision-making is a much slower process when a person is trying to survive a stressful situation.

For journalists, similar stress responses can be experienced whether witnessing someone in distress from a previous trauma or being present first-hand during a trauma event. In a stressful situation students may have difficulty remembering what they had planned because they are overwhelmed by anxiety, making it difficult to concentrate on the task at hand. They may also have poor judgment about what to ask or where to go. After the event or witnessing experience, they may feel irritable, anxious, upset, or worried about what had happened or how they responded. It is also common to only see the negative in the situation or with their encounters with people.

In extreme situations where students experience trauma first-hand or an especially harrowing witnessing of trauma victims or survivors, they may have more acute responses and aftereffects may last beyond the immediate aftermath. Is also important to note that cumulative experiences of witnessing can have long-term impacts for journalists and photojournalists who are consistently in trauma-related contexts.

Discussion Topics

Although most instructors likely have a multitude of discussion leads, I include a few here that are specific to different aspects of processing before, during, or after the event.4 Additionally, questions related to thinking, actions, and emotions can be used in this sequence to help moderate emotionality.

 

Discussion about Pre-event Thoughts

  • What training was most useful in preparing you? What was missing or needed for better preparation?
  • What thoughts or plans did you have before the event about what would happen?
  • What previous experience did you have with similar events?
 

Discussion about Facts about the Event

Student’s role:

  • What was your role? What did you do from that perspective? Why did you decide to do that?

Details about the event:

  • What happened from your point of view?
  • What did you notice around you (e.g., see, hear, touch, smell, taste)?
  • What was your first thought when you began to calm down from your initial reaction?
  • What did you do that you felt good about?

Relationship Aspects:

  • Were there any conflicts with others? How did you handle them?
  • Were there any positive aspects of working with others? What made it positive?
  • Did any of the individuals being interviewed have a special meaning for you? Why?

Emotional Responses:

  • What kinds of things happened to you personally?
  • What was the worst thing about the situation for you?
  • What aspects of the event caused you the most concern or pain?
  • What happened during the incident that made it less chaotic or painful?
  • What techniques helped you handle those uncomfortable feelings?
  • What gave you hope?
  • What was most fulfilling about your role?
 

Discussion about Issues Subsequent to the Event

  • How did you talk about the event with your colleagues, family, or friends after it was over?
  • What help or understanding did you receive from your colleagues, friends, or family since the event?
  • How have you been since the event?
  • Do you have any symptoms of the distress left over from the event? If so, what is happening and what do you need?

Managing Strong Emotions

Crying

When someone cries during a class discussion, it's important that the student does not experience shame in the group. Crying is one way that people respond emotionally to something tragic or violent or to their own reactions to trauma in the aftermath. Always acknowledge that the person is upset, shaken, distressed, sad, angry, frustrated, or whatever the emotion might be. Part of this acknowledgement is being prepared (and expecting) that someone will cry is having some tissues on hand. Often times, people do not want to have attention brought to their tears, but a casual passing over of a tissue, or the opportunity for a person to take some is helpful. Do not try to stop the crying, but include the response as an expected consequence, even saying, “take your time” as they breathe though the tearfulness.

If students are having significant difficulty containing their reactions, the instructor can ask cognitive-based questions (e.g., “What was the first thing that came to your mind?” “What did you notice around you?” “Who was there with you? What did s/he do?”), which get students thinking rather than feeling. As an instructor it is useful to see emotional reactions as teachable moments, especially when it comes to learning how to talk to each other about emotional reactions, normal responses to stress or traumatic stress, and how to take care of themselves after a difficult assignment.

Anger

In order to maintain an open and comfortable discussion where everyone is free to participate, it is important to address any hostile behavior directly towards classmates, including caustic remarks, sarcastic jokes, and other “hit-and-run” types of tactics. Some students may also act in superior, moralistic, judging, or critical ways toward others who are disclosing struggles with the trauma experience. These types of behaviors are very different than typical “gallows” humor between colleagues during trauma assignments. The gallows humor is more of a stress release and not directed towards individuals as a means of hurting or demeaning.

In the case of comments that come from a more destructive impulse, particularly those that demean reactions or opinions of other students, stop the behavior by interrupting or interjecting and rearticulating the agreed-upon norms or guidelines for discussion, exploring the reason for their comments, and/or the impact they have on the person or persons to whom it was directed. Addressing this behavior creates a teachable moment in how to communicate better around the personal impacts of trauma.

Self Care and Other Assistance on Campus

Conclude a post-trauma discussion with reminders of how to take care of oneself after the small or large shocks that a trauma can bring. For students, the first step is taking care of their basic needs, reducing stress as much as possible, and seeking support from trusted family members or friends. Include reminders that in an acute personal crisis they need to call 911 or go to the nearest hospital. They can also call a crisis center (distress line) for additional assistance. These types of crisis lines often exist on college campuses. If students are not in a crisis, the post-secondary school likely has free counseling services available (contact information is most often on the a school website). Make sure that you offer this information to students in the likelihood that they need extra help.

Footnotes

1 For more information on group processes see: Yalom, I. D. & Leszcz, M. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York: Basic Books.

2 For further discussion on creating guidelines and group management see: Corey, M.S., Corey, G., & Corey, C. (2010). Groups: Process and practice (8th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

3 For a more comprehensive explanation see: Levine, P. (1997). Waking the tiger: Healing trauma. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.

4 Adapted from: Tehrani, N. & Westlake, R. (1994). Debriefing individuals affected by violence. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 7(3), 251-259.

References

Ørner, R. J., King, S., Avery, A., Bretherton, R., Stolz, P. & Ormerod, J. (2003). Coping and Adjustment Strategies used by Emergency Services Staff after Traumatic Incidents: Implications for Psychological Debriefing, Reconstructed Early Intervention and Psychological First Aid. The Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, 1. Retrieved Nov 2009 from: http://www.massey.ac.nz/~trauma/issues/previous.shtml