Here is a definition of the terminology used on this site.

• injury to dignity: Injury to dignity refers to harm to a person’s sense of self-worth, respect, or belonging caused by discrimination. In human rights law, it recognises that the impact of discrimination is not only practical or financial but also emotional and psychological. A student may experience injury to dignity when they are treated as less capable, excluded from participation, publicly shamed, or repeatedly denied accommodations related to disability or another protected characteristic. Under the British Columbia Human Rights Code, the BC Human Rights Tribunal can award compensation for injury to dignity when discrimination is found. These awards recognise the real harm caused when a person’s humanity, identity, or rights are not respected within institutions such as schools. Learn more
• institutional betrayal: Institutional betrayal refers to harm that occurs when an institution a person depends on—such as a school—fails to prevent, respond to, or acknowledge wrongdoing. The term describes situations where an organisation that is expected to provide safety and care instead ignores concerns, minimises harm, protects its reputation, or fails to act when problems are reported. In school settings, institutional betrayal can occur when families raise concerns about bullying, discrimination, unsafe conditions, or staff conduct and the response prioritises managing risk or liability rather than addressing the harm experienced by the child. Because students and families rely on schools for daily care and support, these failures can feel especially damaging and can erode trust in the institution. Recognising institutional betrayal helps highlight that the harm is not only the original incident but also the system’s failure to respond in ways that protect and support those affected. Learn more
• institutional confidentiality: Institutional confidentiality refers to the way schools and other organisations limit what information they share about incidents, staff conduct, or internal decisions, often citing privacy, employment law, or policy requirements. While confidentiality can be important for protecting personal information, it can also create situations where families are told that actions were taken but are given little or no detail about what occurred or what consequences followed. In school contexts, institutional confidentiality is frequently invoked during investigations, disciplinary processes, or safety incidents involving staff or other students. This can leave families feeling that concerns were handled behind closed doors without transparency or accountability. As a result, parents may know that something happened but not understand how it was addressed or whether meaningful change occurred. Balancing privacy with transparency is an ongoing challenge in institutional systems that are responsible for both protecting individuals and maintaining public trust. Learn more
• Institutional gaslighting: Institutional gaslighting refers to situations where an organisation dismisses, minimises, or reframes people’s experiences in ways that cause them to question their own understanding of events. In school contexts, this can occur when families raise concerns about harm, discrimination, or unmet supports and are told that nothing unusual happened, that the situation is being misunderstood, or that the problem lies with the child or family rather than the system. Institutional gaslighting does not always involve deliberate deception; it can also arise from defensive institutional responses that prioritise protecting reputation, liability, or internal narratives. Over time, repeated denial or reframing of events can erode families’ confidence in their own observations and make it harder to advocate effectively. Recognising institutional gaslighting helps explain why some conflicts between families and institutions feel disorienting: the disagreement is not only about what happened, but about whose version of reality is treated as credible. Learn more
• institutional harm: Institutional harm refers to harm that arises from the policies, practices, or decisions of an organisation rather than from the actions of a single individual. In school settings, institutional harm can occur when systems are structured in ways that repeatedly produce negative outcomes for students—for example through inaccessible environments, failure to implement accommodations, exclusionary discipline, delayed responses to safety concerns, or processes that make it difficult for families to obtain support. Even when individual staff members are trying to help, the overall structure of the system may still produce harm if resources, policies, or decision-making processes create persistent barriers. Institutional harm often becomes visible through patterns rather than isolated incidents. Recognising institutional harm shifts the focus from blaming individuals to examining how systems can be redesigned to better protect student safety, dignity, and access to education. Learn more
• Institutional normalisation: Institutional normalisation refers to the process by which harmful or inadequate practices become accepted as ordinary within an organisation. Over time, behaviours or conditions that would once have been considered unacceptable—such as chronic under-support, exclusionary discipline, or delayed responses to safety concerns—may come to be treated as routine. Staff working within the system may not recognise the harm because these practices have become embedded in everyday procedures and expectations. For families encountering the system from the outside, however, these conditions can be deeply concerning. Recognising institutional normalisation helps explain how patterns of harm can persist without any single person intending them. Learn more
• institutional trauma: Institutional trauma refers to the psychological harm that occurs when a person experiences repeated distress, neglect, or betrayal within an institution they depend on, such as a school. Unlike a single traumatic event, institutional trauma often develops through ongoing interactions where concerns are dismissed, supports are denied, or harm is not acknowledged. Because schools are places children attend daily and families rely on for care and learning, negative experiences within these systems can have lasting emotional and developmental effects. Institutional trauma may affect both students and families, shaping how safe they feel engaging with the education system in the future. Learn more
• interpersonal neurobiology: Interpersonal neurobiology is a field of study that explores how relationships shape brain development, emotional regulation, and mental health. Developed by psychiatrist Daniel J. Siegel, the framework emphasises that the brain develops through social interaction and that supportive relationships play a central role in regulating stress and learning. In education settings, interpersonal neurobiology highlights the importance of safe, attuned relationships between students and adults. When students feel understood and supported, their nervous systems are more able to engage in learning and problem-solving. Learn more
• intersectionality: Intersectionality is a concept describing how different forms of social identity and inequality interact to shape a person’s experiences. The term was introduced by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw to explain how systems of discrimination such as racism, sexism, and ableism can overlap. In schools, intersectionality helps explain why some students experience barriers that cannot be understood through a single category alone—for example, a student who is both disabled and racialised may encounter different challenges than students who experience only one of those forms of marginalisation. Understanding intersectionality helps institutions respond more accurately to complex experiences of inequity. Learn more
• invisible disability: Invisible disability refers to disabilities that are not immediately apparent to others. These may include neurological, cognitive, mental health, or chronic health conditions such as autism, ADHD, learning disabilities, or anxiety disorders. Because the disability is not visible, students may be misunderstood or judged as unmotivated, disruptive, or inattentive rather than recognised as needing support. Invisible disabilities can therefore require additional advocacy to ensure that accommodations are understood and implemented. Recognising invisible disability helps shift attention from assumptions about behaviour to the underlying needs that may not be obvious to others. Learn more
• justice: Justice refers to the principle that people should be treated fairly and that harms should be addressed through accountability, repair, and equitable treatment. In education contexts, justice involves ensuring that students have meaningful access to learning, that discrimination and harm are taken seriously, and that systems respond appropriately when problems occur. Justice is not only about following rules but about ensuring that decisions and outcomes respect the dignity, rights, and well-being of those affected. Learn more
• lagging skills: Lagging skills is a concept used to describe areas where a child has not yet developed certain abilities, such as emotional regulation, flexibility, problem-solving, or communication. The term is often associated with the work of psychologist Ross W. Greene, who emphasises that challenging behaviour is frequently a sign of skills that are still developing rather than intentional misconduct. In school environments, recognising lagging skills can help shift responses away from punishment and toward teaching, support, and collaborative problem-solving. Learn more
• late diagnosis: Late diagnosis refers to situations where a disability, learning difference, or developmental condition is identified later than expected. This can occur when symptoms are misunderstood, masked, or attributed to other factors such as behaviour or personality. Late diagnosis is particularly common among girls, racialised students, and individuals with high cognitive ability whose strengths may hide areas of difficulty. Delayed identification can mean that students spend years navigating school without appropriate supports, which can affect learning, self-esteem, and mental health. Learn more
• law: Law refers to the system of rules and legal principles established by governments to regulate behaviour, protect rights, and resolve disputes. In education, laws set out the responsibilities of schools, the rights of students and families, and the processes available when disagreements occur. Legal frameworks provide structure and accountability, helping ensure that institutions operate within defined standards and obligations. Learn more
• learning disability: Learning disability refers to a neurological difference that affects how a person processes information related to reading, writing, mathematics, or other academic skills. Learning disabilities are not related to intelligence but reflect differences in how the brain receives, organises, or expresses information. Students with learning disabilities may require specialised instruction, accommodations, or assistive technology in order to demonstrate their knowledge effectively. With appropriate supports, many students with learning disabilities are able to succeed academically and develop strong skills in other areas. Learn more
• learning support: Learning support refers to the additional assistance provided to help students access education when they face barriers related to disability, learning differences, or other needs. This support may include specialised instruction, accommodations, assistive technology, educational assistants, or targeted interventions. Effective learning support focuses on helping students participate meaningfully in the classroom while building skills that allow them to engage more independently over time. Learn more
• legitimacy: Whether harm or concern is treated as valid. Schools determine legitimacy by accepting or dismissing parent accounts, recognising or denying student distress, and responding with urgency or delay. Legitimacy is often granted selectively, with professional reports treated as credible whilst parent observations are characterised as biased. Fights over legitimacy precede fights over remedy, with schools investing energy in contesting whether harm occurred rather than addressing it once documented. Learn more
• limitation periods: Limitation periods are the legal time limits within which a person must bring a complaint or legal claim. These timelines exist to ensure that disputes are addressed while evidence and memories are still relatively fresh. In education and human rights contexts, limitation periods determine how long families have to file formal complaints after an incident or decision occurs. Missing a limitation period can prevent a case from being heard, which is why understanding these timelines can be important when considering formal processes. Learn more
• lip service: Lip service refers to expressions of support or agreement that are not followed by meaningful action. In institutional settings, policies or statements may emphasise values such as inclusion, safety, or collaboration, while everyday practices do not reflect those commitments. When families hear repeated assurances without seeing concrete changes, the language of support may feel symbolic rather than substantive. Recognising lip service helps distinguish between stated values and actual practice. Learn more
• longevity of harm: Longevity of harm refers to the lasting effects that harmful experiences can have over time. In school contexts, events such as repeated exclusion, humiliation, or unsafe conditions may continue to affect a child long after the original incident has passed. The emotional, educational, and relational impacts of these experiences can shape a student’s confidence, sense of safety, and willingness to engage with learning. Recognising the longevity of harm highlights the importance of early intervention, repair, and supportive environments. Learn more