A guide for dynamic, responsive consent in high-load teaching environments
Student agency is the backbone of a safe learning environment. The AERIAL Consent Protocol offers a way to ethically navigate touch in aerial & adjacent arts.
Aerial instruction regularly involves physical contact. Contact without consent, even well-intentioned, can activate a student's nervous system, interrupt trust, and compromise the psychological safety that learning depends on. The AERIAL protocol gives teachers a clear, repeatable structure for navigating touch ethically, while still requiring live assessment and responsive teaching, not reliance on a formula.
A student's touch preferences can change in different contexts and from day to day. The protocol accounts for this, and teaches instructors to stay present with what's actually happening rather than assuming a static preference.
A blind check-in at the start of a group class, or verbal check-in one-on-one before working with a student: is touch okay, or do you prefer verbal cues only? Naming both options is part of the method, as it gives clear permission to choose one or the other, rather than be compliant and just say "yes." That preference is theirs, and it can change at any time, they just need to say so. This sets the baseline without singling anyone out.
For anything more involved or sensitive, or placing hands for a live demonstration for the class, the AERIAL protocol applies regardless of prior established consent. Even when a student has already said touch is okay, specific contact warrants a specific ask.
Each letter is a distinct action. Ask and Explain happen simultaneously. Everything after depends on verbal communication and body language.
Before any hands-on contact, ask for permission and explain what you're about to do and why, in the same breath. The explanation is part of the ask. It gives the student enough information to make a real decision.
This also models something important: that touch in aerial has a purpose, a location, and an expected outcome. It is not vague or incidental. When teachers explain what they're doing and why, students learn to understand their own bodies rather than simply comply.
Ask and Explain happen in the same moment. E is not a separate step but the other half of A, included here to complete the acronym.
The student's response, yes, no, or "let me think about it," is the answer. It does not require justification, and it does not open a negotiation. A no is complete. A "maybe" is a no unless it changes explicitly to a "yes."
This step asks teachers to resist the instinct to reassure, minimize, or reframe when a student declines. "It won't hurt" or "it's just for a second" are pressure, not support. Respecting the answer means taking it as given, adjusting the teaching approach accordingly, and moving on without making the student feel they've made the wrong choice.
Once consent is given, place hands, but understand that verbal consent is a preliminary green light, not a final one. The student said yes to what they imagined based on your explanation. What actually happens may feel different. Initiation is the beginning of the contact, not the end of the consent conversation.
Move deliberately and with clear intention. Hesitant, uncertain touch can be more disorienting than confident touch, especially in a high-load context where students are already managing significant physical and psychological input.
Verbal consent is one signal. The body is another, and it doesn't always match what was said. Once contact begins, read what's actually happening: is the student's breath steady or held? Are they bracing against the contact or receiving it? Are they relaxed and working, or activated and holding still in a way that looks like compliance but feels like shutdown?
If the student appears tense, not breathing normally, or unsure, release and check in again before continuing.
Hands-on support should be minimal and end promptly (but not abruptly) when it is no longer necessary. Extended contact beyond its purpose can be unsettling and creates dependency rather than capability, limiting the student's opportunity to feel the skill in their own body.
Autonomy is the end goal of every hands-on decision.
Consent is dynamic. Students may change their preferences at any time.
The AERIAL Consent Protocol was developed by Sara Kaiser, founder of Embodied Aerial and creator of the BLOOM Aerial Teacher Training. It is a core component of the BLOOM certification and informs the consent and safety culture of every program Sara teaches. It should not be taken as a universal or absolute protocol but as a guideline. Studios can explore this framework in practice through Beyond Technique workshops.