School Shooting in the US: How Far Have We Come?
School shootings in the United States are a statistically rare, albeit devastating, occurrence. There have been many efforts to address school shootings ranging from the Safe School Initiative to spending billions in fortification and security personnel, from enacting zero tolerance policies, gun control, and gun-free school zones at the state and local levels to President Obama’s 23 executive actions on gun control at the federal level. Although these policies may have helped, or at least not made the problem worse, school shootings remain a problem.
Statistically the chance of a child or young adult being killed at school is rare. Children are almost 100 times more likely to be murdered outside of school than in school. However, school shootings do happen. There have been 387 school shootings since 1992. The last fatal school-shooting incident that garnished major media attention and prompted calls for change in the US was in 2012 in Newtown (Sandy Hook Elementary). However, there have been more than 20 fatal school shootings since Newtown.Although school shootings are not necessarily increasing, they are still a huge cause for concern.
Many factors are involved in why school shootings happen and how we might go about preventing them. For example, gun control laws and gun free school zone laws are often debated. Most students who carried out school shootings got the guns from their own homes.This raises questions about gun safety and whether parents should be required to keep guns locked away from children or whether individual liberty is an overriding principal.
Bullying and mental health are a factor. An analysis of 45 related studies confirms that there is a correlation between involvement in bullying behavior, as a victim, bully, or bully-victim, and bringing weapons to school. In 2000, the US Secret Service reported that in 2/3 of the 37 school shootings that have occurred in 26 states since 1974, the attacker felt bullied or attacked prior to the event.
Zero Tolerance Policies
In 1994, the Gun-Free Schools Act (GFSA) was passed as part of the Improving America’s Schools Act. The law requires states that want federal funding, to enact a law requiring local schools to expel, for a minimum of one year, “any student who is determined to have brought a firearm to school” (See 20 U.S.C. §1821(b)(1)). The National Center for Education Statistics notes that 94 percent of all schools have zero tolerance policies for weapons or firearms.
The use of school expulsion or suspension is the cornerstone of zero tolerance policies. The US Department of Education reports that there were 3,477 weapons-related expulsions for the 1998-99 school year, and 2,695 such expulsions for the 2006-07 school year (the most recent year for data). This is not to say, however, that there has been a consistent decline as the second highest year for expulsions in that time frame was 2005-06 (3,028). The rates of suspension though are not indicative of whether or not expulsions are effective at preventing gun violence.
While investigations into the effectiveness of suspensions and expulsions for improving school safety are limited (surprisingly so considering they’ve been implemented for over 20 years), indirect data suggests that they are not effective at changing student behavior. For example, studies have found that up to 40 percent of school suspensions are due to repeat offenders. Additionally, zero tolerance policies disproportionately affect minority students; one study found that black students receive significantly harsher punishments for first time offenses than white students do.
Threat Assessment: A Better Alternative?
Threat assessment is “ a structured group process used to evaluate the risk posed by a student or another person, typically as a response to an actual or perceived threat or concerning behavior.” Threat assessment uses a set of strategies or pathways to assess if a threat is credible, series, and likely to be carried out. Threat assessment, a common violence prevention approach for law enforcement, begins with an evaluation of the persons who may threaten harm, followed by an investigation designed to reduce violence.
The Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines (V-STAG), also referred to as the Virginia Model for Student Threat Assessment, is a specific model, which focuses on problems such as bullying, teasing, and other forms of student conflict. This model follows a seven-step decision tree, the first three of which constitute a triage process of investigating a reported threat. The next four steps guide the threat assessment team through more thorough assessment and response based on the seriousness of the threat.
A number of studies have focused on the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines (V-STAG), which is a specific method for schools to respondent to threats of violence without resorting to zero tolerance policies (See Cornell, et. al., 2004; Strong & Cornell, 2008; Cornell, Lorek, & Sheras, 2009; and Allen, Cornell & Fan 2012). Together, these studies found that V-STAG resulted in less suspensions and expulsions, less alternative school placements, less bullying infractions, increased use of mental health and counseling services, and, so far, have resulted in no threats being carried out to completion. This means that threat assessment in general, and the V-STAG model in particular, is more successful at keeping students in school than zero tolerance policies. It also suggests that threat assessment places a greater emphasis on mental health and bullying, and on getting troubled students the help they need. Further, the fact that none of these threats in the above mentioned studies were carried out to completion should be celebrated.
Based on the available evidence, threat assessment, and particularly V-STAG, is more effective than the status quo. Will threat assessment completely solve school violence and result in zero school shootings ever? Probably not. But overall, it is a more sound policy than zero tolerance policies, which have been criticized as draconian, racially-biased, and ineffective. In sum, threat assessment is a viable alternative to zero tolerance policies that are not effective at preventing school shootings and are failing our children in many other ways.
“APA Zero Tolerance task Force Report,” APA, http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.aspx.
Dewey Cornell, “Gun violence and mass shootings – myths, facts and solutions,” The Washington Post (June 11, 2014), http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/11/gun-violence-and-mass-shootings-myths-facts-and-solutions/.
Dewey G. Cornell, Anne Gregory, and Xitao Fan, “Reductions in Long-Term Suspensions Following Adoption of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines,” 95 NASSP Bulletin 3 (2011).
Dewey Cornell, Crystal Shin, and Angela Ciolfi, “Prevention v. Punishment: Threat Assessment, School Suspensions, and Racial Disparities,” Curry School of Education and Legal Aid Justice Center, (December 18, 2013), http://curry.virginia.edu/uploads/resourceLibrary/UVA_and_JustChildren_Report_-_Prevention_v._Punishment.pdf.
Dewey G. Cornell, Korrie Allen, and Xitao Fan, “A Randomized Controlled Study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in Kindergarten through Grade 12,” 41 School Psychology Review 1, 100-115 (2012).
Dewey Cornell, Peter Sheras, Anne Gregory, and Xitao Fan, “A Retrospective Study of School Safety Conditions in High Schools Using the Virginia Threat Assessment Guidelines Versus Alternative Approaches,” 24 School Psychology Quarterly 2, 119-129 (2009).
Dewey Cornell, Peter Sheras, Sebastian Kaplan, David McConville, Julea Douglass, Andrea Elkon, Lela McKnight, Christ Branson, and Joanna Cole, “Guidelines for Student Threat Assessment: Field-Test Findings,” School Psychology Review 4, 527-546 (2004).
Gwen M. Glew, MD, MPH, et. al., “Bullying and School Safety,” NCBI PubMed (January 2008), http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3839286/.
Ken Strong and Dewey Cornell, “Student Threat Assessment in Memphis City Schools: A Descriptive Report,” 34 Behavioral Disorders 1, 42-54 (2008).
Mark Follman, “America’s many fatal school shootings since Newtown,” Mother Jones (December 9, 2014), http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/fatal-school-shootings-data-since-sandy-hook-newtown.
Mitch van Gael, PhD, et. al., “Bullying and Weapon Carrying,” Journal of the American Medical Association (August 2014), http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1879724#Methods.
Natasja Sheriff, “Guns in schools: using threat assessments to prevent school violence,” Al Jazeera (January 28, 2015), http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/1/28/how-to-stop-school-shootings.html.
Randy Borum, et. al., “What Can Be Done About School Shootings? A Review of the Evidence,” 39 Educational Researcher 1, 28 (February 2010), available at: http://www.politico.com//story/2014/06/obama-gun-law-inaction-my-biggest-frustration-107667.html.
Rebecca Klien, “Zero-Tolerance Policies May Make Schools More Unsafe, Report Finds,” Huffington Post (January 3, 2014), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/03/school-zero-tolerance-policies_n_4538420.html.
“Report on the Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act In the State and Outlying Areas School Years 2005-06 and 2006-07,” US Department of Education, (September 2010), http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/gfsa/gfsarp100610.pdf
Russell J. Skiba, “Zero Tolerance, Zero Evidence: An Analysis of School Disciplinary Practices,” Indiana Education Policy Center, (2000), http://www.indiana.edu/~safeschl/ztze.pdf.
“School Safety Center,” State of Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, http://www.k12.wa.us/safetycenter/threat/default.aspx.
Stell Simonton, “Guns in Schools: Georgia has most school shootings since Sandy Hook,” Al Jazeera (January 29, 2015), http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/1/29/gun-lax-georgia-has-most-school-shootings-since-sandy-hook-massacre.html.
“Threat Assessment,” Virginia Youth Violence Project at the Curry School of Education, http://curry.virginia.edu/research/projects/threat-assessment.