One of the more troubling recent news stories in education surfaced early last spring, when it was reported that teachers at an elementary school in Monticello, Indiana, had been shot with pellet guns during an active-shooter drill. If you're in education, you almost certainly remember the story: During one part of the drill, teachers were taken (in shifts) into a room, told to get on the floor, and then "shot" execution-style. Some of the educators were left with welts and bleeding wounds, not to mention lingering fears and confusion.
The story, which made national headlines, drew attention to similar experiences in other schools and sparked concerns about whether schools' attempts to ramp up security in the wake of recent shootings had gone too far. While no one would dispute the need for schools to take student security more seriously, it was hard not to wonder: Was this level of "reality" necessary? Were we turning schools into military compounds? Were we creating even greater trauma for teachers and students? And were such security-"hardening" activities even effective in making schools safer?
For a Whole Child education organization like ASCD, such questions are hardly academic. Ensuring that students are safe is one of the five tenets of ASCD's Whole Child framework. (The others are healthy, engaged, supported, and challenged.) But in the context of the framework, student safety is defined more broadly—or more holistically—than is often practiced. While the Whole Child indicators for safe schools include ensuring that buildings and grounds are secure and meet safety standards, they also highlight the importance of students' emotional safety, developmental well-being, and sense of belonging and self-worth.
In a sense, then, you might see this issue of Educational Leadership on "Making School a Safe Place" as a whole child-oriented response to recent trends in school safety. The articles take seriously the urgent need to ensure students are physically safe in schools (particularly in light of recent events and ongoing legislative inaction), but they also look at students' broader security needs. Indeed, one message of the issue is that attending to students' emotional and developmental needs is what creates truly safe places for teaching and learning.
In his survey of principals' heightened concerns over school shootings, for example, UCLA researcher John Rogers argues that, despite their often heroic efforts to keep students safe, most school leaders have focused on a relatively "narrow set of [campus security-related] strategies for preventing gun violence at their schools." Highlighting the need for more relationship- and well-being-centered approaches, Rogers notes that "physical barriers alone do not address the underlying conditions that lead to school shootings." In a similar vein, Nancy Rappaport, Meredith Gansner, and Lois T. Flaherty discuss ways to re-envision the school threat-assessment process—a central component of many school-safety plans—as a vehicle to enhance supports for troubled students and identify problems in a school's culture. Deepening such protocols and supports, as special education experts Timothy J. Landrum, Chris A. Sweigart, and Lauren W. Collins write in a separate piece, "may well be better uses of resources than more extreme, expensive measures like installing bulletproof glass or instituting active shooter drills." Nor, as these authors suggest, should our notions of school safety be confined to preventing shootings, important as that concern is. Other articles in this issue offer thoughtful and actionable ideas for providing support for students suffering from trauma (Minahan & Platt); creating inclusive and empowering environments for students with disabilities or other differences (d'Erizans, Jung and Bibbo & Ciuffo); understanding the nuances of cyberbullying (Englander); helping students regulate emotions and feel valued (Armstrong & Quaglia and Brait); and attending to teachers' mental health (Seton). For teachers and students alike, school safety is a multi-dimensional issue. And as school security experts Christine Eith and Kenneth Trump suggest in their online exclusive, that's something schools need to take into account even—or perhaps especially—when designing preparedness exercises. Reflect & Discuss
➛ How does your school respond when a student makes a threat of violence? What usually happens to a student who makes such a threat?
➛ Does the safety assessment procedure the authors describe seem like it would be helpful for dealing with students in your school who make threats—and their families? Does your school have anything like this in place? If not, who might you approach to talk about putting such a procedure in place?
➛ Have you felt external pressure to make your school less vulnerable to a school shooting? Have you taken any of the measures described in this article, or similar measures?
➛ Do you think these measures have made your school safer? Have they made it feel safer?
➛ Do you find students are fearful about gun violence? How have you responded when a student shares this fear with you?
➛ As Minahan writes, "Students can't learn if they don't feel safe." What small changes are you willing to try in your classroom to foster a sense of safety among traumatized students?
➛ Think about one of your students who struggles with behavior. How could you help him "switch the channel" when he is upset?
➛ Do you routinely share—and exchange ideas about—what's working with a traumatized student? How could you better improve lines of communication across the whole support team?
➛ What's one simple tactic you have for diffusing a difficult situation with a student?
➛ Think of a student at your school dealing with trauma. Would any of Platt's recommendations work to help that student?
➛ How can you help your school to become more welcoming and supportive to students with trauma?
➛ Have you ever had your values or assumptions challenged by the needs of a student? How did this change you as an educator?
➛ Can you think of longstanding practices or conventions in your classroom or school that may alienate gender-nonconforming or other marginalized students?
➛ Ciuffo says his experiences accommodating two transgender students changed his thinking on school safety. What do you think he means by this?
