main points traumatic effect of school shootings

May 16, 2018

Dewey Cornell, Ph.D. 1

School Climate and Safety


Dewey Cornell, Ph.D.Curry School of Education

University of Virginia

434-924-8929Email: [email protected]

Website: youthviolence.edschool.virginia.edu

Dewey G. Cornell, Ph. D.• Professor of Education in the Curry

School of Education at the University of Virginia.

• Director of the UVa Youth Violence Project and faculty associate of the Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy.

• Trained as forensic clinical psychologist

• Lead author of Authoritative School Climate Survey

• Developed Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines

Main Points 1. School violence is a small part of the larger

problem of gun violence. Schools are safer than the public perceives.

2. The fear of school violence has stimulated harmful consequences in school discipline and security.

3. We need a multi-tiered approach to school violence prevention, including:

• Safe and supportive school climate

• School threat assessment

Traumatic Effect of School Shootings

School shootings are so traumatic that they convince everyone that we extensive schools are unsafe and require extensive security measures.

We need both recovery from trauma and a factual analysis of the best way to prevent more shootings.

May 16, 2018



Annual Gun Toll- 33,000 deaths- 67,000 injuries100,000 total

275 Shootings per day

APA report is available at http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/gun-violence-prevention.aspxShooting deaths from: National Vital Statistics http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/dataRestriction_inj.htmlShooting injuries from: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html

5 yrs x 100,000 =

500,000 outside of schools

For every shooting in a school, there are 1,600+ outside of

schools

If schools were impregnable, it would only stop .06% of

shootings

Less than 1 tenth of 1 percent

The real problem is gun violence,

not school violence.

March for Our Lives

Youth from across the country emphasize the gun violence they experienced both in and out of school.

May 16, 2018



2150

1965

1651

1478

1338 1354 1361 1379 1365

1479

1661 1641

15051426

1303

1143 1127

1014 1002

1110

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Homicides of School‐Aged Youth

Sources: Kaplan, Jacob. Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data: Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976‐2015. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter‐university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2017‐06‐01. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100699V1. Data on 22 homicides per year in schools based on years 1994‐95 to 2013‐14 in Zhang, A., Wang, K., Zhang, J., & Oudekerk, B. A. (2017). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2016. NCES 2017‐064/NCJ 250650. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017064.pdf

Average of 22 homicides per year in schools Average of 1,480 homicides outside of schools Homicides outside of school are 67x more likely

9847

4455

1209

629

533

492

288

211

49

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Residence

Street

Parking lot/garage

Outdoors

Restaurant/bar

Store/gas station

Public building/business

Hotel/motel

School

2005‐2010 Homicides in 37 States

Restaurants are 10x more dangerous than schools.

Homes are 200x more dangerous than schools.

Source: FBI National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) database. Selected locations. School includes colleges. See Nekvasil & Cornell (2015) Psychology of Violence, 5, 236-245.

Why the Fear of School Violence Matters

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-11-14/schools-boosting-security-spending-after-newtown-massacreHigh Security Military Entrances

(DeAngelis, Brent, & Ianni, 2011)

School security measures are expensive and deprive schools of resources that could be allocated to preventive measures such as anti-bullying programs and counseling services.

May 16, 2018



The Expansion of Zero Tolerance

From No Guns to• No Toy Guns• No Nail clippers• No Plastic utensils• No Finger-pointing• No Jokes• No Drawings• No Rubber band

shootingNo accidental violations

3.3 Million Suspensions Per Year Fuel the School to Prison Pipeline

Latest available data April 2018https://ocrdata.ed.gov/StateNationalEstimations/Estimations_2013_14

We should prevent shootings rather than

simply prepare for them.

Prevention means“to keep something from

happening”

Crisis response is not prevention.

A crisis occurs when prevention has failed.

May 16, 2018



Photo of gunman

Prevention must start before the gunman is

at your door.

There are opportunities for prevention years

before the shooting starts and leading up to the day it happens.

IIIIntensive

Interventions

IIAt-Risk Students

ISchoolwide Prevention

Three Tiers of Prevention in Schools

Prevention begins with a safe and

supportive school climate for all

students.

Virginia Secondary School Climate Study

• Surveys of students and teachers

• 700+ middle and high schools

• In collaboration• Virginia Department of Education

• Virginia Department of Criminal Justice ServicesThis project was supported by Grant #2012-JF-FX-0062 awarded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

May 16, 2018



What is Authoritative School Climate?

Developmental research has found that authoritative parents, who are both demanding and warm with their children, are more effective than authoritarian parents who are demanding but cold and permissive parents who are warm but not demanding.

Our research suggests that schools are most effective when teachers are demanding and warm, too.

Four types of schools?

Structure

Low Support High

Authoritarian Authoritative

Disengaged Permissive

Low

S

tru

ctu

re

H

igh

2.6

2.6

3

2.8

2.4

2.7

2.6

2.7

The punishment for breaking schoolrules is the same for all students

Students at this school only getpunished when they deserve it

Students are treated fairlyregardless of their race or ethnicity

Students are suspended withoutgood reason (reverse scored)

The adults at this school are toostrict (reverse scored)

The school rules are fair

When students are accused of doingsomething wrong, they get a

chance to explain it

Overall STRUCTURE

1-Strongly Disagree 2-Disagree 3-Agree 4-Strongly Agree

Discipline - Strict, but Fair

2.9

3.1

2.7

2.8

2.9

3

3.1

3.4

3

Most teachers and other adults at thisschool care about all students

Most teachers and other adults at thisschool want all students to do well

Most teachers and other adults at thisschool listen to what students have to…

Most teachers and other adults at thisschool treat students with respect

There are adults at this school I couldtalk with if I had a personal problem

If I tell a teacher that someone isbullying me, the teacher will do…

I am comfortable asking my teachersfor help with my school work

There is at least one teacher or anotheradult at this school who really wants…

Overall SUPPORT

1-Strongly Disagree 2-Disagree 3-Agree 4-Strongly Agree

Support - Caring and Willing to Help

Disciplinary Structure and Support established in multi-level structural factor analysis

Konold et al (2014), Multilevel multi-informant structure of the Authoritative School Climate Survey, School Psychology Quarterly, 29, 238-255.

27

46

52

73

0

20

40

60

80

Low Str/ Low SuppDisengaged

Hi Str/ Low SuppAuthoritarian

Lo Str/Hi SuppPermissive

Hi Str/Hi SuppAuthoritative

School Percentile in

Student En

gagemen

t

Student Engagement

May 16, 2018



2013-14 school year

May 16, 2018



Authoritative School Climate

• Higher student engagement• Less teasing, bullying, and sexual

harassment• Teachers report less aggression by

students• Less fighting and weapon carrying• Lower suspension rates

Authoritative School Climate

Findings consistent across schools varying in:

• School size• Student poverty %• Minority students %• Urbanicity

School threat assessment is an

alternative to zero tolerance.

The FBI, Secret Service, and Dept of Education recommended a threat assessment approach nearly 20 years ago.

What is Threat Assessment?

Threat assessment is a problem-solving approach to violence prevention that involves assessment and intervention with students who have threatened violence in some way.

Threat Assessment is a violence prevention strategy.

1. Family members, friends, or others seek help when concerned about someone in distress or who is threatening violence.

2. The threat assessment team evaluates the seriousness of the threat.

3. The team initiates assistance to address the underlying problem, conflict or need. In the most serious cases, protective action is taken.

May 16, 2018



Threat Assessment Takes a Problem-Solving Approach

The team takes action based on the seriousness of the threat.• What protective action, if any, is needed?

• What problem stimulated the threat?

• What can be done to resolve that problem?

•Threat assessment must be adapted for schools.

•Recognize developmental issues in children, social context of school.

•Goal is not punishment but successful education and healthy development.

Available from amazon.com

Accurate Threat Assessment Avoids 2 Errors …

1.Over-reaction

Accurate Threat Assessment Avoids 2 Errors …

2. Under-Reaction

Continuum of Threats

• Warning of impending violence• Attempts to intimidate or frighten• Thrill of causing a disruption• Attention-seeking, boasting• Fleeting expressions of anger• Jokes• Figures of speech

Tran

sien

t

S

ub

stan

tive

Key Point

In a threat assessment, we try to determine why a student made a threat, and therefore how we can prevent the threat from being carried out.

May 16, 2018



Research on Threat Assessment

1. Cornell, D., Sheras, P. Kaplan, S., McConville, D., Douglass, J., Elkon, A., McKnight, L., Branson, C., & Cole, J. (2004). Guidelines for student threat assessment: Field-test findings. School Psychology Review, 33, 527-546.

2. Kaplan, S., & Cornell, D. (2005). Threats of violence by students in special education. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 107-119.3. Strong, K., & Cornell, D. (2008). Student threat assessment in Memphis City Schools: A descriptive report. Behavioral Disorders,

34, 42-54. 4. Allen, K., Cornell, D., Lorek, E., & Sheras, P. (2008). Response of school personnel to student threat assessment training. School

Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19, 319-332. 5. Cornell, D., Sheras, P., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2009). A retrospective study of school safety conditions in high schools using the

Virginia Threat Assessment Guidelines versus alternative approaches. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 119-129. 6. Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2011). Reductions in long-term suspensions following adoption of the Virginia Student

Threat Assessment Guidelines. Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 95, 175-194.7. Cornell, D., Allen, K., & Fan, X. (2012). A randomized controlled study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in

grades K-12. School Psychology Review, 41, 100-115.8. Cornell, D. & Lovegrove, P. (2015). Student threat assessment as a method for reducing student suspensions. In D. Losen (Ed.).

Closing the School Discipline Gap: Research for Policymakers. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.9. Nekvasil, E., Cornell, D. (2015). Student threat assessment associated with positive school climate in middle schools. Journal of

Threat Assessment and Management 2, 98-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam000003810. Burnette, A. G., Datta, P. & Cornell, D. G. (2017). The distinction between transient and substantive student threats. Journal of

Threat Assessment and Management. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-56103-00111. Cornell, D., Maeng, J., Burnette, A.G., Jia, Y., Huang, F., Konold, T., Datta, P., Malone, M., Meyer, P. (2017). Student threat

assessment as a standard school safety practice: Results from a statewide implementation study. School Psychology Quarterly. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000220

12. Cornell, D., Maeng, J., Huang, F., Shukla, K., & Konold, T. (in press). Racial/ethnic parity in disciplinary consequences using student threat assessment. School Psychology Review.

Research on Threat Assessment

1. 99% of threats not carried out.2. Only 1% expelled, 1% arrested.3. Suspension rates decreased.4. Racial disparities reduced or absent. 5. Counseling used more often.6. More positive school climate.

Virginia mandates K-12 threat assessment in 2013

Student Threat Assessment as a Safe and Supportive Prevention Strategy

4-year project (2015-2018)

This project supported by Grant #NIJ 2014-CK-BX-0004 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

Selected sample of 1,865 threat assessment cases reported by 785 Virginia public schools during the 2014-15 school year

Percentages for 1,865 threat cases from 785 schools. One case can involve more than one type of threat.

33

23

21

18

13

5

1

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Unspecified

Kill

Use weapon

Hit, beat

Stab, cut

Bomb

Arson

Sexual

Types of Threats (%)n= 1,865

May 16, 2018



Percentages for 1,8765 threat cases from 785 schools. One case can involve more than one victim.

68

15

13

7

4

0 20 40 60

Student

Teacher

Whole school/group

Staff/administrator

Other

Intended Victim (%)n = 1,865

97.7

2.6

0.7

0 20 40 60 80 100

Threat NotAttempted

Attempted andAverted

Threat CarriedOut

Threat Outcomes (%)n = 1,865 cases

Percentages for 1,865 threat cases from 785 schools. One case can involve more than one outcome.

53

44

16

5

3

3

1

1

0 10 20 30 40 50

Reprimand

Suspension out of school

Suspension in school

Expulsion reduced to…

Detention after school

Placed in juvenile detention

Arrested

Expelled

Disciplinary Outcome (%)n= 1,865

84

8

5

1

2

0 20 40 60 80

No Change

Transferred to alternativeschool

Homebound instruction

Transferred to regularschool

Other

School Placement Outcome (%)n = 1,865 cases

No statistically significant differences for White vs Black or White vs Hispanic students

45

15

0.5 0.7 0.8

46

18

1.4 1.2 0.7

43

16

1.5 0.8 00

10

20

30

40

50

Suspension Change inPlacement

Expulsion Arrest Incarceration

Percent of Studen

ts

No Racial Differences in Disciplinary Outcomes for Students Receiving a Threat Asesssment

n = 785 schools

White

Black

Hispanic

Key Points about School Threat Assessment

1.Must be adapted for schools.2.Avoid criminalizing students.3. Provide help where needed.4.Need systematic training and

research to maintain effectiveness.

May 16, 2018



Concluding Points

1. School violence is a small part of a larger problem of gun violence.

2. Schools are much safer than the public thinks.

3. Prevention begins with a positive school climate.

4. Threat assessment can help schools respond to student threats.

http://youthviolence.edschool.virginia.edu

main points traumatic effect of school shootings

Documents