Abstract
This work offers an assessment and recording of the problem of threats and injuries from weapons to teenagers on school grounds based on official statistics from the past decade and the decade before that. The issue has significant social and moral implications and requires comprehensive intervention by relevant authorities. Given the widespread safety concerns among teenagers, the disappointing statistics clearly demonstrate the need for attention to this matter. Consequently, the work provides a detailed analysis of statistical data, reviews key scientific works in the field, and proposes recommendations for solving the problem based on the evidence provided.
Keywords: weapon, injuries, threats, school, safety.
Introduction
The issue of school safety is one of the critical issues in the context of the nation. Unfortunately, despite declining statistics over time, as of 2013, nearly 7% of students still experience threats or injuries involving weapons on school property (Robers et al., 2015, p. 118). This issue raises concern in society, as there remains a threat to the physical safety and emotional well-being of senior students who are brought up in this learning environment. The frequency of these incidents is relatively high, while the nature of the problem can be assessed with the percentage of accidents, murders, and suicides, which has a non-zero value in the same years statistics (Robers et al., 2015, p. 112). Intervention by policymakers, gun control stakeholders, and educational institutions is essential in the context of collaboration and comprehensive action.
The initial assessment of the problem should focus on existing prevention programs and the reasons leading to such incidents. Factors contributing to threats may include bullying, gang activity, mental health issues, access to guns, or social influences. Each of these reasons is the area of responsibility of different authorized institutions. Finally, assessing the effectiveness of existing prevention or proactive measures can lead to potential recommendations and solutions to reduce these statistics. Information from this research can then be used to improve existing policies and procedures, ensuring that schools have the most effective tools to prevent and respond to such incidents.
Analysis
Classifications undertaken in academia and statistics typically focus on demographic and geographic determinants for further analysis. If the analyzed sample is ranked by state, researchers often propose differentiation by the communities in which the schools are located: urban, suburban, and rural (Peguero et al., 2020; Robers et al., 2015). This practice is explained, firstly, by the difference in resources allocated by local authorities to protect schools from violence.
It is natural that in areas more remote from the city, the problem of financing is most acute (Peguero et al., 2020). At the same time, security practices, including zero-tolerance policies, profiling, and physical security measures, often cause significant collateral damage that does not solve the problem but aggravates it (Limber & Kowalski, 2020). Research shows that such actions, including lockdowns or active shooter drills, cause additional harm to children, regardless of geographic region (Limber & Kowalski, 2020; Peguero et al., 2020). Statistics partially support this thesis – percentages rarely deviate significantly from the national average (Robers et al., 2015, p. 118). Consequently, the primary demographic characteristics of the problem or the territorial location of individual cases rarely provide essential information.
However, some studies try to refute this thesis: first, it is crucial to assess the evolution of the problem across children’s grades. The threat of violence changes from homicide and weapon use to a purely physical focus from first to ninth grade (Burnette et al., 2020). At the same time, older children have more opportunities to move from word to action – the actual use of weapons for threats, despite the overall decrease in statistics by 2019, is still about 5% nationwide (Jewett et al., 2021).
This study sought to find a significant difference by race: children of color were more likely to come to school with weapons after negative similar experiences as victims of similar threats (Jewett et al., 2021). Notably, schools that marketed themselves as safer had a higher percentage of white boys carrying guns (Jewett et al., 2021). Accordingly, this issue should be assessed free of any prejudice within the framework of demographic characteristics, except for the age of the students.
The psychological aspects of the problem concerning children become much more critical. The predisposition to own a weapon is dictated primarily by the feeling of insecurity among high school students, as one of the fundamental human instincts (Mukherjee et al., 2022). Students choose different strategies to cope with this feeling—many simply skip school, but others choose more aggressive methods and look for opportunities to acquire weapons, even firearms (Mukherjee et al., 2022). Experience of injury or threat caused by the use of weapons, as well as participation in physical fights, are the main prerequisites for the occurrence of weapons in a student in the future (Mukherjee et al., 2022). As a consequence, the root of the issue lies in similar problems of the past, and their eradication requires unique strategies and preventive programs.
At the moment, various practices are being considered to limit the access of minors to weapons, in addition to legislative mechanisms that require additional support. Proactive measures include, but are not limited to, arming teachers, but such a drastic step would increase the number of guns in schools and create the potential for even greater danger (Flannery et al., 2021). The initiative will require additional monitoring measures, qualifications of school personnel, and training, which in turn requires limited finances and resources in rural schools (Peguero et al., 2020). Less radical measures include increasing attention to the role of student mental health, enhancing the social competence of professionals, and implementing interdisciplinary threat assessment protocols (Flannery et al., 2021).
Research shows these measures are effective, but the problem is that comprehensive implementation is not carried out in every educational institution (Cornell, 2020). In contrast, schools that create threat risk assessment teams and use the most humane, non-violent strategies show better safety outcomes and positive school climates (Cornell, 2020). Considering the still non-zero statistics regarding weapons threats, such practices should be extrapolated to the entire country, regardless of the cost of implementation resources.
Involving a medical point of view allows for a deeper look at the causes of the problem that leads to threats. The range of experiences students have that undermine their sense of safety in an educational environment is broad and includes microaggressions, mental illness, and international acts of verbal or cyber cruelty (Cohen, 2021). In addition, gray area emotional experiences, harassment and rape, and witnessing suicides, assaults, and even natural disasters also contribute to students’ unstable behavior (Cohen, 2021). Some of these causes are beyond the control of even specialists, but proactive interventions have proven evidence for individual and community health. Considering all types of factors requires time, which is often taken away from the direct educational process, but given the potential for danger, this need is justified.
If the source of aggression in a given problem is clearly defined, then the direction has different goals. Research shows that threats may be used by adolescents not only against other students but also against staff, including teachers (Maeng et al., 2020). It is where initiatives like arming teachers arise, since the safety issue extends beyond children in this regard (Flannery et al., 2021).
Moreover, the study by Maeng et al. (2020) found that 15% of threats were directed at peers, versus 85% directed at others. When making comprehensive recommendations and developing policies, the safety of school personnel should also be taken into account since psychological problems in high school students can develop due to academic problems, and teachers become the targets of aggression in this case (Cohen, 2021). As a consequence, the decrease in statistics from 2003 to 2013 in the sample under consideration is the result of the work of many authorities implementing preventive measures. However, the diversity of determinants and factors of threats involving the use of weapons requires continued consistent and united efforts.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Solving the problem of the threat of weapons in schools requires a comprehensive and careful approach without implementing radical measures, such as arming staff. The most effective methods are creating a unique risk assessment team, focusing on the psychological health of students and staff, and education about such activities within the framework of consequences and countermeasures. Such initiatives often run into financial and resource constraints, especially for suburban or rural schools. It is in the authorities’ interests to prioritize this problem and solve it in advance, preventing psychological and physical harm and ensuring safety.
Involving specialists requires appropriate classification and experience, knowledge of cultural characteristics, and approach to children, especially high school students. Relying on medical research will allow looking for problems in a wide range of potential triggers, minimizing the risks of new threats in every possible way. It is important to work not only with children but also with school staff, who may also receive threats with weapons. A values-based approach must be fundamentally applied to eradicate the chain reaction of feelings of insecurity. A clear example is those in charge, such as authorities, politicians, psychologists, and educational workers, who make appropriate efforts to achieve the goal.
This value orientation aligns with current trends toward creating inclusive environments that encourage respect for every group member. Student demographics other than age are not critical in assessing these types of threats (Robers et al., 2015, pp. 21-22). As a result, respect, as a fundamental value, can be one of the most accessible proactive measures. Showing respect from students to other students and teachers, regardless of the other person’s race, gender, or interests, reduces the risk of even microaggressions that can escalate into crimes (Cohen, 2021).
The comprehensive work of responsible authorities to ensure safety is also a manifestation of respect for the educational process of students. Against the backdrop of the efforts made, children will take an example from the actions of those in power. If the activity is insufficient or negligent, it will be implicitly perceived as a disrespectful attitude and cultivate the seeds of future crimes in the psyche of schoolchildren.
References
Burnette, A. G., Konold, T., & Cornell, D. (2020). Grade-level distinctions in student threats of violence. Journal of School Violence, 19(3), 323-335.
Cohen, J. (2021). School safety and violence: Research and clinical understandings, trends, and improvement strategies. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 18(3), 252-263.
Cornell, D. G. (2020). Threat assessment as a school violence prevention strategy. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(1), 235-252.
Flannery, D. J., Fox, J. A., Wallace, L., Mulvey, E., & Modzeleski, W. (2021). Guns, school shooters, and school safety: What we know and directions for change. School Psychology Review, 50(2-3), 237-253.
Jewett, P. I., Gangnon, R. E., Kafka, J., Areba, E. M., Malecki, K., & Borowsky, I. W. (2021). Weapon carrying among boys in US schools by race and/or ethnicity: 1993–2019. Pediatrics, 148(1).
Limber, S. P., & Kowalski, R. M. (2020). How schools often make a bad situation worse. International Journal on Child Maltreatment: Research, Policy and Practice, 3(2), 211-228.
Maeng, J. L., Malone, M., & Cornell, D. (2020). Student threats of violence against teachers: Prevalence and outcomes using a threat assessment approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 87.
Mukherjee, S., Taleb, Z. B., & Baiden, P. (2022). Locked, loaded, and ready for school: the association of safety concerns with weapon-carrying behavior among adolescents in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(9-10), NP7751-NP7774.
Peguero, A. A., Yost, L., Ripepi, M., & Johnson, K. (2020). Weapons at school: Examining the significance of place. Journal of School Violence, 19(1), 77-92.
Robers, S., Zhang, A., Morgan R. E. & Musu-Gillette, L. (2015). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2014. DIANE Publishing.