Protecting the lives and safety of students and teachers is of the utmost importance to all members of the Trinity family. Head of Security Michael Keating has stated his intent to roll out a comprehensive security plan with drills and situations specific to “an intruder on campus”, although details have not yet been released. Keating prefers to characterize security under the overarching term “crisis management”, however acknowledges that his department are taking necessary precautions to specifically deter and mitigate active shooter scenarios.
Equally important is protecting those same students’ and teachers’ mental health and emotional well-being. Crucially, there are certain methods of “security” that do significantly more harm than good, having a profoundly negative impact on the mental health of teachers and students. More security is not intrinsically “better” because it necessitate s a trade-off, potentially harming the mental health of students. Active shooter training on campus communicates the message that our campus is unsafe, a message that is clearly not conducive to learning. Mental health should be the priority of any school administrator wanting to protect schools, as the vast majority of school shooters target their own school.
Active shooter training is a controversial topic but holds no widely accepted definition. It could be argued that Trinity already has degrees of active shooter training, lockdown drills for example. However, the general nature of the term should be cause for concern, opening the door for wildly unnecessary safety precautions that masquerade as benign “training.”
Generally speaking, there are two types of active shooter training: drills and training that involve firearms and safety precautions that do not.
Empirically, gun-related training causes a myriad of stress-related phenomena, experienced both by students and teachers.
“I felt more traumatized than trained,” a Pennsylvania teacher, who underwent active shooter drills, told Education Week magazine.
Active shooter drills are not only ineffective for certain individuals but for students and teachers as a whole.
“School security consultants and psychologists say…active-shooter training, overzealous methods, and techniques that encourage fighting back can lead to injuries, both physical and psychological,” according to Education Week reporter Evie Blad.
Trinity’s severe weather drills teach students to stay away from doors and windows, protect their heads, and take cover under desks and chairs. The location of an active shooter is often difficult to ascertain, preventing mass evacuation of students. As a result, it seems that Trinity students already have the understanding necessary to protect themselves non-violently, with no mention of active shooters ever being made.
Specifically repurposing this knowledge to apply to active shooter scenarios unnecessarily introduces elements of stress-related ailments shared among both teachers and students.
Keating’s security plan is still in the works, and making unfounded assumptions regarding its contents would be irresponsible. However, careful examination and consideration of the adverse side effects of any and all potential policies is necessary to ensure the safety of our school. And in the case of school security, less is most often more.
The lead editorial expresses the opinion of the Trinity Voice editorial staff. Please send comments to [email protected].