BY KENNETH S. TRUMP
Death threats, hit lists and "I'm going to kill you"
comments by students must be taken seriously. Administrators
cannot take the risks associated with ignoring such threats,
but at the same time, they also want to avoid overreacting
or creating a panic.
How can school leaders effectively evaluate and manage
student threats in a balanced and rational manner?
A number of school safety consultants have created
checklists, profiles and even computerized software designed
for use in evaluating student threats. The problem with
using checklists of characteristics or individual
personality traits is that administrators are not likely to
get an accurate read or the best direction for handling
every threat scenario. Each student and threat situation is
unique, and a one-size-fits-all approach can lead to faulty
evaluations.
Sizing Up Threats
Still, some important lessons have been learned in assessing
student threats. These include:
* No particular look or appearance is characteristic of
every potential violent offender;
* The presence of a threat in itself does not guarantee that
violence will occur nor does the absence of a threat in
itself guarantee that violence will not occur.
* Although offenders may not communicate their threat
directly to the target of their intended violence, those
involved in school shootings frequently have shared their
intentions with someone they know, typically other students.
* The acts committed by high-profile violent school
offenders do not appear to be the results of their acting on
impulse, but instead appear to be planned and organized.
Most high-profile cases suggest these acts were the result
of a progression of deteriorating events and/or untreated
depression. Educators therefore need to focus on the
behavior and thinking processes of threatening students
rather than focusing on who they are or appear to be.
Assessment Questions
Administrators should develop a set of questions to help
them gather as much information as possible to assess
threats. The answers should help multidisciplinary
evaluation teams better gauge each unique situation.
Questions may include:
* What was the motivation of the threat and the context in
which it was made?
* What was communicated, how was it communicated and what
was its intensity and detail?
* Has the person previously engaged in planning or
committing violent acts, and/or engaged in threatening,
menacing, harassing, stalking or similar behavior? If so,
has this behavior increased in frequency and/or intensity?
* Does the person making the threat have a plan? Does it
include specific steps or supportive details? Does the
person have the ability and tools to carry out the threat?
* Has the threat maker shown an unusual interest in
violence, weapons, self-abuse, suicide, abuse of animals or
other progressions of violent behavior? Has the person shown
an interest in others who have committed such acts and how
they did so?
* Does the threat maker display signs of emotional
detachment and, if so, to what degree and has there been
progressively increased detachment?
* Does the threat maker have undiagnosed and/or untreated
mental illnesses or emotional disturbances such as
depression, hallucinations, feelings of desperation and/or
persecution?
* Have there been major stressors in the life of the threat
maker? Does the person have a social support system in and
outside of school? What is the person's willingness to seek
help?
Information should be gathered from as many people as
possible who know the threat maker and the circumstances
surrounding the threat. Accurate information and adults who
know their students are two of the best threat assessment
resources.
Management Procedures
All threats must be treated seriously and a standard,
rational protocol should exist for assessing, investigating
and documenting threats. Written statements should be
obtained from threat makers, witnesses and the targets of
threats. The actions taken by administrators to address each
threat should also be documented.
Administrators should develop and use questions similar to
those above to evaluate each threat, rather than relying on
checklists of profiling characteristics or personality
traits. A review of the threat maker's past disciplinary and
psychological record should be made as a part of the
evaluation process. In addition to disciplinary action
consistent with school policies, police also should be
involved when appropriate.
The key is for administrators to treat threats seriously
without overreacting or panicking. Implementation of a
standard assessment protocol and proper staff training will
help administrators reach that goal.
Kenneth Trump is president of National School Safety and
Security Services, P.O. Box 110123, Cleveland, Ohio 44111.
E-mail:
kentrump@aol.com
