Drills have been imbedded in the public school system for the past hundred + years. Fire drills were developed in response to catastrophic fires in Illinois and Ohio. Although they may have been scary at first, fire drills have become routine and students are more likely to be annoyed than afraid.
This is what some say will happen with lockdown drills and possibly active shooter drills. The belief is that the drills may seem scary now but eventually they will become routine and students will not be frightened by them.
I find it difficult to compare fire drills with active shooter drills. Most students are familiar with fire. They recognize fire. Some know how to prevent fire. Many know what to do if there is a fire. They are not afraid of fire.
I can’t say the same about students’ knowledge of active shooters, identification of threats or how to prevent targeted violence.
At this point, active shooter drills are like the “duck and cover drills” from the 1950s. Ineffective and frightening.
Instead of Duck and Cover, we have Run, Hide, Fight. None of which are helpful to students who can not dick, cover, run, hide or fight.
Both can be very traumatic for students, even when announced, depending on the intensity of the drill. No student should be going about their day when a siren blares or a lockdown is called – letting students know to run, hide fight or they will die. .
Students not knowing if would live or die for even a few minutes has resulted in lifelong consequences for some. Others are not bothered at all. Some are fearful in the moment but once the drill is over, they feel fine and don’t think twice about it. Others do not react until after the drill is complete. We don’t know the long term effects because we have not been preparing for active shooters long enough to know.
Many say it is unethical to trick students into believing that someone is on campus trying to kill them. Many say it is harmful. Some say the harm is worth it if it saves their lives later. Others believe that announcing the drills reduces harm. Others say announcing drills will not prepare students.
There is agreement that the the severity of harm is unknown.
Especially for students with disabilities. If a student has cognitive or intellectual disabilities, communication delays or difficulties in expressing thoughts and/or feelings, we don’t know how they are processing what is going on around them. They can’t tell us. We don’t know how this will affect them now or if it will “help them later”. Who determines whether or not to take that risk?
The nuclear attack never happened. The probability of being attacked by an active shooter varies depending on the source of information. Some statistics indicate a student has a higher probability of being struck by lightning, twice, than being involved in an active shooter attack at school. Others say that the probability is much higher. Most will not say due to the variation in population, gun laws, definition of gun violence or mass casualty event.
Drills or no drills, targeted violence can be prevented. Maybe that should be the focus moving froward, preventing attacks rather than responding to them.