Rethinking School Safety: The Growing Call to Rethink Intruder Drills
When a fourth-grade teacher in Ohio recently shared her students’ reactions to an intruder drill, her story went viral. “One child asked if they’d need to hide under their desks forever. Another started crying, thinking it was real,” she wrote. While the drill was designed to prepare students for the unthinkable, the emotional fallout left her questioning: Are we doing more harm than good?
This teacher isn’t alone. Across the U.S., a growing number of parents, educators, and mental health professionals are urging schools to reconsider—or even eliminate—intruder drills. Their argument? While safety is paramount, the psychological toll on children may outweigh the benefits. Let’s unpack why this debate matters and explore alternatives that prioritize both physical safety and emotional well-being.
The Rise of Intruder Drills: A Well-Intentioned Response
Intruder drills, also known as lockdown or active shooter drills, became widespread after the 1999 Columbine High School tragedy. Today, 95% of U.S. public schools conduct some form of safety exercise, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. The goal is clear: equip students and staff with muscle memory to respond effectively during emergencies.
But over time, the nature of these drills has shifted. What once involved simple lockdown procedures now often includes hyper-realistic simulations. In some districts, actors portray armed intruders, blanks are fired, and students practice barricading doors with furniture. Proponents argue that realism increases preparedness. Critics, however, see a troubling trend.
The Hidden Cost of “Realism”
A 2021 study published in JAMA Network Open found that intruder drills correlated with increased anxiety, depression, and fear of death among students. Younger children, in particular, struggle to distinguish drills from real threats. Dr. Laura Gray, a child psychologist, explains: “Developmentally, kids under 12 don’t fully grasp hypothetical scenarios. To them, a drill isn’t practice—it’s a traumatic event they believe is happening now.”
Even teens aren’t immune. High schoolers interviewed by the National Education Association reported lingering distress, with some describing nightmares or panic attacks triggered by routine fire alarms. “Every drill makes me relive the Parkland shooting news footage,” said one Florida student. “I can’t focus in class afterward.”
The Case for Ending High-Intensity Drills
Organizations like the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) now advocate for less traumatic approaches. Their recommendations include:
1. Eliminating surprise drills: Giving advance notice reduces shock and allows teachers to frame exercises age-appropriately.
2. Avoiding sensory triggers: Removing simulated gunfire, masked intruders, or physical restraint scenarios.
3. Focusing on empowerment: Teaching practical skills (e.g., locking doors, locating exits) without dramatizing violence.
Some districts are already shifting policies. Maryland’s Howard County Public Schools, for instance, replaced graphic simulations with discussion-based training. “We teach kids to recognize exits and listen to adults—not to playact worst-case scenarios,” said a district spokesperson. Early data suggests this approach maintains readiness while reducing anxiety.
What Effective Alternatives Look Like
Critics of ending drills often ask: If not this, then what? Experts emphasize that school safety doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing choice. Here are research-backed alternatives gaining traction:
– Trauma-informed training: Educators learn to conduct drills with sensitivity. For example, using clear language like “safety practice” instead of “active shooter drill” and debriefing with students afterward.
– Multi-layered security: Combining door-locking protocols with threat-assessment teams, anonymous reporting systems, and anti-bullying programs.
– Community collaboration: Partnering with local law enforcement to design drills that align with developmental stages. In Vermont, police officers visit classrooms before drills to build trust and explain their role.
Perhaps most importantly, schools are investing in prevention. A 2023 U.S. Secret Service report found that 76% of school attackers exhibited warning signs beforehand. By training staff to identify and address risks early—such as social isolation or violent threats—schools can tackle root causes rather than just symptoms.
A Path Forward: Balancing Preparedness and Compassion
The push to end intruder drills isn’t about dismissing school safety. It’s about acknowledging that readiness and psychological safety aren’t mutually exclusive. As one Colorado principal put it: “We don’t teach swimming by throwing kids into the deep end. Why teach safety through trauma?”
Parents and educators can take actionable steps:
– Ask questions: What type of drills does your school use? Are they age-appropriate?
– Advocate for transparency: Ensure drills are announced and followed by mental health check-ins.
– Support holistic policies: Push for funding toward counselors, threat-assessment programs, and infrastructure upgrades (e.g., secure entryways).
Change is already happening. States like Virginia and Connecticut now mandate drill modifications to protect student mental health. Meanwhile, grassroots movements like NoMoreTraumaDrills continue to amplify voices of those directly impacted.
Ultimately, protecting kids from violence shouldn’t require sacrificing their sense of security in the process. By reimagining school safety through a lens of compassion, we can prepare students—without preying on their peace of mind.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Rethinking School Safety: The Growing Call to Rethink Intruder Drills