Rethinking School Safety: The Case Against Intruder Drills
In recent years, schools across the country have adopted intruder drills—also known as active shooter drills or lockdown drills—as a standard practice to prepare students and staff for potential emergencies. These exercises often involve simulated scenarios where classrooms lock doors, turn off lights, and practice hiding from an imaginary threat. While the intention behind these drills is to protect lives, a growing movement of parents, educators, and mental health professionals is urging schools to reconsider their approach. Critics argue that the psychological toll on children, coupled with a lack of evidence supporting their effectiveness, makes a compelling case to end intruder drills as we know them.
The Hidden Cost of Fear
Proponents of intruder drills often describe them as a “necessary evil,” but research suggests the “evil” part might outweigh the necessity. A 2020 study published in JAMA Network Open found that exposure to lockdown drills was associated with increased anxiety, depression, and stress in students—even when drills were announced in advance. Younger children, in particular, struggle to distinguish between drills and real danger. Stories abound of kids writing farewell notes to parents, wetting themselves during simulations, or developing long-term phobias of school.
“We’re essentially teaching children that their classroom—a place meant to nurture curiosity and growth—could turn into a battlefield at any moment,” says Dr. Laura Thompson, a child psychologist specializing in trauma. “For some students, especially those with preexisting anxiety or trauma histories, these drills can retraumatize them or create new fears.”
The issue isn’t just about immediate distress. Chronic stress in childhood has been linked to developmental setbacks, including impaired memory, difficulty concentrating, and weakened immune systems. Critics argue that trading short-term preparedness for long-term mental health risks is a flawed equation.
Questionable Effectiveness
Beyond the emotional impact, there’s little data to prove that intruder drills save lives. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) analyzed 250 active shooter incidents between 2000 and 2017 and found no correlation between drill participation and survival rates. In fact, some experts warn that overly scripted drills might create a false sense of security.
Real-world attacks are chaotic and unpredictable. For example, the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, occurred despite the school having conducted multiple intruder drills. Students and teachers reported confusion during the attack, with some mistaking real gunfire for another drill. This raises questions: Are drills fostering vigilance, or are they normalizing violence to the point of complacency?
Security consultant Mark Anderson, who trains schools in crisis response, notes that many drills are poorly designed. “Locking kids in a room for 20 minutes without context doesn’t teach them how to think critically during a crisis,” he says. “Worse, some schools use mock gunfire or role-players posing as shooters, which can escalate fear without improving readiness.”
Alternatives to High-Intensity Drills
If traditional intruder drills are causing harm, what’s the alternative? Many advocates propose shifting toward trauma-informed safety practices. For instance:
– Age-Appropriate Training: Tailoring discussions to developmental stages. Younger students might learn basic “safe spots” without detailed scenarios, while older students can engage in calm, solution-focused dialogues.
– Focus on Prevention: Addressing root causes of violence, such as bullying and social isolation, through mental health resources and conflict resolution programs.
– Soft Drills: Conducting low-stress exercises, like reviewing evacuation routes or ensuring classroom doors lock properly, without simulating an attack.
– Staff Training: Equipping teachers and administrators with emergency response skills, thereby reducing the burden on students to “perform” during drills.
Some schools have already embraced these changes. In Maryland, for example, several districts replaced high-intensity drills with “emergency preparedness weeks” that blend safety education with wellness activities, such as mindfulness exercises and peer support workshops. Early feedback suggests students feel more empowered and less frightened.
The Role of Policy and Community
Ending intruder drills requires systemic change. Parent-led organizations like Safe and Sound Schools are lobbying for state-level policies to limit or reform drills. In 2022, Oregon passed a law prohibiting unannounced drills and simulations involving fake weapons or blood—a move celebrated by mental health advocates. Similar legislation is under review in New York and California.
However, not everyone agrees. Some parents and policymakers argue that dismissing drills entirely ignores the grim reality of school shootings. “It’s unfair to say drills don’t work when they’re one piece of a larger safety puzzle,” says Linda Sanchez, a school board member in Texas. “The answer isn’t to abandon preparedness but to make drills less terrifying.”
This middle-ground approach includes giving parents advance notice, offering opt-out options, and debriefing with students after drills to address their concerns.
A Path Forward
The debate over intruder drills reflects a broader societal tension: How do we protect children without robbing them of their sense of safety? While there’s no one-size-fits-all answer, the conversation is pushing schools to innovate. For example, some districts are investing in AI-powered monitoring systems to detect threats earlier or partnering with local law enforcement to improve response times.
Ultimately, the goal should be to create environments where students feel physically and emotionally secure. This means listening to their voices. In a 2021 survey by the National Association of School Psychologists, 70% of middle and high school students reported feeling “more anxious than prepared” after drills. As one eighth-grader bluntly put it: “Why are we practicing for shootings instead of stopping them from happening?”
Perhaps the most powerful argument against intruder drills is that they normalize a reality no child should accept. By reimagining school safety, we can shift from preparing for failure to investing in prevention—and give students the peace of mind they deserve.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Rethinking School Safety: The Case Against Intruder Drills