The following op-ed is written by our friend and colleague Paul Jablon and explains why we need a holistic, culture-based view of school safety, rather than the “magical thinking” that school police fix all problems.
Over the past two weeks there have been articles and letters in the Recorder, and much discussion on social media about safety in Greenfield schools. Although there was talk about physical fights and bullying, and reference to national gun violence, little was focused on what school safety really means, and virtually no reference to how schools achieve it. As an educator of 46 years let me speak about safe schools.
In a school with a safe environment, bullying is rare. There are few, if any, physical confrontations. Many conflicts are avoided, but students who get into them have the skills to resolve the conflicts in a responsible way. Students know there is at least one adult who feels personally responsible for them, and that other students will also not be passive bystanders if bullying occurs. If a student does harm another student, there is a process in place in which a trained adult will sit with the two students and work toward proactive relationship building, and restitution if needed, rather than punishing them. This is a culture where there is buy-in from students, teachers, parents, staff, and administrators. This is a positive proactive process of creating safety, rather than a reactive after-the-fact punitive method, so students attend and learn.
How does a school or district create this culture? In the first school where I taught, I couldn’t even imagine such a place. We had a school resource officer (SRO) and teachers on hall patrol, but there was constant bullying and many violent outbursts. I then transferred to another high school where, early on, I saw two students about to fight in the hallway. About five of their peers pulled them apart and said, “We don’t do that here.” Somehow the administration and teachers had empowered the students.
But what about the school shooting possibility? A 2019 Secret Service analysis of 41 school shooting incidents found that 80% of the 35 attackers whose behavioral histories were reviewed, had been bullied by classmates. 57% of those were bullied for weeks, months, or years. A recent study by The Violence Project suggests that armed guards in schools don’t reduce fatalities. There were armed police officers in at least 25% of the 133 cases studied and these had no reduction in rates of injuries. Unarmed bystanders have stopped more shootings than armed guards or police ever have.
The students had the desire to stop the fight because they had been equal partners in creating the culture of the school that opposed harmful behavior. Teachers and administrators were also given continual professional development so they could acquire the understanding and expertise necessary to help students learn the skills to peacefully resolve conflicts and become effective active bystanders. Everyone agreed that 20 minutes each day would be set aside for an “advisory” period where one adult would meet with about 15 students to deal with social and emotional issues that affected student learning at home and school. One adult, usually a teacher, would be with the same students for all four years. In that time they would run well-planned activities so that students could learn various conflict resolution skills.
They’d learn to de-escalate conflicts, deal with anger, use “I” messages, find win-win resolutions, utilize “really needs” vs “demands”, and acquire negotiation and mediation skills. Over the years, students began to appreciate diversity, understand clout, culture, prejudice and scapegoating. They’d also learn effective and safe strategies to not be a passive bystander, but rather how as a group to have each other’s back when bullying appears, either in person or online. Each adult was trusted and accessible, and when conflicts occasionally occurred, all the adults in the building were trained to sit with the students (and sometimes teachers) who were in conflict to work towards a socially just solution that was agreeable to both parties. All of these strategies are part of a restorative justice program that serves the students well in their personal, family, and professional interactions as adults.
If we want to hire someone to make our school culture safe, we would want someone who is professionally a social worker or counselor who’s been trained in bystander anti-bullying programs, peaceful conflict resolution programs, and restorative justice practices. They need to have experience in staff development so the faculty, guidance staff, and administration become able to run activities themselves that empower students with these skills. This is not the expertise of police officers, even trained SROs. Wielding authority against each other doesn’t keep us safe, building community from the ground up does.
Paul Jablon is a retired public school science and advisory teacher and university faculty who has helped create safe school communities. He resides in Greenfield.