This document discusses approaches for preventing targeted school violence. It distinguishes targeted violence from other forms of school violence and reviews risk assessment, threat assessment, and other approaches. Threat assessment is presented as a useful approach for responding to concerning behaviors that may indicate a risk of targeted violence in schools.
The document discusses motivations behind rampage school shootings as determined by the media through an interdisciplinary lens. It begins by defining rampage school shootings and outlining an interdisciplinary research question on how media coverage affects public perception of motivations. It then justifies an interdisciplinary approach, identifies relevant disciplines including psychology, sociology, and journalism, and conducts a literature review. Finally, it analyzes the problem by evaluating insights from different disciplines and theories on school shooting motivations.
NOHA Psychology Essay Matthijs van Essen November 2015, final versionMatthijs van Essen
This document summarizes 7 research articles on political violence and post-traumatic stress among Palestinian youth. The studies found that direct exposure to political violence, like bombardment and physical injury, significantly predicted PTSD. Social support and intact family structures helped mitigate psychological impacts. While active resistance increased self-esteem, chronic violence made PTSD and symptoms more likely without effective coping. Overall, the studies showed political violence can trigger both resilience and trauma in Palestinian youth depending on social and personal factors.
Bullying is a worldwide issue that can be seen in any school; it is not limited to one type of
public, private, primary or secondary, urban or rural institution and, as a result, brings anxiety, decreased
school absenteeism, academic school performance, and can even contribute to the suicide of bullying victims.
This chapter discusses various approaches to controlling crime at the individual, household, and family level. It first examines individual crime control approaches like gun ownership and risk avoidance behaviors. It then analyzes research on household and family crime control, including the influence of families on delinquency, varieties of family crime prevention programs (like parent training, family preservation therapy, and financial assistance), and challenges in evaluating such private family programs. Key debates discussed include the effectiveness of different crime prevention strategies and the appropriate role of government intervention versus individual or family responsibility in controlling crime.
Designing Schneier’s Five Step Risk Analysis Process into an Online Role Play...Nicola Marae Allain, PhD
Risk analysis and security policy development are essential components of an educated approach to security.
The author discusses an online security role play scenario and policy development exercise designed to include Schneier’s five step risk assessment methodology, while developing higher level cognitive, consensus building, communication, and decision-making skills.
A Poster Presentation for the Educause Conference, October 24th 2007
This study examined the impact of crime on students' housing choices at the University of Central Florida. An online survey of 415 students found that:
1) Females were more likely than males to research crime rates when choosing housing.
2) Upperclassmen were more likely than lowerclassmen to consider crime rates when selecting where to live.
3) Males felt safer walking around campus and Orlando than females.
An Overview of Measurement Issues in School Violence and School Safety Resear...Liz Adams
This document provides an overview of measurement issues in research on school violence and safety. It discusses the history of measurement in this area, examines measurement practices in recent related studies, and describes common instruments used to measure school violence and safety variables. The key findings are that measurement in school violence research has been hindered by limited validation of measurement tools and inconsistent use of measures across studies. Common instruments include self-report surveys, mandated reporting of discipline data, and instruments assessing broader constructs like school climate. However, more rigorous validation and standardized use of measures is still needed.
The document discusses motivations behind rampage school shootings as determined by the media through an interdisciplinary lens. It begins by defining rampage school shootings and outlining an interdisciplinary research question on how media coverage affects public perception of motivations. It then justifies an interdisciplinary approach, identifies relevant disciplines including psychology, sociology, and journalism, and conducts a literature review. Finally, it analyzes the problem by evaluating insights from different disciplines and theories on school shooting motivations.
NOHA Psychology Essay Matthijs van Essen November 2015, final versionMatthijs van Essen
This document summarizes 7 research articles on political violence and post-traumatic stress among Palestinian youth. The studies found that direct exposure to political violence, like bombardment and physical injury, significantly predicted PTSD. Social support and intact family structures helped mitigate psychological impacts. While active resistance increased self-esteem, chronic violence made PTSD and symptoms more likely without effective coping. Overall, the studies showed political violence can trigger both resilience and trauma in Palestinian youth depending on social and personal factors.
Bullying is a worldwide issue that can be seen in any school; it is not limited to one type of
public, private, primary or secondary, urban or rural institution and, as a result, brings anxiety, decreased
school absenteeism, academic school performance, and can even contribute to the suicide of bullying victims.
This chapter discusses various approaches to controlling crime at the individual, household, and family level. It first examines individual crime control approaches like gun ownership and risk avoidance behaviors. It then analyzes research on household and family crime control, including the influence of families on delinquency, varieties of family crime prevention programs (like parent training, family preservation therapy, and financial assistance), and challenges in evaluating such private family programs. Key debates discussed include the effectiveness of different crime prevention strategies and the appropriate role of government intervention versus individual or family responsibility in controlling crime.
Designing Schneier’s Five Step Risk Analysis Process into an Online Role Play...Nicola Marae Allain, PhD
Risk analysis and security policy development are essential components of an educated approach to security.
The author discusses an online security role play scenario and policy development exercise designed to include Schneier’s five step risk assessment methodology, while developing higher level cognitive, consensus building, communication, and decision-making skills.
A Poster Presentation for the Educause Conference, October 24th 2007
This study examined the impact of crime on students' housing choices at the University of Central Florida. An online survey of 415 students found that:
1) Females were more likely than males to research crime rates when choosing housing.
2) Upperclassmen were more likely than lowerclassmen to consider crime rates when selecting where to live.
3) Males felt safer walking around campus and Orlando than females.
An Overview of Measurement Issues in School Violence and School Safety Resear...Liz Adams
This document provides an overview of measurement issues in research on school violence and safety. It discusses the history of measurement in this area, examines measurement practices in recent related studies, and describes common instruments used to measure school violence and safety variables. The key findings are that measurement in school violence research has been hindered by limited validation of measurement tools and inconsistent use of measures across studies. Common instruments include self-report surveys, mandated reporting of discipline data, and instruments assessing broader constructs like school climate. However, more rigorous validation and standardized use of measures is still needed.
Daniel Quintana November 26, 2018 COMM 101C Comm.docxwhittemorelucilla
Daniel Quintana
November 26, 2018
COMM 101C
Communication Research Project:
School Gun Violence and Uncertainty Reduction Theory
The Problem
Gun control is one of the longest debated issues in American history, and gun violence
had been a growing concern for individuals and their families. Acts of gun violence are regularly
reported on the news; and consequently, fear of school shootings have become an expected
concern for students and their parents. While there are many facets to gun control, I chose to
concentrate my communication research on school gun violence. The goal of this project is not to
argue either sides of the gun control debate; however, the goal is to propose possible
communication strategies to help students develop their ability to address concerns for school
safety. Issues surrounding gun violence creates stress and fear in young people’s lives. Through
communication, I believe young people can address these issues and feel both safe at school and
prepared to identify and respond to potential threats.
The Cornerstones
Of San Jose State University’s Communication Studies department, this project primarily
intersects with three of the four department cornerstones: Democracy, Diversity and Technology.
(Dept. of COMM Studies) Through my communication research, I found that students can
promote democracy by engaging in dialogue and debate on gun control. Students can learn from
each other’s different perspectives and develop their own values, preparing them to engage in
policy surrounding gun control. They can encourage diversity through communicating
compassionate with each other. They can utilize technology through online training videos and
online peer communication. And, they can create a compassionate community and reduce the
change of isolated and angered students acting out in aggression or violence.
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
I chose to address school shootings through the lens of the Uncertainty Reduction Theory
(URT). In Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application, Richard L. West and
Lynn H. Turner describe the theory,
“When strangers meet, their primary focus is on reducing their levels of uncertainty in the
situation because uncertainty is uncomfortable. People can be uncertain on two different
levels: behavioral and cognitive. They may be unsure of how to behave (or how the other
person will behave), and they may also be unsure of what they think of the other person
and what the other person thinks of them. High levels of uncertainty are related to a
variety of verbal and nonverbal behaviors.” (West & Turner, pg. 137)
Student of different backgrounds and upbringings experience uncertainty when meeting new
peers at school. Though relationships develop, students can also develop uncertainty related
stress in regard to unfamiliar peers. Social differences and fear can prevent students from
reducing these uncertainty.
Impact Of Exposure To Violence In School On Child And Adolescent Mental Healt...Angela Williams
This study examined the relationship between exposure to violence at school and psychological trauma symptoms and violent behavior in children and adolescents. The sample included 5,969 students in grades 3-12 from 17 public schools in two states. Rates of witnessing violence at school ranged from 56% of elementary students witnessing someone being beaten up to 87% of students witnessing someone being hit, slapped, or punched. Nearly half of middle school students were threatened at school. After accounting for demographic factors, witnessing violence at school predicted trauma symptoms and violent behavior more than being a direct victim. Students exposed to high levels of violence were more likely to experience clinical levels of trauma symptoms than those exposed to low levels. Exposure to violence at school is associated
SCHOOL VIOLENCE REPORTED SCHOOL SHOOTINGSAND MAKING SCHOOLS S.docxanhlodge
SCHOOL VIOLENCE: REPORTED SCHOOL SHOOTINGS
AND MAKING SCHOOLS SAFER
R
osalind
D
uplechain
,
P
h
D
University of West Georgia
R
obert
M
orris
,
P
h
D
University of West Georgia
This manuscript consists of three sections. Section one provides his
torical data on some 310 documented shootings that have taken place
on school property within the United States. Section two discusses
numerous risk factors associated with school shooters. Section three
discusses numerous strategies for creating safe schools.
Key words: U.S. schools shootings, risk factors of school shooters,
creating safe schools
School shootings are most commonly
committed by either a student who goes to
the school or by an intruder from off campus
who has a connection to someone within a
particular school. From 1760 until 2010, in the
United States alone, there have been more than
310
documented shootings on school property.
These researchers have gathered the following
historic data about these schools shootings:
Table 1.
Reported School Shootings in U.S.
*
Period of Time
Total Number of
School Shootings
)
1900 (140 year period
1760 -
25
)
1900 -
1930 (30 year period
39
1930 -
)
1960 (30 year period
45
)
1990 (30 year period
1960 -
53
— 2014 (24 year period
)**
1990
190
These data were collected from various newspa
per reports.
** Last count was October 24, 2014.
It is worth noting that America has wit
nessed four major school shootings in re
cent years - one at a university and three at
K-12 schools (public and private). In 1999,
Columbine High School was number 204
out of these 300 plus incidents. In 2006, the
Amish schoolhouse was number 236. In 2007,
Virginia Tech was number 242. In 2012, San
dy Hook Elementary School was number 300.
Since 2010, there have been at least 80
more school shootings. That’s an average of
school shootings per year from 2010 to
20
. The number of deaths in these addi
2014
tional school shootings is 86. Twenty-seven
deaths were reported for Newton, CT alone.
These figures are staggering even though
violent deaths at our schools account for less
than 1% of the homicides and suicides among
children ages 5 to 18 in the United States.
These types of tragedies touch the hearts
of every American and it is time to better un
derstand the particulars of the most horrible
of forms of school violence, school shootings.
Behaviors and Risk Factors of School
Shooters
There are several behaviors—risk fac
tors—of school shooters. All school person
nel should be aware of these risk factors as
many of them are understandable and easy to
identify.
145
146 / Education Vol. 135 No. 2
Bullying. Of course bullying and school shootings are directly linked to each other. Research by Crawford in 2001 reported that of the 37 school shootings he identified and studied, 75% of the school shooters felt bullied, threatened, or were attacked or injured by others. Several of the shooters he reported on said they experienced long-.
Bullying in schools psychological implications and counselling interventionsAlexander Decker
Bullying is a common problem in schools worldwide that can have serious psychological consequences. The document discusses bullying in schools, defining it as repeated negative acts intended to cause harm, physically or psychologically. Bullies often target those seen as different or vulnerable. Studies from several countries including the US, UK, Canada, and Scandinavia show bullying affects 10-30% of students. Effective counseling interventions are needed to address the problems of bullying and promote a safe school environment.
NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982 (www.nationalforum.com) is a group of national and international refereed journals. NFJ publishes articles on colleges, universities and schools; management, business and administration; academic scholarship, multicultural issues; schooling; special education; teaching and learning; counseling and addiction; alcohol and drugs; crime and criminology; disparities in health; risk behaviors; international issues; education; organizational theory and behavior; educational leadership and supervision; action and applied research; teacher education; race, gender, society; public school law; philosophy and history; psychology, sociology, and much more. Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief.
School shootings are a form of violence that.pdfsdfghj21
This document discusses school shootings in the United States, examining characteristics of perpetrators and prevention strategies. It analyzes two case studies of school shootings - the Townville Elementary School shooting and Aztec High School shooting. Perpetrators often have a relationship to the targeted school and display mental health or behavioral issues. Prevention strategies discussed include stricter gun control laws, monitoring online threats, and utilizing security technologies in schools.
This document summarizes research on state bullying laws and policies in the United States. It finds that while 46 states have bullying laws, three do not define prohibited behavior. 36 states include provisions against cyberbullying. Studies show that in 2008-2009, 28% of US students ages 12-18 reported being bullied at school and 6% reported cyberbullying. The document also discusses analyses of the effects of bullying and approaches to addressing the issue through summits and model policies. It provides an example of cyberbullying victimization through the story of Megan Meier.
This document summarizes research on state bullying laws and policies in the United States. It finds that while 46 states have bullying laws, three do not define prohibited behavior. 36 states include provisions against cyberbullying. Studies show that in 2008-2009, 28% of US students ages 12-18 reported being bullied at school and 6% reported cyberbullying. The document discusses analyses of state laws, model policies, and the impacts of bullying. It profiles victims like Megan Meier and activist Jodee Blanco.
This document summarizes research examining bullying from a postmodernist perspective. Observations and interviews were conducted in various school settings with 84 participants. A social constructionist view was used to understand bullying as experienced on individual and institutional levels, rather than an isolated phenomenon. Teachers were found to be part of everyday interactions that contribute to endemic bullying. Bullying is examined as multiple forms of mistreatment experienced by all students and teachers to some extent, rather than a behavior distinct from other aggression.
This document discusses the issue of school violence and ways to prevent it. It defines school violence and provides statistics on the prevalence and impact of violence in schools. The document also discusses factors that contribute to school violence like bullying and reviews policies and programs aimed at preventing violence, such as the Stop School Violence Act, threat assessment training, and Red Ribbon Week activities. The overall goal is to educate students and parents on the issue of school violence and strategies to promote safety in schools.
1
Sample Essay
TEXAS POLICY REPORT
Your Name
PROFESSOR
GOVT 2306-XXXXX
Semester and Year
WORD COUNT: 1580 (EXCLUDING CITATIONS)
TITLE: SCHOOL VIOLENCE
2
School Violence
On Wednesday April, 2014 in Murrysville Pennsylvania, a teenage boy wielding two
kitchen knives went on a stabbing rampage at the Franklin Regional High School. Twenty-four
people were injured, and at least five of those people were critically wounded including a boy
who is on a ventilator after the knife pierced his liver (CBS Pittsburg). According to the CDC’s
School Associated Violent Death Study, between 1% and 2% of all homicides among school-age
children happen on school grounds or on the way to and from school. These serious and
continuous acts of violence make us ask certain questions: Are students going through an
unexplainable change? Are schools no longer a place for individuals to learn and develop skills
that would mold them into being profitable citizens for themselves and their country? Are the
causes of these violent acts psychological or emotional? And what role has the government
played in limiting the advancement of school violence? Schools are an integral part of our
society, and as violence escalates in society so does the violence in our schools.
There is a problem eating at the educational system in the U.S, a dilemma that has
completely obstructed and deflated the scholastic organization in a negative way. For several
decades now, news of mass shootings, murders, rapes, and suicides in schools have dominated
the media and soaked into the consciousness of Americans everywhere. Schools are not only
dealing with providing an excellent education for their students but they are also dealing with
threats, students bringing weapons to school, and the protection of their students. The purpose of
this study is to examine the relationship between school violence and violence in the society and
to provide selected solutions to reduce school violence.
The question now arises: who is to blame for this? To address this increasing social
problem, theories have been developed. From the book, The Evolution of School Disturbance in
3
America, Gordon Crews discusses eight theories why youth become delinquent; nevertheless,
only three stand out. To begin with, the Positivism theory “emphasize[s] the offender’s personal
and also background characteristics rather than just the rational thought process and free will”
(9). In other words, the individual’s background, the “biological, psychological, sociological,
cultural, and physical environments” are to blame for his or her conduct (10). The Biological
theory believes that “criminal behavior is inbred, not learned” (10). In essence, the student
suppresses his emotions until he explodes in a bid to take control of his life (Bonilla). In
contrast, the Behaviorist theory argues that “people act a certain way becaus.
CYBERBULLYING EXPERIENCES OF UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO CRIMINOLOGY STUDENTSAJHSSR Journal
ABSTRACT:This paper explores the cyberbullying experiences among Criminology students at the
University of Mindanao. A simple random sampling method was used to distribute the study's online
questionnaire to the respondents and to survey the target population. This study has four hundred (400)
respondents, and the respondents are Criminology students at the University of Mindanao. The findings of this
study revealed that the level of cyberbullying experiences is sometimes manifested. On the other hand, the
cyberbullying experiences of the students indicate a moderate level, which indicates that the cyberbullying
experiences of the respondents are sometimes manifested. Also, the computations showed that among the
indicators presented, the highest mean is obtained in the psychological effect, which implies that there is a
significant effect of cyberbullying experiences of the respondents in terms of the Gender level of the
respondents. Therefore, respondents with a low level of cyberbullying experiences tend to have a moderate level
of cyberbullying experience. However, there is no significant effect in terms of age and year level of the
respondents according to the results regarding the psychological, emotional, and physical impact of
cyberbullying.
KEYWORDS :cyberbullying, emotional, experiences, psychological,physical effect, and simple random
sampling method.
Essay on Preventing School Violence
School Violence
School Violence Essay
Essay on School Violence
School Violence
School Violence
School Violence Speech Essay
School Violence Essay
Essay on Violence in the Schools
School Violence
Essay about School Violence
School Violence Essay example
School Violence Essay
School Violence Essay
School Violence Essay
School violence is a growing problem that threatens student safety. It occurs in various forms like bullying, fighting, and weapon use. While schools were once safe havens, violence now occurs in elementary schools through colleges. The causes of school violence include non-loving homes, peer pressure, obsession with video games, and cries for attention. To address this issue, schools must provide a safe environment where students feel secure and supported.
This document discusses a study that investigated the impact of school bullying on students' academic achievement from teachers' perspectives in Jordanian schools. The study used a descriptive analytical methodology and surveyed 200 teachers in Amman West, Jordan. The results showed that school bullying exists in both governmental and private schools. The study also concluded that school bullying negatively affects both the academic achievement of bullying victims as well as the bullies themselves. Various forms of bullying were outlined including physical, verbal, sexual, psychological, and social bullying.
This study investigated the impact of school bullying on students' academic achievement from teachers' perspectives in Jordanian schools. The study found that school bullying exists in all schools regardless of whether they are public or private. It was also concluded that school bullying affects both the academic achievement of victims and bullies. Teachers reported high levels of bullying occurring daily in schools, including physical, verbal, and psychological forms of bullying. The study found bullying has a medium to high negative impact on students' academic performance, concentration, motivation, and attendance in school.
This annotated bibliography contains sources related to campus carry laws and safety. The sources cover topics such as the constitutionality of campus carry restrictions, the effectiveness of gun-free zones, approaches to threat assessment, and the need for an interdisciplinary analysis of school violence. One source proposes that allowing concealed carry on campus may help discourage mass shootings by enabling citizens to stop violence, while others argue that educational institutions should determine their own policies without legislative interference.
1465American Behavioral ScientistVolume 52 Number 10Ju.docxdurantheseldine
This document discusses recommendations for improving campus safety in the wake of mass shootings at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University. It summarizes the top 7 recommendations that were most commonly made in reports from various task forces. These include creating an emergency response plan, adopting an emergency notification system, establishing a threat assessment team, improving mental health services, training faculty and staff to recognize signs of trouble, limiting access to campus buildings, and conducting risk assessments. However, the document cautions that some recommendations may not be effective and could even have unintended negative consequences if not implemented carefully.
When thinking about issues impacting education today, I thought of.docxjolleybendicty
When thinking about issues impacting education today, I thought of bullying, high stakes testing, and technology use in and outside of the classroom. After furthering my reading and researching the three topics, I realized that my topics were too broad. I had to narrow my focus. I had to ask myself what bothered me most or what did I have a connection with in each topic.
Bullying is a violent behavior that occurs when a person or group of people disturbs or threatens the safety and health of others both physically and psychologically, threatens one's property, reputation, or social acceptance and is carried out repeatedly and continuously (Bernard & Milne, 2008). On April 20, 1999, America was shocked by the first massive school shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado. Then there was the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 12, 2012 in Newtown, Connecticut. It seemed as though school shootings were happening more and more creating a numbness across America. It was these incidents that led to states drafting and passing anti-bullying laws. Recognizing that this topic is still too broad; I had to narrow the focus even more. Bullying has become a worldwide problem and is experienced by thousands of children every day (Carney & Marrel, 2001). In a study conducted by on 1,588 third through fifth graders who completed a survey regarding their perceptions of bullying in schools the key findings were that 40 % of third through fifth graders reported being bullied, while girls reported being victims of bullying more often than boys.
In recent years, bullying has grown and been found prevalent in many schools across the United States of America. It has moved from mass shootings to children taking their own lives due to bullying experiences. I recalled the story of a 9 year old African-American fourth grade girl in Alabama committing suicide because of the bullying she endured from her classmates. It was this headline that assisted me in narrowing this topic and refining my research even further.
Problem One
Suicide on the Rise Among Youth in the United States of America
All children have the right to a free public school education and should be able to attend schools without the fear of being bullied or harmed; however, recent studies indicate suicide as the second leading cause of death for teens. It is also noted that the suicide rate for African-American children ages 5-12 is two times higher than that of Caucasian children (Christensen, 2019). To address this problem, this study will investigate leading causes of bullying among elementary students grades 2-4. Based on the findings, schools will be asked to lead bullying prevention seminars for faculty and staff and develop anti-bullying campaigns for student awareness.
References
Christensen, J. (2019, October 14). Suicide attempts by black teens are increa.
Why therapists are worried about america’s growing mental health crisis the...JA Larson
Therapists across the US report being overwhelmed by surging demand for mental health services as the pandemic continues. Nine out of 10 therapists say they have seen an increase in clients seeking care, with many experiencing significantly longer waitlists and an inability to take on new patients. Common issues clients are seeking help for include anxiety, depression, family/relationship problems, and substance abuse. Therapists are especially concerned about the impact on children's mental health. The crisis is straining an already under-resourced mental health system.
This document discusses food insecurity among military families in the United States. It finds that despite food pantries operating near every military base, the true scale of the problem is unknown due to a lack of data collection by the Department of Defense. The challenges military families face, such as low pay especially for junior enlisted service members, housing allowances counting as income, and other financial difficulties, are exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The document recommends solutions like increasing pay and establishing a basic needs allowance to ensure military families can afford food.
More Related Content
Similar to Secret Service EVALUATING RISK FOR TARGETED VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS 2001
Daniel Quintana November 26, 2018 COMM 101C Comm.docxwhittemorelucilla
Daniel Quintana
November 26, 2018
COMM 101C
Communication Research Project:
School Gun Violence and Uncertainty Reduction Theory
The Problem
Gun control is one of the longest debated issues in American history, and gun violence
had been a growing concern for individuals and their families. Acts of gun violence are regularly
reported on the news; and consequently, fear of school shootings have become an expected
concern for students and their parents. While there are many facets to gun control, I chose to
concentrate my communication research on school gun violence. The goal of this project is not to
argue either sides of the gun control debate; however, the goal is to propose possible
communication strategies to help students develop their ability to address concerns for school
safety. Issues surrounding gun violence creates stress and fear in young people’s lives. Through
communication, I believe young people can address these issues and feel both safe at school and
prepared to identify and respond to potential threats.
The Cornerstones
Of San Jose State University’s Communication Studies department, this project primarily
intersects with three of the four department cornerstones: Democracy, Diversity and Technology.
(Dept. of COMM Studies) Through my communication research, I found that students can
promote democracy by engaging in dialogue and debate on gun control. Students can learn from
each other’s different perspectives and develop their own values, preparing them to engage in
policy surrounding gun control. They can encourage diversity through communicating
compassionate with each other. They can utilize technology through online training videos and
online peer communication. And, they can create a compassionate community and reduce the
change of isolated and angered students acting out in aggression or violence.
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
I chose to address school shootings through the lens of the Uncertainty Reduction Theory
(URT). In Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application, Richard L. West and
Lynn H. Turner describe the theory,
“When strangers meet, their primary focus is on reducing their levels of uncertainty in the
situation because uncertainty is uncomfortable. People can be uncertain on two different
levels: behavioral and cognitive. They may be unsure of how to behave (or how the other
person will behave), and they may also be unsure of what they think of the other person
and what the other person thinks of them. High levels of uncertainty are related to a
variety of verbal and nonverbal behaviors.” (West & Turner, pg. 137)
Student of different backgrounds and upbringings experience uncertainty when meeting new
peers at school. Though relationships develop, students can also develop uncertainty related
stress in regard to unfamiliar peers. Social differences and fear can prevent students from
reducing these uncertainty.
Impact Of Exposure To Violence In School On Child And Adolescent Mental Healt...Angela Williams
This study examined the relationship between exposure to violence at school and psychological trauma symptoms and violent behavior in children and adolescents. The sample included 5,969 students in grades 3-12 from 17 public schools in two states. Rates of witnessing violence at school ranged from 56% of elementary students witnessing someone being beaten up to 87% of students witnessing someone being hit, slapped, or punched. Nearly half of middle school students were threatened at school. After accounting for demographic factors, witnessing violence at school predicted trauma symptoms and violent behavior more than being a direct victim. Students exposed to high levels of violence were more likely to experience clinical levels of trauma symptoms than those exposed to low levels. Exposure to violence at school is associated
SCHOOL VIOLENCE REPORTED SCHOOL SHOOTINGSAND MAKING SCHOOLS S.docxanhlodge
SCHOOL VIOLENCE: REPORTED SCHOOL SHOOTINGS
AND MAKING SCHOOLS SAFER
R
osalind
D
uplechain
,
P
h
D
University of West Georgia
R
obert
M
orris
,
P
h
D
University of West Georgia
This manuscript consists of three sections. Section one provides his
torical data on some 310 documented shootings that have taken place
on school property within the United States. Section two discusses
numerous risk factors associated with school shooters. Section three
discusses numerous strategies for creating safe schools.
Key words: U.S. schools shootings, risk factors of school shooters,
creating safe schools
School shootings are most commonly
committed by either a student who goes to
the school or by an intruder from off campus
who has a connection to someone within a
particular school. From 1760 until 2010, in the
United States alone, there have been more than
310
documented shootings on school property.
These researchers have gathered the following
historic data about these schools shootings:
Table 1.
Reported School Shootings in U.S.
*
Period of Time
Total Number of
School Shootings
)
1900 (140 year period
1760 -
25
)
1900 -
1930 (30 year period
39
1930 -
)
1960 (30 year period
45
)
1990 (30 year period
1960 -
53
— 2014 (24 year period
)**
1990
190
These data were collected from various newspa
per reports.
** Last count was October 24, 2014.
It is worth noting that America has wit
nessed four major school shootings in re
cent years - one at a university and three at
K-12 schools (public and private). In 1999,
Columbine High School was number 204
out of these 300 plus incidents. In 2006, the
Amish schoolhouse was number 236. In 2007,
Virginia Tech was number 242. In 2012, San
dy Hook Elementary School was number 300.
Since 2010, there have been at least 80
more school shootings. That’s an average of
school shootings per year from 2010 to
20
. The number of deaths in these addi
2014
tional school shootings is 86. Twenty-seven
deaths were reported for Newton, CT alone.
These figures are staggering even though
violent deaths at our schools account for less
than 1% of the homicides and suicides among
children ages 5 to 18 in the United States.
These types of tragedies touch the hearts
of every American and it is time to better un
derstand the particulars of the most horrible
of forms of school violence, school shootings.
Behaviors and Risk Factors of School
Shooters
There are several behaviors—risk fac
tors—of school shooters. All school person
nel should be aware of these risk factors as
many of them are understandable and easy to
identify.
145
146 / Education Vol. 135 No. 2
Bullying. Of course bullying and school shootings are directly linked to each other. Research by Crawford in 2001 reported that of the 37 school shootings he identified and studied, 75% of the school shooters felt bullied, threatened, or were attacked or injured by others. Several of the shooters he reported on said they experienced long-.
Bullying in schools psychological implications and counselling interventionsAlexander Decker
Bullying is a common problem in schools worldwide that can have serious psychological consequences. The document discusses bullying in schools, defining it as repeated negative acts intended to cause harm, physically or psychologically. Bullies often target those seen as different or vulnerable. Studies from several countries including the US, UK, Canada, and Scandinavia show bullying affects 10-30% of students. Effective counseling interventions are needed to address the problems of bullying and promote a safe school environment.
NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982 (www.nationalforum.com) is a group of national and international refereed journals. NFJ publishes articles on colleges, universities and schools; management, business and administration; academic scholarship, multicultural issues; schooling; special education; teaching and learning; counseling and addiction; alcohol and drugs; crime and criminology; disparities in health; risk behaviors; international issues; education; organizational theory and behavior; educational leadership and supervision; action and applied research; teacher education; race, gender, society; public school law; philosophy and history; psychology, sociology, and much more. Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief.
School shootings are a form of violence that.pdfsdfghj21
This document discusses school shootings in the United States, examining characteristics of perpetrators and prevention strategies. It analyzes two case studies of school shootings - the Townville Elementary School shooting and Aztec High School shooting. Perpetrators often have a relationship to the targeted school and display mental health or behavioral issues. Prevention strategies discussed include stricter gun control laws, monitoring online threats, and utilizing security technologies in schools.
This document summarizes research on state bullying laws and policies in the United States. It finds that while 46 states have bullying laws, three do not define prohibited behavior. 36 states include provisions against cyberbullying. Studies show that in 2008-2009, 28% of US students ages 12-18 reported being bullied at school and 6% reported cyberbullying. The document also discusses analyses of the effects of bullying and approaches to addressing the issue through summits and model policies. It provides an example of cyberbullying victimization through the story of Megan Meier.
This document summarizes research on state bullying laws and policies in the United States. It finds that while 46 states have bullying laws, three do not define prohibited behavior. 36 states include provisions against cyberbullying. Studies show that in 2008-2009, 28% of US students ages 12-18 reported being bullied at school and 6% reported cyberbullying. The document discusses analyses of state laws, model policies, and the impacts of bullying. It profiles victims like Megan Meier and activist Jodee Blanco.
This document summarizes research examining bullying from a postmodernist perspective. Observations and interviews were conducted in various school settings with 84 participants. A social constructionist view was used to understand bullying as experienced on individual and institutional levels, rather than an isolated phenomenon. Teachers were found to be part of everyday interactions that contribute to endemic bullying. Bullying is examined as multiple forms of mistreatment experienced by all students and teachers to some extent, rather than a behavior distinct from other aggression.
This document discusses the issue of school violence and ways to prevent it. It defines school violence and provides statistics on the prevalence and impact of violence in schools. The document also discusses factors that contribute to school violence like bullying and reviews policies and programs aimed at preventing violence, such as the Stop School Violence Act, threat assessment training, and Red Ribbon Week activities. The overall goal is to educate students and parents on the issue of school violence and strategies to promote safety in schools.
1
Sample Essay
TEXAS POLICY REPORT
Your Name
PROFESSOR
GOVT 2306-XXXXX
Semester and Year
WORD COUNT: 1580 (EXCLUDING CITATIONS)
TITLE: SCHOOL VIOLENCE
2
School Violence
On Wednesday April, 2014 in Murrysville Pennsylvania, a teenage boy wielding two
kitchen knives went on a stabbing rampage at the Franklin Regional High School. Twenty-four
people were injured, and at least five of those people were critically wounded including a boy
who is on a ventilator after the knife pierced his liver (CBS Pittsburg). According to the CDC’s
School Associated Violent Death Study, between 1% and 2% of all homicides among school-age
children happen on school grounds or on the way to and from school. These serious and
continuous acts of violence make us ask certain questions: Are students going through an
unexplainable change? Are schools no longer a place for individuals to learn and develop skills
that would mold them into being profitable citizens for themselves and their country? Are the
causes of these violent acts psychological or emotional? And what role has the government
played in limiting the advancement of school violence? Schools are an integral part of our
society, and as violence escalates in society so does the violence in our schools.
There is a problem eating at the educational system in the U.S, a dilemma that has
completely obstructed and deflated the scholastic organization in a negative way. For several
decades now, news of mass shootings, murders, rapes, and suicides in schools have dominated
the media and soaked into the consciousness of Americans everywhere. Schools are not only
dealing with providing an excellent education for their students but they are also dealing with
threats, students bringing weapons to school, and the protection of their students. The purpose of
this study is to examine the relationship between school violence and violence in the society and
to provide selected solutions to reduce school violence.
The question now arises: who is to blame for this? To address this increasing social
problem, theories have been developed. From the book, The Evolution of School Disturbance in
3
America, Gordon Crews discusses eight theories why youth become delinquent; nevertheless,
only three stand out. To begin with, the Positivism theory “emphasize[s] the offender’s personal
and also background characteristics rather than just the rational thought process and free will”
(9). In other words, the individual’s background, the “biological, psychological, sociological,
cultural, and physical environments” are to blame for his or her conduct (10). The Biological
theory believes that “criminal behavior is inbred, not learned” (10). In essence, the student
suppresses his emotions until he explodes in a bid to take control of his life (Bonilla). In
contrast, the Behaviorist theory argues that “people act a certain way becaus.
CYBERBULLYING EXPERIENCES OF UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO CRIMINOLOGY STUDENTSAJHSSR Journal
ABSTRACT:This paper explores the cyberbullying experiences among Criminology students at the
University of Mindanao. A simple random sampling method was used to distribute the study's online
questionnaire to the respondents and to survey the target population. This study has four hundred (400)
respondents, and the respondents are Criminology students at the University of Mindanao. The findings of this
study revealed that the level of cyberbullying experiences is sometimes manifested. On the other hand, the
cyberbullying experiences of the students indicate a moderate level, which indicates that the cyberbullying
experiences of the respondents are sometimes manifested. Also, the computations showed that among the
indicators presented, the highest mean is obtained in the psychological effect, which implies that there is a
significant effect of cyberbullying experiences of the respondents in terms of the Gender level of the
respondents. Therefore, respondents with a low level of cyberbullying experiences tend to have a moderate level
of cyberbullying experience. However, there is no significant effect in terms of age and year level of the
respondents according to the results regarding the psychological, emotional, and physical impact of
cyberbullying.
KEYWORDS :cyberbullying, emotional, experiences, psychological,physical effect, and simple random
sampling method.
Essay on Preventing School Violence
School Violence
School Violence Essay
Essay on School Violence
School Violence
School Violence
School Violence Speech Essay
School Violence Essay
Essay on Violence in the Schools
School Violence
Essay about School Violence
School Violence Essay example
School Violence Essay
School Violence Essay
School Violence Essay
School violence is a growing problem that threatens student safety. It occurs in various forms like bullying, fighting, and weapon use. While schools were once safe havens, violence now occurs in elementary schools through colleges. The causes of school violence include non-loving homes, peer pressure, obsession with video games, and cries for attention. To address this issue, schools must provide a safe environment where students feel secure and supported.
This document discusses a study that investigated the impact of school bullying on students' academic achievement from teachers' perspectives in Jordanian schools. The study used a descriptive analytical methodology and surveyed 200 teachers in Amman West, Jordan. The results showed that school bullying exists in both governmental and private schools. The study also concluded that school bullying negatively affects both the academic achievement of bullying victims as well as the bullies themselves. Various forms of bullying were outlined including physical, verbal, sexual, psychological, and social bullying.
This study investigated the impact of school bullying on students' academic achievement from teachers' perspectives in Jordanian schools. The study found that school bullying exists in all schools regardless of whether they are public or private. It was also concluded that school bullying affects both the academic achievement of victims and bullies. Teachers reported high levels of bullying occurring daily in schools, including physical, verbal, and psychological forms of bullying. The study found bullying has a medium to high negative impact on students' academic performance, concentration, motivation, and attendance in school.
This annotated bibliography contains sources related to campus carry laws and safety. The sources cover topics such as the constitutionality of campus carry restrictions, the effectiveness of gun-free zones, approaches to threat assessment, and the need for an interdisciplinary analysis of school violence. One source proposes that allowing concealed carry on campus may help discourage mass shootings by enabling citizens to stop violence, while others argue that educational institutions should determine their own policies without legislative interference.
1465American Behavioral ScientistVolume 52 Number 10Ju.docxdurantheseldine
This document discusses recommendations for improving campus safety in the wake of mass shootings at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University. It summarizes the top 7 recommendations that were most commonly made in reports from various task forces. These include creating an emergency response plan, adopting an emergency notification system, establishing a threat assessment team, improving mental health services, training faculty and staff to recognize signs of trouble, limiting access to campus buildings, and conducting risk assessments. However, the document cautions that some recommendations may not be effective and could even have unintended negative consequences if not implemented carefully.
When thinking about issues impacting education today, I thought of.docxjolleybendicty
When thinking about issues impacting education today, I thought of bullying, high stakes testing, and technology use in and outside of the classroom. After furthering my reading and researching the three topics, I realized that my topics were too broad. I had to narrow my focus. I had to ask myself what bothered me most or what did I have a connection with in each topic.
Bullying is a violent behavior that occurs when a person or group of people disturbs or threatens the safety and health of others both physically and psychologically, threatens one's property, reputation, or social acceptance and is carried out repeatedly and continuously (Bernard & Milne, 2008). On April 20, 1999, America was shocked by the first massive school shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado. Then there was the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 12, 2012 in Newtown, Connecticut. It seemed as though school shootings were happening more and more creating a numbness across America. It was these incidents that led to states drafting and passing anti-bullying laws. Recognizing that this topic is still too broad; I had to narrow the focus even more. Bullying has become a worldwide problem and is experienced by thousands of children every day (Carney & Marrel, 2001). In a study conducted by on 1,588 third through fifth graders who completed a survey regarding their perceptions of bullying in schools the key findings were that 40 % of third through fifth graders reported being bullied, while girls reported being victims of bullying more often than boys.
In recent years, bullying has grown and been found prevalent in many schools across the United States of America. It has moved from mass shootings to children taking their own lives due to bullying experiences. I recalled the story of a 9 year old African-American fourth grade girl in Alabama committing suicide because of the bullying she endured from her classmates. It was this headline that assisted me in narrowing this topic and refining my research even further.
Problem One
Suicide on the Rise Among Youth in the United States of America
All children have the right to a free public school education and should be able to attend schools without the fear of being bullied or harmed; however, recent studies indicate suicide as the second leading cause of death for teens. It is also noted that the suicide rate for African-American children ages 5-12 is two times higher than that of Caucasian children (Christensen, 2019). To address this problem, this study will investigate leading causes of bullying among elementary students grades 2-4. Based on the findings, schools will be asked to lead bullying prevention seminars for faculty and staff and develop anti-bullying campaigns for student awareness.
References
Christensen, J. (2019, October 14). Suicide attempts by black teens are increa.
Similar to Secret Service EVALUATING RISK FOR TARGETED VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS 2001 (20)
Why therapists are worried about america’s growing mental health crisis the...JA Larson
Therapists across the US report being overwhelmed by surging demand for mental health services as the pandemic continues. Nine out of 10 therapists say they have seen an increase in clients seeking care, with many experiencing significantly longer waitlists and an inability to take on new patients. Common issues clients are seeking help for include anxiety, depression, family/relationship problems, and substance abuse. Therapists are especially concerned about the impact on children's mental health. The crisis is straining an already under-resourced mental health system.
This document discusses food insecurity among military families in the United States. It finds that despite food pantries operating near every military base, the true scale of the problem is unknown due to a lack of data collection by the Department of Defense. The challenges military families face, such as low pay especially for junior enlisted service members, housing allowances counting as income, and other financial difficulties, are exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The document recommends solutions like increasing pay and establishing a basic needs allowance to ensure military families can afford food.
The 2018 Department of Defense Health Related Behaviors Survey assessed health behaviors and well-being of Army National Guard members. It found several areas of concern: less than half of members received adequate sleep; rates of binge drinking, tobacco use, and psychological distress were higher than the general population; and over two-thirds were overweight or obese. Comparisons to Healthy People benchmarks showed Army National Guard members did not meet goals for weight, sleep, binge drinking, tobacco use, and mental health. The survey provides leadership with information to understand health-related readiness and facilitate improvements. However, the low response rate suggests results require cautious interpretation.
The Health Related Behaviors Survey (HRBS) assessed health behaviors and well-being of Army reservists. It found that while body weights were comparable to civilians, reservists reported inadequate sleep and higher rates of tobacco/nicotine use than civilians. Psychological distress and probable PTSD were greater among reservists compared to civilians. Limitations included a low response rate, so results require interpretation with other data.
The 2018 Department of Defense Health Related Behaviors Survey (HRBS) found that:
1) While Army soldiers met weight goals, many did not get sufficient sleep and reported sleep-related lack of energy, and rates of binge drinking, tobacco and nicotine use, and mental health issues were higher than civilian benchmarks.
2) Over 30% of soldiers engaged in binge drinking, 9.7% used sleep medications frequently, and rates of serious psychological distress and probable PTSD exceeded civilian rates.
3) Lesbian, gay, and bisexual personnel reported higher rates of mental health issues, substance abuse, and unwanted sexual contact than non-LGB personnel.
This document provides an executive summary of the 2020 Health of the Force report, which documents conditions that influence health and medical readiness of U.S. Army soldiers. Key findings include that over half of soldiers experienced a new injury in 2019, mostly musculoskeletal overuse injuries. Obesity prevalence remained at 17% overall but varied by race. Around 16% of soldiers had a behavioral health diagnosis and 3.5% had a substance use disorder diagnosis. Sexually transmitted infection rates increased compared to previous years. Environmental health metrics like air quality, water quality, and heat risk varied significantly across installations. Performance triad measures showed that less than half of soldiers met fruit/vegetable or sleep recommendations.
This monthly medical surveillance report summarizes morbidity data for the U.S. Armed Forces in 2020. It finds that musculoskeletal disorders, injuries, and mental health disorders accounted for the most medical encounters, largest number of affected service members, and greatest number of hospital days. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 accounted for less than 1% of total medical encounters and hospital bed days for active service members. The report concludes that musculoskeletal disorders, injuries, and mental health disorders detract from individual readiness and deployability and hinder the military's ability to complete its missions. Continued focus on prevention and treatment of these conditions is warranted.
This document is the 2020 Health of the Force Report, which analyzes health metrics and demographics of over 469,000 active duty U.S. Army soldiers. Some key findings include: over half of soldiers experienced a new injury in 2019, with most being overuse injuries; obesity rates remained at 17% overall but showed racial disparities; and behavioral health diagnoses were reported for 16% of soldiers. The report also introduces analysis by race and ethnicity to identify potential health disparities. It provides data and metrics to help Army leaders understand factors influencing medical readiness and make informed policy decisions.
Small Arms Lethality variables 1.6e DRAFTJA Larson
small arms lethality is a complex equation.
military operations are generally a team event.....more like football or soccer than tennis......
therefore teamwork and safety adds complexity
This document is a report from the Joint Committee on Health in Ireland that examines vitamin D deficiency as a public health issue. It discusses the importance of vitamin D for health, the high rates of deficiency in Ireland, approaches in other countries, and recommendations for reforming public health policy in Ireland to address deficiency. The report recommends daily vitamin D supplements for adults, a public awareness campaign, reducing VAT on supplements, and targeted measures for at-risk groups like nursing home residents.
This document discusses options to reduce injury and attrition rates during military training by addressing underlying health conditions prior to and during entry-level training. It identifies several physiological risk factors for injuries like low bone density, nutrient deficiencies, and low fitness levels. It then outlines various screening and treatment options at different stages of the recruitment and training process to identify and address these risks, such as conducting bone density and blood screens at Military Entrance Processing Stations (MEPS) or Delayed Entry Programs (DEP), and establishing temporary Fitness Training Units (FTU) for recruits identified as high-risk. The goal is to implement "prevention and fix forward" approaches to improve readiness and save over $250 million annually.
1. The document discusses a modular container system called the "one box" that enhances mission capabilities for military forces. It allows supplies and equipment to be pre-loaded and creates the ability for fast deployment of forward operating bases.
2. The containers are rust-proof, self-leveling, and have standard wall interfaces and electrical/plumbing connections. They can be armored and insulated on-site.
3. The containers are configured for different functions like barracks, medical facilities, operations centers, and more. This allows one container system to meet various needs.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Scotland has an extreme climate with very little sunshine compared to England. This results in low vitamin D levels among the Scottish population, as over 90% of vitamin D comes from sun exposure. Insufficient vitamin D has been linked to increased risk of numerous chronic diseases that are highly prevalent in Scotland like cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and autoimmune disorders. Despite evidence that improving vitamin D status could help address Scotland's health deficit, successive reports by the Scottish government have failed to recognize low vitamin D as a risk factor. Implementing measures to increase vitamin D levels, such as supplements, food fortification, and updated sun exposure advice, could potentially achieve significant health gains in Scotland at low cost.
The document summarizes several studies that found associations between vitamin D deficiency and worse outcomes from COVID-19:
- Studies found higher rates of vitamin D deficiency in severe COVID-19 patients requiring ICU care compared to non-ICU patients. Deficiency was also linked to increased risk of COVID-19 infection and hospitalization.
- A study of over 4,000 COVID-19 patients found those with vitamin D deficiency at the time of testing had a higher risk of testing positive for COVID-19 compared to patients with sufficient levels.
- A study of older COVID-19 patients found those taking a combination of vitamin D, magnesium and B12 were less likely to require oxygen support or intensive care than those not
Studies have found that vitamin D levels are often lower in patients with more severe cases of COVID-19. Researchers analyzed data from over 190,000 patients and found that those with vitamin D deficiency were more likely to test positive for COVID-19. A separate study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 found that patients with the lowest vitamin D levels were more likely to require ICU support and experienced the highest mortality rates.
A cohort study evaluated the effect of combination Vitamin D, Magnesium and Vitamin B12 (DMB) on older COVID-19 patients. 17 patients received DMB and 26 did not. Significantly fewer DMB patients required oxygen therapy (17.6% vs 61.5%). DMB exposure was associated with reduced odds of oxygen therapy need and intensive care support. The study supports larger trials to determine if DMB can ameliorate COVID-19 severity through immunomodulation.
This document discusses how lighter skin and weaker bones may have evolved as adaptations in human populations that migrated north out of Africa. It hypothesizes that natural selection favored these traits because they improved reproductive fitness in environments with less sunlight by minimizing risks of pelvic deformation during childbirth. Specifically, it suggests smaller, more rapidly mineralized bones reduced risks of cephalopelvic disproportion caused by vitamin D deficiency, allowing for greater reproductive success in northern latitudes despite higher osteoporosis risk later in life.
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
Disampaikan pada FGD Kepmen Pertahanan tentang Organisasi Profesi JF Analis Pertahanan Negara
Jakarta, 20 Juni 2024
Dr. Tri Widodo W. Utomo, SH. MA.
Deputi Bidang Kajian Kebijakan dan Inovasi Administrasi Negara LAN RI
Presentation by Julie Topoleski, CBO’s Director of Labor, Income Security, and Long-Term Analysis, at the 16th Annual Meeting of the OECD Working Party of Parliamentary Budget Officials and Independent Fiscal Institutions.
FT author
Amanda Chu
US Energy Reporter
PREMIUM
June 20 2024
Good morning and welcome back to Energy Source, coming to you from New York, where the city swelters in its first heatwave of the season.
Nearly 80 million people were under alerts in the US north-east and midwest yesterday as temperatures in some municipalities reached record highs in a test to the country’s rickety power grid.
In other news, the Financial Times has a new Big Read this morning on Russia’s grip on nuclear power. Despite sanctions on its economy, the Kremlin continues to be an unrivalled exporter of nuclear power plants, building more than half of all reactors under construction globally. Read how Moscow is using these projects to wield global influence.
Today’s Energy Source dives into the latest Statistical Review of World Energy, the industry’s annual stocktake of global energy consumption. The report was published for more than 70 years by BP before it was passed over to the Energy Institute last year. The oil major remains a contributor.
Data Drill looks at a new analysis from the World Bank showing gas flaring is at a four-year high.
Thanks for reading,
Amanda
Was this forwarded to you?
If you’re a Premium FT subscriber, sign up here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
Sent Tuesdays and Thursdays.
Not a Premium subscriber?
Take out a subscription, or upgrade from standard.
New report offers sobering view of the energy transition
Every year the Statistical Review of World Energy offers a behemoth of data on the state of the global energy market. This year’s findings highlight the world’s insatiable demand for energy and the need to speed up the pace of decarbonisation.
Here are our four main takeaways from this year’s report:
Fossil fuel consumption — and emissions — are at record highs
Countries burnt record amounts of oil and coal last year, sending global fossil fuel consumption and emissions to all-time highs, the Energy Institute reported. Oil demand grew 2.6 per cent, surpassing 100mn barrels per day for the first time.
Meanwhile, the share of fossil fuels in the energy mix declined slightly by half a percentage point, but still made up more than 81 per cent of consumption.
Presentation by Rebecca Sachs and Joshua Varcie, analysts in CBO’s Health Analysis Division, at the 13th Annual Conference of the American Society of Health Economists.
2. perpetrator and target(s) are identified or identifiable prior to the incident (Borum, Fein, Vossekuil,
& Berglund, 1999; Fein & Vossekuil, 1998; Fein, Vossekuil, & Holden, 1995). The defining ele-
ment of targeted violence is that the perpetrator selects a target prior to the violent incident. In
some instances of targeted violence, the target may not become a victim; for example, the target
may avoid injury (e.g., if the perpetrator is a poor shot) or the target may not be at the site where
the perpetrator believes the target to be. In others, the target may be one of several victims or may
be the only victim. In still others, the target may be an institution or facility, as it was in Timothy
McVeigh’s bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. But each case would be an
instance of targeted violence if a target was known—or was knowable—prior to the incident
(Borum et al., 1999; Fein & Vossekuil, 1998; Fein et al., 1995).1
In the wake of recent school shootings, a cottage industry of school safety products has
quickly developed (Chaddock, 2000). To date, however, schools have been given little or no
empirically based guidance on how best to assess the risk posed by a student for targeted violence
in schools.2
In our view, the current options available to schools for responding to and preventing
school shootings—which we review herein—are at best unproven (Hoagwood, 2000), and at
worst carry the potential for serious harm (Hyman & Perone, 1998). Some violence prevention
options, such as zero tolerance policies, have been criticized as overly punitive (Hyman & Perone,
1998; Tebo, 2000). Others, such as behavioral profiling and computer programs that identify
students at risk, have raised widespread concern among parents, students, policymakers, and even
the U.S. Secretary of Education for their potential to infringe on students’ civil liberties and to
unfairly label or stigmatize certain students as “dangerous” (Cooper, 2000; Morse, 2000; Sewell
& Mendelsohn, 2000; Steinberg, 2000).
In this article, we attempt to lay a foundation for developing an effective assessment ap-
proach to evaluate the risk of targeted violence in schools by addressing four issues. First, we
delineate the contours of the problem of targeted violence by distinguishing the fear of this
violence from its actual probability and by distinguishing targeted violence from other forms of
aggression in youth. Second, we examine and critique three assessment approaches—profiling,
guided professional judgment, and automated decision making—that have been advocated and
used in some schools to identify students at risk for violence, giving particular consideration to
the potential for harm inherent in these current approaches. Finally, we describe and explore the
utility of a threat assessment approach (Borum et al., 1999; Fein & Vossekuil, 1998; Fein et al.,
1995) to identify and assess risk posed by a potential student perpetrator for targeted violence in
school.
Delineating the Problem
The problem of “school violence” has been defined and constructed in a myriad of ways
(Furlong & Morrison, 2000). While eliminating all forms of antisocial aggression and violence in
youth is a laudable goal, different types of violence have different antecedents and thus require
different approaches for assessment and intervention (Cornell, 1990; Dishion, McCord, & Poulin,
1999; Hoagwood, 2000; Quay, 1987). The first step in developing effective assessment approaches
1
This definition of targeted violence is intentionally vague. It is not intended as an operational research definition, but
is proposed as a conceptual heuristic to stimulate thinking about the differences between the school-based attacks and the
more prevalent, less publicized violence that commonly occurs in schools and among youth.
2
It should be noted, however, that the U.S. Secret Service is in the process of conducting the first empirical analysis
of all known incidents of targeted school violence in the U.S., from 1974 through 2000. An interim report of findings is
available at http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac.
158 Reddy et al.
3. and appropriate policy is to identify clearly the types of behavior or outcomes that one is trying to
prevent (Chavez, 1999; Furlong & Morrison, 2000).3
Fear of School Violence Versus Actual Probability
It is clear that many Americans fear violence in schools, but the precise nature of this fear and
its relationship to the actual probability of harm are much less certain (Arnette & Walsleben, 1998;
Elliott et al., 1998; Furlong & Morrison, 1994; Henry, 2000; Hyman & Perone, 1998; Hyman
et al., 1997; Lawrence, 2000; U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).
Many have argued that the extensive media coverage of incidents of targeted school violence, and
its disproportion to the actual prevalence of targeted school violence, have significantly exacer-
bated fear over school violence (Arnette & Walsleben, 1998; Brooks et al., 2000; Elliott et al.,
1998; Henry, 2000; Lawrence, 2000; Snyder & Sickmund, 1999; Stossel, 1999; U.S. Department
of Education & U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).4
People seem to fear school-based homicides
most; yet, statistically, these events are so rare that the epidemic of concern would seem misplaced.
Relative to the risk of violent victimization that children face outside of school, the risk they
face in school is minimal (Goldstein & Conoley, 1997; Hyman et al., 1997; Kaufman et al., 1999;
U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Justice, 1999). The most recent report on
safety in American schools indicates that while more than 2,500 children in the U.S. were mur-
dered or committed suicide in the first half of the 1997–1998 school year, less than 1% of those
deaths—including those from multiple-victim homicides—occurred at school (U.S. Department
of Education & U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).5
While the odds that a student would be
threatened or injured with a weapon at school during the 1996 year were approximately 1 in 15
and the odds of getting into a physical fight at school were approximately 1 in 8 (Snyder &
Sickmund, 1999), recent studies have estimated that during the past 3 academic years the odds that
a child would die in school (by homicide or suicide) were no greater than 1 in 1 million (U.S.
Department of Education & U.S. Department of Justice, 1999)—and some argue were closer to 1
in 2 million (Brooks et al., 2000).
Although these incidents are extremely rare, they are so vexing and their impact is so great
that the fear they engender can often drive radical policy change, in some cases leading to the
implementation of bad policy (Hyman & Perone, 1998). Accordingly, we view the fear of school
3
While much discussion in the violence risk assessment literature has focused on the accuracy of predictions (Borum,
1996; Monahan, 1981; Mossman, 1994; Otto, 1992), we see an important distinction between predicting violence and
preventing it. The central difference lies in the outcomes implied by each term. With the frame of “violence prediction” or
even “violence risk assessment,” the implicit outcome is maximizing the accuracy of the assessor’s predictions—to be able
to gauge accurately who is more likely to be violent, and the circumstances under which the probability is greatest (Sewell
& Mendelsohn, 2000). With a frame of violence prevention, however, the outcome emphasis shifts from optimizing
predictive accuracy to effecting appropriate interventions. By emphasizing prevention as the outcome, the need to provide
necessary services takes precedence over the need to be “right” about whether a given child will in fact become violent.
More importantly, we would argue that the need to intervene permits school officials and others to consider options that are
less punitive (e.g., counseling, establishing a friendship with the child, finding a mentor, etc.) than those available when the
emphasis is placed on the child’s danger to others.
4
A 1998 Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed that 70% of respondents believed a school shooting could
happen in their community (Washington Wire, April 24, 1998). Also, in a critique of television coverage of these infrequent
school shootings, John Stossel (1999) reported that the three major television networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, aired a total
of 296 stories on the shooting at Columbine High School in Jefferson County, Colorado. Stossel noted that, in contrast,
lightning accounts for more deaths overall, and bathtub accidents account for more deaths of children, than do school
shootings (Stossel, 1999; Tebo, 2000); yet, they receive comparatively little media coverage.
5
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Education define a school-associated
violent death as any homicide or suicide that occurred a) on the campus of a functioning elementary or secondary school
(in the U.S.); b) while the victim was on the way to or from regular sessions at school; or c) while attending or travelling
to/from an official school event (e.g., a football game or school dance; Kachur et al., 1996).
School Threat Assessment 159
4. violence as a distinct problem that schools face, and one that must be acknowledged and consid-
ered in developing and implementing prevention policy.
Targeted Violence Versus General Aggression
As noted above, different types of violence have different antecedents and thus require dif-
ferent approaches for assessment and intervention. Identifying children and adolescents who are at
risk for violent behavior, broadly conceived, is not particularly difficult. There is an extensive
empirical knowledge base of risk factors (Hawkins et al., 1993, 2000); and, violent behavior
during adolescence is so common that, in some groups, it is virtually normative (Elliott, Ageton,
Huizinga, Knowles, & Cantor, 1983; Hirschi, 1969; Moffitt, Lynam, & Silva, 1994). Events that
occur so frequently are, statistically, not as difficult to predict.
Students at risk for targeted violence may or may not possess many of the traditional risk
factors associated with general violence recidivism and delinquency in youth. The etiology and
intervention for targeted violence may differ substantially from more general forms of aggressive
behavior in youth. Indeed, studies of juvenile homicide suggest that youth who commit murder
differ along certain dimensions from those who engage in nonviolent delinquency (Cornell, 1990;
Cornell, Benedek, & Benedek, 1987a,b)—but in ways that may seem counterintuitive. For exam-
ple, Cornell and his colleagues found that, compared with juveniles who were referred for evalu-
ation after committing larceny, juveniles who were referred for evaluation after committing homicide
were less likely to have prior mental histories, less likely to have a history of prior arrests or
placement in a juvenile facility, and less likely to have had problems with school adjustment.
Youth convicted of homicide were less likely to have histories of prior violent behavior than were
juveniles convicted on assault charges (Cornell, 1990; Cornell et al., 1987a,b). Notably, there is
considerable heterogeneity even among juvenile homicide offenders (Cornell, 1990; Cornell et al.,
1987a,b). Youth who commit acts of targeted school violence may differ substantially not only
from juveniles who engage in nonviolent delinquency but also from other juveniles who engage in
different types of homicide.
The particular challenge that schools face in trying to prevent targeted violence in school is
to assess the nature and degree of risk posed by a student who has come to official attention
because of some threatening communication or behavior of concern. The question is not whether
the student might be at increased risk for engaging in some form of aggressive behavior during
adolescence, but rather whether he or she currently poses a substantial risk of harm to another
identified or identifiable person(s) at school.
Current Approaches to Targeted Violence Assessment
In the sections that follow, we examine the three assessment approaches currently advocated
and used in some jurisdictions6
for evaluating risk of targeted violence in schools. These are: a)
profiling; b) guided professional judgment/structured clinical assessment (including the use of
warning signs and other checklists); and c) automated decision making (including the use of
actuarial formulas and expert systems). For each of these approaches, we describe how the eval-
6
It is not currently known how many schools use which type of assessment. No data yet exist that describe the
prevalence of any of these three approaches (or others) schools may currently use, nor of their effectiveness—perceived or
actual. Researchers at the Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, University of South Florida, the U.S. Secret
Service National Threat Assessment Center, and the Department of Education’s Safe and Drug Free Schools Program are
currently surveying school administrators, school-based law enforcement personnel, and others law enforcement investi-
gators on this issue. The purpose of these surveys is to describe the “landscape” of current assessment approaches used to
evaluate school-based targeted violence risk, gauge the perceived effectiveness of those approaches, and identify perceived
barriers to improved evaluation effectiveness.
160 Reddy et al.
5. uation is conducted, identify its threshold for concern used to determine risk of targeted violence
in school, explore its utility for evaluating risk of targeted violence in schools, and examine the
potential for harm (to students and others) inherent in each. We then turn to the threat assessment
approach, the strategy developed by the U.S. Secret Service for identifying, evaluating, and man-
aging threats and other inappropriate behaviors directed toward the president and other public
officials (Borum et al., 1999; Fein & Vossekuil, 1998; Fein et al., 1995). After describing the
contours of the threat assessment approach, we explore its utility for school administrators, law
enforcement professionals, mental health professionals, and others to determine the risk of tar-
geted school violence posed by a student who has engaged in threatening or otherwise concerning
behavior.
Profiling
The term “profiling” has become increasingly familiar in recent years. It is used broadly to
connote a range of identification techniques or assessment strategies that are used in both law
enforcement and non-law enforcement settings (Homant & Kennedy, 1998; Turvey, 1999a). Recently,
the practice of profiling has come under considerable scrutiny, as concern has developed both over
the use of racial profiles to single out types of people pulled over in traffic stops (e.g., Rogers,
2000), and over the use of demographic or behavioral profiles to identify types of students likely
to become “school shooters” (Cooper, 2000; Morse, 2000). To clarify what is meant by profiling
and establish a foundation for better understanding of the recent concern over its use in schools,
we will review briefly the various techniques that share the term “profiling.” We will then describe
in greater detail the profiling techniques suggested by some to determine risk of targeted violence
in schools.
Description and threshold of concern. The technique of crime scene profiling, as originally
developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Behavioral Science Unit, involves using
information gathered from a crime scene to generate a set of hypotheses about the characteristics—
physical, demographic, personality, and others—of the person most likely to have committed the
crime (Douglas, Ressler, Burgess, & Hartman, 1986; Holmes & Holmes, 1996; Homant & Ken-
nedy, 1998). The hypotheses are then used generally to help narrow a list of suspects or to suggest
other areas of investigative inquiry and thereby enhance the efficiency of an investigation. This
technique is retrospective in that it works from a behavior (i.e., the crime and crime scene evi-
dence) backward to infer the type of person who committed the crime. This technique has gained
popularity among state and local law enforcement personnel, with anecdotal reports of consider-
able success (Douglas et al., 1986) and some limited empirical support (Homant & Kennedy,
1998; Pinizzotto & Finkel, 1990; Turvey, 1999b).
The technique of criminal profiling has since been extended to include techniques for pro-
spective identification of would-be criminals. Rather than starting with a crime and working back-
ward to the type of person who committed the crime, the prospective form of profiling begins with
a specific person (one suspected of being, for example, the next “school shooter”) and projects
forward to try to predict the future likelihood that the person in question will commit the crime of
concern. In this version of profiling, a profile or description of the typical perpetrator of a partic-
ular type of crime—such as serial murder or school shootings—is compiled from characteristics
shared by known previous perpetrators (Homant & Kennedy, 1998; Pinizzotto, 1984). This pro-
spective profile is then used as a prototype or template against which an individual who is sus-
pected of being (or of becoming) a perpetrator may be compared. Prospective profiling is used
both to identify types of individuals likely to become perpetrators (absent a behavior or commu-
nication that brings someone to official attention) and to assess a given individual who has come
School Threat Assessment 161
6. to someone’s attention for some troubling communication or behavior. The threshold for concern
in both cases is a sufficient degree of “fit”7
or similarity between the characteristics of prior
perpetrators and those of the person under consideration. Various agencies and professionals have
developed prospective profiles of “the school shooter,” including the school shooter profile devel-
oped by the FBI (Band & Harpold, 1999) and the “classroom avenger” profile developed by
McGee and DeBernardo (1999).8
Attendant problems. Numerous concerns have arisen over the use of prospective profiling
to identify and assess the risk students pose for targeted violence in school. First, prospective
profiling is not sufficiently sensitive nor specific to identify a child who may be at risk for
engaging in targeted school violence, nor for evaluating the child’s likelihood of doing so (Sewell
& Mendelsohn, 2000). Prospective profiling to identify students likely to become “school shoot-
ers” carries with it considerable risk of false positives; that is, because targeted violence in
school is such a rare event, most who “fit” the profile will not engage in acts of targeted school
violence (Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000). In addition, use of prospective profiles would inappro-
priately exclude students who do not fit the profile, but who may in fact pose a risk of targeted
violence. By way of example, the use of a prospective profile derived from previous assassins
would have failed to identify Sarah Jane Moore prior to her assassination attempt on President
Ford in San Francisco in 1975. The profile most accepted at that time would have predicted
Ford’s attacker to be male, between the ages of 20 and 40, of slight build, born overseas, un-
employed, a loner, and someone who suffered from delusions of grandeur or persecution (Weisz
& Taylor, 1969). At the time she shot at Ford, Moore was female, in her mid-40s, of stocky
build, born in the U.S., employed full-time as an accountant, had been married and had a son,
and had no history of delusions.
The second concern is that the accuracy of school shooter profiles is questionable. The FBI’s
offender profile is based on only six school shootings (Band & Harpold, 1999; p. 14), whereas
other research has identified nearly 40 cases of school shootings in the past 20 years (Henry, 2000;
Vossekuil, Reddy, Fein, Borum, & Modzeleski, 2000). There is no discussion in the FBI’s profile
regarding the extent to which the information taken from the six shootings is representative of the
more than 30 school shootings not included in the profile. Given that incidents of targeted violence
in school are so infrequent, we would caution against any generalizations made from such a
minority of cases. In addition, the classroom avenger profile (McGee & DeBernardo, 1999) erro-
neously describes all of the perpetrators they included as white males, when in fact three of them
were not (Sincino was African American, Sirola was Hispanic, and Ramsey is half Native Alas-
kan). This kind of inaccuracy calls into question the accuracy of the other characteristics pre-
sented. It also highlights the fact that information about the perpetrators and offenses is only as
7
The threshold for concern is not specified with sufficient clarity in the school shooter profiles, nor in the warning sign
checklists. In a few places, the instruction given indicates that the greater number of characteristics present, the greater
should be the evaluator’s concern (e.g., Dwyer et al., 1998). Others in the field of violence risk assessment have argued that
this may not be an appropriate threshold (e.g., Borum et al., 1993).
8
Although we postpone discussion of warning sign checklists until the following section (on guided professional
judgement), we recognize that such lists belong equally in a discussion of concerns about profiling (Sewell & Mendelsohn,
2000). We note that the Department of Education warning sign checklist explicitly states that their list does not constitute
a profile and cautions that the list was never intended to serve as a predictor of violent behavior; rather, it was intended to
provide educators and others working with youth with a better idea of which students needed help and assistance (see e.g.,
Dwyer et al., 1998). However, despite such cautions, others have argued that in school settings, warning sign checklists are
often applied as profiles and their explicit cautions disregarded (Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000). We believe the concerns
about profiling for identifying and assessing risk of targeted school violence also apply to the use of warning sign check-
lists for the same purposes.
162 Reddy et al.
7. accurate as the source from which it is derived. Verlinden, Hersen, and Thomas (2000a,b), for
example, relied exclusively on media accounts of school shootings. Yet, preliminary findings from
the first empirical study of incidents of targeted school violence suggest that, when compared with
investigative and court records, media depictions of school shootings are in many cases incom-
plete or even inaccurate (Henry, 2000; Vossekuil et al., 2000).
Third, there are no data that demonstrate the validity or effectiveness of prospective profiling
to identify potential perpetrators for any type of crime. What little empirical support exists for the
use of profiling exists for retrospective identification only (Grubin, 1995; Homant & Kennedy,
1998).9
Moreover, research on decision making suggests that the use of prototypes to determine
whether someone or something belongs in a particular category (for example, whether a student
may be a “future school shooter”) can increase the effects of judgment bias. Decision makers who
rely on characteristics that appear to be more typical or representative of the category, to deter-
mine whether an object belongs in that category, may inadvertently render faulty decisions (Kah-
neman & Tversky, 1972, 1973; Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000; Tversky &
Kahneman, 1974). For example, a school administrator who believes she should be concerned
about a particular student because the student wears a black trench coat similar to the ones worn
by the shooters at Columbine High School would be relying inappropriately on such information
to determine risk. This use of what is called the representativeness heuristic can bias decision
making, when the characteristics an evaluator uses (e.g., “wears black trench coat”) are in fact less
informative than others that may appear less typical of previous shooters (e.g., has asked friends
where he could get a gun).
Still other research suggests that when decision makers set out to determine the validity of a
working hypothesis (e.g., that a particular student fits the school shooter profile), they may inad-
vertently search only for information that confirms their hypothesis and fail to search for—or tend
to discount—any information inconsistent with the hypothesis (Borum, Otto, & Golding, 1993;
Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Snyder & Swann, 1978). Known as the hypothesis confirmation bias, this
effect may increase the risk of false positives if the evaluator begins with the hypothesis that the
student in question fits the profile—rather than beginning with the hypothesis that the student does
not fit the profile (Borum et al., 1993; Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000).
Finally, use of prospective profiling in schools has received extensive criticism from those
the approach is designed to benefit, including parents, students, and even the Secretary of Educa-
tion (Cooper, 2000; Morse, 2000). This criticism has focused primarily on the risk of unfairly
labeling students as dangerous and the potential for stigmatizing them and depriving them of their
civil liberties as a result (Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000). Criticism has also focused on the potential
for profiling to produce bias, particularly bias against students who differ from the majority in
terms of appearance, race, sexual preference, etc. Results from a 2000 survey conducted by Time
magazine and the Discovery Channel indicate that the majority of students polled (60%) disap-
prove of the use of profiling in schools (Morse, 2000). Their concerns and fears are based on the
potential for unfair use of profiling against students who are not likely to be violent. Secretary of
Education Richard W. Riley publicly opposed the use of profiling in schools to identify potentially
9
With respect to the utility of current school shooter profiles, one aspect of the FBI school shooter profile in particular
bears scrutiny: The FBI’s school shooter profile includes the characteristic that prior school shooters showed no remorse
after the shooting (Band & Harpold, 1999). We question the utility of including a behavior that can only be detected after
an incident (no remorse over the shooting) in a profile intended to be used to identify children before a critical incident
occurs (see also Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000, for a similar discussion of violent behaviors included in profiles and check-
lists for violence risk). In interviews conducted by the Secret Service with several recent school shooters, many of the
shooters have shown considerable remorse over their actions (see 60 Minutes II, 2000).
School Threat Assessment 163
8. violent students, saying that we “simply cannot put student behaviors into a formula to come up
with the appropriate response” (Cooper, 2000; p. A11).
Guided Professional Judgment
The second approach used in schools to evaluate the risk of violence posed by a student is
that of guided professional judgment, also referred to as structured clinical assessment. In general,
clinical assessments that form the basis for professional risk judgments involve an interview and
evaluation of an individual that is informed by the base rates for violence within the individual’s
population, and by relevant risk factors known to be related to the risk of violent behavior (Borum,
1996, 2000; Otto, 2000). When the evaluator uses instruments or checklists that help to structure
or guide the collection and analysis of appropriate information, the approach is referred to as
guided professional judgment or structured clinical assessment (Borum, 2000; Otto, 2000). We
use the former term here since those conducting these assessments in schools may not necessarily
be mental health professionals. Risk judgements based on guided or structured assessments have
been shown to produce greater rates of accuracy than those based on unstructured assessments for
civil and forensic psychiatric patients, sex offenders, and domestic violence offenders (Dempster,
1998; Hanson, 1998; Kropp, Hart, Webster, & Eaves, 1999).
Guided professional judgments are traditionally conducted by trained and licensed mental
health professionals (Borum, 1996; 2000). However, school officials and law enforcement per-
sonnel also use checklists of risk factors and warning signs—such as those put out by the Depart-
ments of Justice and Education (Dwyer, Osher, & Warger, 1998),10
the International Association
of Chiefs of Police (1999), and the American Psychological Association (APA)/MTV collabora-
tion (American Psychological Association, 1999)—in a less formal but similar manner to that
used in structured clinical assessment. Therefore, we have broadened our discussion to include the
use of checklists and warning signs by school and law enforcement personnel. Many of the con-
cerns about the use of guided professional judgment to evaluate risk of targeted school violence
apply to school and law enforcement use of checklists and warning signs as well.11
Description and threshold of concern. In guided professional judgment, to the extent that
the assessment requires an estimate of probability or relative risk, the evaluator may begin by
determining the base rate for the type of violence in question among individuals with similar
demographic or clinical characteristics. This provides a baseline estimate of the probability of
violence among people in relevant populations. The evaluator then gathers information from and
about the individual by consulting a checklist of factors, each of which has a demonstrated rela-
tionship to violence recidivism based on existing professional literatures, and each of which may
have some form of scoring criteria (Borum, 2000). This approach helps the evaluator to gather all
relevant data during the course of interviews with the individual and reviews of existing records
(e.g., school, mental health, etc.). The evaluator may then adjust (or not) the baseline probability
of risk up or down, depending on the presence or absence of relevant risk factors, to determine the
10
The Department of Education emphasizes that the warning sign list included in their publication, Early warning,
Timely response, was never intended to serve as a predictor of youth violence but rather to provide a better idea of which
students may need assistance.
11
It is important to distinguish between “risk factor” and “warning sign.” These terms have been used interchange-
ably in the broader public debate about profiles, warning signs, and school violence prevention. We emphasize that the
concept of a risk factor is based upon an empirically established relationship with a particular outcome. Last (1988) defines
risk factor as an attribute or exposure that is associated with an increased probability of a specified outcome, such as the
occurrence of a disease (although not necessarily a causal factor). In contrast, a warning sign does not necessarily imply
an empirical relationship with a particular outcome, but rather is used as a rule of thumb or heuristic to suggest the
presence or impending existence of that outcome (see American Heritage Dictionary, 1996).
164 Reddy et al.
9. individual’s risk for violent behavior.12
The goal of a guided professional judgment is to reach an
appraisal of risk that is well informed by the best available research (Borum, 2000). The threshold
of concern is the presence, within the individual or his or her situation, of a sufficient number (or
severity) of risk factors known to be related to increased risk for violent behavior.
Attendant problems. We recognize that guided professional judgment represents a best prac-
tice approach in the mental health professions for assessing risk of general aggression, in school as
well as in other settings. However, we believe there are several limitations to its use for determin-
ing the risk that a student poses for targeted violence in school. First, because the prevalence of
targeted school violence is so small, an evaluation of risk for targeted school violence cannot be
driven primarily by the base rate (Sewell & Mendelsohn, 2000).13
If it were, the evaluator would
have to start with such a low probability baseline that even if all known risk factors were present
in a given student, the final appraisal of violence likelihood would necessarily be low. For exam-
ple, if a student was known to have recently acquired a weapon, and had told several friends that
they should not go near the library at 9:00 a.m. on Friday, a school administrator could not rea-
sonably ignore this information just because the base rate for school shootings is miniscule. Sewell
and Mendelsohn (2000) have argued, and we agree, that the cost of making a Type I error in such
a case—that is, of assessing the student as not posing a risk when in reality he or she does—would
be too high.
The second limitation is that empirical research is not yet available on risk factors for tar-
geted school violence, so evaluators do not yet know what information to gather for a school-
based, targeted violence risk assessment (Borum, 2000). As we noted earlier, different types of
violence have different antecedents. Thus, we believe it will be necessary to conduct empirical
research on the antecedents of targeted school violence before a sufficient knowledge base can
inform guided professional judgments for this type of violence. Third, and relatedly, existing
empirical research on general violence may have limited utility for assessments of risk for targeted
school violence (Borum, 2000; Borum et al., 1999). It is unclear how aggregate data from research
studies on other types of youth-perpetrated violence will generalize to specific targeted violence
fact patterns (Borum, 2000). Most of this research has examined only general violence recidivism
as a criterion. Moreover, most of this research has been conducted on criminal offenders and
psychiatric patients, populations to which the perpetrators of targeted school violence may not
belong. Although some of the checklists of warning signs and risk factors currently used by
schools are derived from empirical research on youth violence and aggression, the relationship
between these factors and risk of targeted school violence is not yet known.
Fourth, standard psychological tests and other instruments traditionally used in guided pro-
fessional judgments are of questionable utility to school-based targeted violence risk assessments.
Many psychological tests are designed primarily to assess mental disorders; yet, the prevalence,
nature, or role of mental disorder among perpetrators of targeted violence is not yet known. Nor
has research demonstrated any useful relationship between the results of standard psychological
tests and instruments and the risk of targeted violence in schools (Borum, 2000).
12
As a point of clarification, the distinction between guided professional judgment and actuarial assessment is the
clinician’s involvement in any decision or judgement. Any assessment approach where the evaluation is made by means
other than a strict statistical or formulaic combination of variables is considered to be a clinical assessment (Borum, 2000).
Please refer to the section on automated decision making for a more in-depth discussion of the use of actuarial formulas in
violence risk assessment decisions.
13
Interestingly, this concern about over-reliance on base rates in targeted violence risk assessments runs counter to the
more common concern that general violence risk assessments do not take base rates into account sufficiently (e.g., Borum
et al., 1993).
School Threat Assessment 165
10. Automated Decision Making
The two final approaches to assessing risk of targeted violence in schools fall under the
heading of what we term automated decision making. They are: 1) actuarial formulas, and 2)
expert systems and other artificial intelligence/artificial intuition approaches. We review these
together because both procedures produce a decision (although one that can be framed in more or
less definitive terms), rather than leaving the decision to the person conducting the assessment.
Description and threshold of concern. Actuarial tools are equations consisting of weighted
risk factors that are statistically or mechanically combined to yield a decision about the likelihood
of a condition or outcome (see, e.g., Dawes, Faust, & Meehl, 1989). They are created based on
empirical research on the behavior in question (e.g., violence), and typically are standardized for
specific populations and subtypes of the behavior in question (e.g., sexual assault or domestic
abuse). The development of such formulas is optimized when there exists a sufficient knowledge
base of known variables that contribute to the outcome in question (e.g., risk factors for a partic-
ular type of violence within that population), and where there is a sufficient frequency of occur-
rence of the event/outcome to permit statistically derived prediction. Where such actuarial equations
can be standardized and validated, they have been shown to perform as well or better than clinical
judgements in a range of decision tasks (Borum, 2000; Borum et al., 1993; Dawes et al., 1989;
Grove, 2000; Grove & Meehl, 1996). In short-term assessments of violence risk, however, the
formulas have not been significantly more accurate than even unstructured clinical judgments
(Mossman, 1994).
Expert systems and artificial intelligence/intuition are defined here as computer-based or
automated applications of expert knowledge on a particular issue to solve a problem or render a
decision in an instant case. Through various methods and structures, expertise that has been com-
piled on a particular topic or issue is represented in a computer program through the use of
algorithms or other computer-based rules (see Beaumont, 1991; Fox, 1996). The computer then
compares its store of expertise to the facts in the instant case and arrives at a decision or outcome,
based on the rules in its program and the content of expertise to which the case was compared. The
advantage of using an automated system is the reduction in any errors introduced through human
involvement in the decision, such as through biased information collection or subjective decision
making (Borum, 1996). The threshold for concern in both actuarial tools and expert systems is
determined by the formula or system, in theory based upon an empirical or experiential knowledge
base about the issue.
Attendant problems. We have three main concerns about the use of automated decision
making to assess risk of targeted violence in schools. First, appropriate actuarial equations do not
yet exist to determine risk of targeted violence, particularly school-based targeted violence. As we
noted earlier, a sufficient knowledge base on the antecedents and risk factors for targeted violence
in schools has yet to be created, thus precluding the derivation of any meaningful statistical
equations to assess the likelihood of its occurrence from known risk factors. More importantly,
however, the base rate of targeted school violence is too low for any statistically derived equation
to attain any reasonable discriminant accuracy. Any equation derived from empirically researched
risk factors for targeted school violence would never be sufficiently sensitive (minimizing the
number of false negatives) nor specific (minimizing the number of false positives) to reasonably
estimate the probability that a given student would engage in targeted violence in school (Sewell
& Mendelsohn, 2000).
Second, expert consensus on evaluating risk of targeted violence generally, and targeted
school violence in particular, has not yet been formed. This area of research is clearly in its
infancy, with the first known empirical study of violence targeted against public officials and
166 Reddy et al.
11. public figures just published in 1999 (Fein & Vossekuil, 1999). As previously noted, the appro-
priate empirical research on targeted school violence has yet to be conducted, making the utility of
existing knowledge on other forms of youth violence as yet unknown. Expert systems and artifi-
cial intuition programs that claim to compare the student in question with thousands of known
cases (e.g., Morse, 2000; Steinberg, 2000) are not comparing the student to cases of targeted
school violence because the incidence of such cases is far lower (see Henry, 2000).
Finally, research on the use of expert systems in other contexts has raised concerns regarding
the creation of expectations that exceed what expert systems can reasonably accomplish (Winegrad
& Flores, 1987). To the extent that existing actuarial formulas and expert systems are not yet
informed by empirical research on targeted violence in schools, they may fail to gather informa-
tion on the student or situation that may be relevant to appraising risk and thus produce a flawed
assessment. Still other research has documented that users of expert systems may rely inappro-
priately on the decisions produced by a computer (Will, 1991). In one study, users of an expert
system (both experts and novices for the task in question) reported considerable satisfaction with
what were in fact flawed decisions the system produced (only one participant figured out the
decision was fundamentally flawed; Will, 1991). By extension, when an expert systems approach
is used to determine risk of targeted school violence, there is a risk the user may discount their own
knowledge of the student in question and rely primarily, if not solely, on the computer-generated
decision instead.
Threat Assessment Approach
The common conceptual element in each of these approaches is that they are fundamentally
inductive (see Turvey, 1999b): they rely on aggregate information about prior events to guide
inferences about facts in a specific case. In our view, what is needed to evaluate the risk of
school-based targeted violence posed by students is an approach that is deductive (see Turvey,
1999c): one that focuses primarily on the facts of the particular case in question to guide infer-
ences (rather than on a series of factors shared by similar perpetrators or other violent youth); that
examines closely the progression of ideas and planning behaviors over time; and, that corroborates
information gathered in the case from multiple sources in contact with the student.
Based upon their empirical research on assassinations and attacks of public officials and
public figures, Fein, Vossekuil, and colleagues (1998, 1999; Fein et al., 1995) developed the threat
assessment approach, a framework for identifying, assessing, and managing persons who pose a
risk for targeted violence. Threat assessment is guided by several operational principles and relies
on key questions that this research suggests are important to ask when evaluating the risk posed by
an individual for acts of targeted violence (Borum et al., 1999; Fein & Vossekuil, 1998, 1999; Fein
et al., 1995). We believe this approach holds promise for assessing risk of targeted violence in
schools.
Guiding Principles of the Threat Assessment Approach
Certain guiding principles derived from the public official violence research underlie the
threat assessment approach. First among these is that there is no profile or single “type” of per-
petrator of targeted violence. Rather, violence is seen as the product of an interaction among the
perpetrator, situation, target, and the setting. In their study of assassins and near-assassins, Fein
and Vossekuil found a wide range of ages, both genders, varying educational backgrounds, and
other differing demographic features (Fein & Vossekuil, 1998, 1999). It is possible that school
shooters will show similar heterogeneity, as prior research attempting to identify the prototype of
a violent youth has been wholly unsuccessful. As Herbert Quay noted over a decade ago:
School Threat Assessment 167
12. The assumption that all delinquents exhibit some common set of psychological characteristics
has been the basis for most of the early research into the psychological characteristics of
delinquents . . . and unfortunately, remains so . . . If, in fact, delinquent youth are behaviorally
and psychologically heterogeneous, the search for single psychological variables that can
reliably separate delinquents from non-delinquents is not an effective research strategy (Quay,
1987; p. 118).
We extend this comment by suggesting that it is also not a useful clinical assumption or an effec-
tive assessment strategy.
The second key guiding principle underlying the threat assessment approach is that there is a
distinction between making a threat (expressing, to the target or others, an intent to harm a target)
and posing a threat (engaging in behaviors that further a plan to harm a target). Many people who
make threats do not pose a serious risk of harm to a target. Conversely, many who pose a serious
risk of harm will not issue direct threats prior to an attack. For example, no public official/public
figure assassin or attacker directly threatened their target prior to the attack (Fein & Vossekuil,
1998, 1999). The implication derived from this finding is that, while all threats (direct, indirect,
conditional, or otherwise) should be taken seriously, they are not the most reliable indicator of risk
and therefore should not be a necessary condition to initiate an inquiry or preliminary evaluation.
Indeed, a youth who is committed to mounting an attack may be less inclined to threaten a poten-
tial target directly, particularly if he or she does not want to be stopped. The youth may, however,
discuss ideas of harm among friends and peers.
The third assumption underlying the approach is that targeted violence is not random or
spontaneous; it does not occur because someone “just snapped.” The research on public official/
public figure violence indicates that this type of targeted violence is the result of an understand-
able, and an often discernible, pattern of thinking and behavior (Borum et al., 1999; Fein &
Vossekuil, 1998; Fein et al., 1995). What this finding suggests is that many incidents of targeted
violence may be preventable. Conceptually, this principle is very important since assessing risk
for events that are considered to be random would seem to be a contradiction. If, however, they are
viewed as the result of a behavioral process, then a fact-based assessment makes sense.
What Constitutes Threat Assessment
The threat assessment approach is a set of operational activities that combine the use of an
investigative process and information-gathering strategies with target-violence relevant questions
(see Borum et al., 1999 for a detailed description of the threat assessment approach; see also
International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1999; p. 67). These activities are designed to iden-
tify, assess, and manage individuals who pose a risk of violence to an identified, or identifiable,
target.
A threat assessment may be initiated by any communication or behavior of concern. Threats
are not a necessary threshold for concern; however the threat assessment approach also dictates
that no threat should be ignored. The process of gathering information about the individual includes
an investigative emphasis on corroboration of facts to establish their veracity (in contrast with the
typical clinical emphasis on the patient’s story or their perception of events). The focus of the
inquiry is on the individual’s behavior in the instant case, and what the progression of their behav-
iors may suggest (i.e., movement from development of an idea to implementation of a plan). The
threshold for concern is evidence that suggests the individual may be on a pathway toward violent
action. The threshold is deliberately set low enough to facilitate early intervention, as the empha-
sis of this approach is on prevention and the development of effective case management strategies.
168 Reddy et al.
13. The threat assessment approach asks the person conducting the inquiry to gather information,
and answer key questions about the instant case, to determine whether there is evidence to suggest
movement toward violent action. The questions focus on: 1) motivation for the behavior that
brought the person being evaluated to official attention; 2) communication about ideas and inten-
tions; 3) unusual interest in targeted violence; 4) evidence of attack-related behaviors and plan-
ning; 5) mental condition; 6) level of cognitive sophistication or organization to formulate and
execute an attack plan; 7) recent losses (including losses of status); 8) consistency between com-
munications and behaviors; 9) concern by others about the individual’s potential for harm; and 10)
factors in the individual’s life and/or environment or situation that might increase or decrease the
likelihood of attack.
Taken together, the information learned from these questions—as gathered from the student
and from corroborating sources (family members, friends, teachers, classmates, school and mental
health records, etc.)—should provide evidence to answer the question of whether the student is
moving on a path toward violent action. The answer to the last set of questions in particular can
inform the development of a risk management plan. For example, school officials could decide to
take active steps to minimize factors that could put the student at greater risk for an attack, such as
through referral to appropriate services. Or they could opt instead to monitor the student (perhaps
with assistance from family and others close to the student) for changes in factors that could
increase the student’s targeted violence risk.
Conclusion
When considering how best to prevent (rather than optimally predict) targeted violence in
circumstances where a student has come to official attention because of threatening or concerning
behavior, traditional inductive approaches are unlikely to be helpful. The use of profiles is inef-
fective and inefficient, carries with it a considerable risk of false positives (most youth who fit the
profile are not a targeted violence risk), has a potential for bias, and has been sharply criticized for
its potential to stigmatize students and deprive them of civil liberties. The use of guided profes-
sional judgment—while highly appropriate and effective for evaluating risk of more general forms
of violence and aggression—is currently inappropriate for evaluating risk of targeted school vio-
lence. The knowledge base of empirically researched risk factors for targeted school violence has
not yet been developed, nor has any relationship been established between general youth violence
risk factors or standard psychological tests/instruments and the occurrence of targeted violence.
And finally, because targeted school violence is such an infrequent event, it is not amenable to
statistical prediction by actuarial tools. Nor is it amenable to evaluation by expert systems or
artificial intuition programs because expert consensus on this topic has not yet been reached, and
the validity (i.e., accuracy) of the programs or their decision rules has not been established.
We suggest that a deductive, fact-based approach is needed to investigate and assess the risk
for targeted violence in schools. The threat assessment approach developed by the U.S. Secret
Service represents a good first step toward identifying and assessing risk posed by students for
targeted violence in schools. We have promoted this approach as one that is suitable for use right
now by mental health professionals, school administrators, law enforcement professionals, and
others who have responsibilities for maintaining school safety. We believe, however, that what is
most needed for effective prevention of planned school-based attacks is empirical research on
incidents of targeted school violence. Many of the shortcomings that we highlighted about current
assessment approaches for targeted school violence center around the lack of empirical research
on targeted violence perpetrated by students at school. We recognize that although the threat
assessment approach is based upon empirical research on targeted violence, it too lacks the benefit
of comprehensive empirical knowledge on targeted violence in schools. The most effective approach
School Threat Assessment 169
14. for understanding and preventing planned school-based attacks will be the one that is informed by
empirically derived knowledge about the antecedents, motives, idea development, communica-
tions, and planning behaviors of all known perpetrators of targeted school violence. We see these
as the most critical unanswered questions that school and law enforcement professionals currently
face in attempting to prevent targeted violence in schools.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Michelle Rand for her research assistance and Megan Williams for
her editorial assistance. They also wish to thank Secretary Richard Riley, U.S. Department of
Education, Director Brian Stafford and Assistant Director Barbara Riggs, U.S. Secret Service, and
Drs. William Pollack and Michael Gelles, for their ongoing support of the U.S.S.S. Safe School
Initiative.
References
American Heritage dictionary of the English language (3rd ed.). (1996). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
American Psychological Association. (1999). Warning signs: A violence prevention guide for youth. [Online]. Available:
http://helping.apa.org/warningsigns/index.html.
Arnette, J.L., & Walsleben, M.C. (1998, April 1–15). Combating fear and restoring safety in schools. OJJDP Juvenile
Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.
Band, S.R., & Harpold, J.A. (1999, September). School violence: Lessons learned. FBI: Law Enforcement Bulletin, 68,
9–16.
Beaumont, J.G. (1991). Expert systems and the clinical psychologist. In A. Ager (Ed.), Microcomputers and clinical
psychology: Issues, applications and future developments (pp. 175–193). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Borum, R. (1996). Improving the clinical practice of violence risk assessment: Technology, guidelines and training. Amer-
ican Psychologist, 51, 945–956.
Borum, R. (2000). Assessing violence risk among youth. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 1263–1288.
Borum, R., Fein, R., Vossekuil, B., & Berglund, J. (1999). Threat assessment: Defining an approach for evaluating risk of
targeted violence. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 17, 323–337.
Borum, R., Otto, R., & Golding, S. (1993). Improving clinical judgement and decision making in forensic evaluation.
Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 21, 35–76.
Brooks, K., Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2000). School house hype: Two years later. Washington, DC: Justice Policy
Institute/Children’s Law Center [Online]. Available: http://www.cjcj.org/schoolhousehype/shh2.html.
Chaddock, G.R. (2000, January 13). A radical step for school safety. The Christian Science Monitor, p. 1.
Chavez, V. (1999). Operational definitions of youth violence in empirical research. International Quarterly of Community
Health Education, 18, 237–261.
Cooper, K.J. (2000, April 19). Riley rejects schools’ profiling of potentially violent students. The Washington Post, p. A11.
Cornell, D.G. (1990). Prior adjustment of violent juvenile offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 569–577.
Cornell, D.G., Benedek, E.P., & Benedek, D.M. (1987a). Characteristics of adolescents charged with homicide: Review of
72 cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 5, 11–23.
Cornell, D.G., Benedek, E.P., & Benedek, D.M. (1987b). Juvenile homicide: Prior adjustment and a proposed typology.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57, 383–393.
Dawes, R., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgement. Science, 243, 1668–1674.
Dempster, R. (1998). Prediction of sexually violent recidivism: A comparison of risk assessment instruments. Unpublished
master’s thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
Dishion, T.J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American
Psychologist, 54, 755–764.
Douglas, J.E., Ressler, R.K., Burgess, A.W., & Hartman, C.R. (1986). Criminal profiling from crime scene analysis.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 4, 401–421.
Dwyer, K., Osher, D., & Warger, C. (1998). Early warning, timely response: A guide to safe schools. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education.
Elliott, D.S., Ageton, S., Huizinga, D., Knowles, B., & Canter, R. (1983). The prevalence and incidence of delinquent
behavior: 1976–1980 (The National Youth Survey Report No. 26). Boulder, CO: Behavioral Research Institute.
170 Reddy et al.
15. Elliott, D.S., Hamburg, B.A., & Williams, K.R. (1998). Violence in American schools: An overview. In D. Elliott, B.
Hamburg, & K. Williams (Eds.), Violence in American schools (pp. 3–28). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Fein, R.A., & Vossekuil, B. (1998). Protective intelligence & threat assessment investigations: A guide for state and local
law enforcement officials (NIJ/OJP/DOJ Publication No. 170612). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Fein, R.A., & Vossekuil, B.V. (1999). Assassination in the United States: An operational study of recent assassins, attack-
ers, and near-lethal approachers. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44, 321–333.
Fein, R.A., Vossekuil, B., & Holden, G.A. (1995, September). Threat assessment: An approach to prevent targeted vio-
lence. National Institute of Justice: Research in Action, 1–7.
Fox, J. (1996). Expert systems and theories of knowledge. In M.A. Boden (Ed.), Artificial intelligence (pp. 157–181). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Furlong, M., & Morrison, G. (1994). Introduction to miniseries: School violence and safety in perspective. School Psy-
chology Review, 23, 139–150.
Furlong, M., & Morrison, G. (2000). The school in school violence: Definitions and facts. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 8, 71–82.
Goldstein, A.P., & Conoley, J.C. (1997). Student aggression: Current status. In A. Goldstein & J. Conoley (Eds.), School
violence intervention: A practical handbook (pp. 3–19). New York: Guilford .
Grove, W., & Meehl, P. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical,
algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 2, 293–323.
Grubin, D. (1995). Offender profiling. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 6, 259–263.
Hanson, K. (1998). What we know about sex offender risk assessment. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 4, 50–72.
Hawkins, J., & et al. (1998). A review of predictors of youth violence. In R. Loeber & D. Farrington (Eds.) Serious and
violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 106–146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Henry, T. (2000, April 11). Scared at school. USA Today.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Hoagwood, K. (2000). Research on youth violence: Progress by replacement, not addition. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 8, 67–70.
Holmes, R.M., & Holmes, S.T. (1996). Profiling violent crimes: An investigative tool (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Homant, R., & Kennedy, D. (1998). Psychological aspects of crime scene profiling: Validity research. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 25, 319–343.
Hyman, I., & Perone, D. (1998). The other side of school violence: Educator policies and practices that may contribute to
student misbehavior. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 7–27.
Hyman, I., Weiler, E., Perone, D., Romano, L., Britton, G., & Shanock, A. (1997). Victims and victimizers: The two faces
of school violence. In A. Goldstein & J. Conoley (Eds.), School violence intervention: A practical handbook (pp. 426–
459). New York: Guilford.
International Association of Chiefs of Police. (1999). Guidelines for preventing and responding to school violence. Alex-
andria, VA: Author.
Kachur, S.P., Stennies, G.M., Powell, K.E., Modzeleski, W., Stephens, R., Murphy, R., Kresnow, M., Sleet, D., & Lowry,
R. (1996). School-associated violent deaths in the United States, 1992 to 1994. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 275, 1729–1733.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgement of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3,
430–454.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237–251.
Kaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S.P., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., Chandler, K.A., Chapman, C.D., Rand, M.R., & Klaus, P.
(1999). Indicators of school crime and safety, 1999 (NCES 1999–057/NCJ-178906). Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-
ments of Education and Justice.
Kropp, P., Hart, S., Webster, C., & Eaves, D. (1999). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide (3rd ed.).
Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
Last, J. (1988). A dictionary of epidemiology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Lawrence, R. (May/June 2000). School violence, the media, and the ACJS. ACJS Today, 20, 1, 4–6. Alexandria, VA:
Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences.
McGee, J., & DeBernardo, C.R. (1999, May/June). The classroom avenger: A behavioral profile of school based shootings.
The Forensic Examiner, 16–18.
Moffitt, T., Lynam, D., & Silva, P. (1994). Neuropsychological tests predict male delinquency. Criminology, 32, 101–124.
Monahan, J. (1981). The clinical prediction of violent behavior. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.
Morse, J. (2000, April 24). Looking for trouble: More and more schools are trying to spot the potential killers in their midst.
But what about the innocents? Time, pp. 50–xx.
School Threat Assessment 171
16. Mossman, D. (1994). Assessing predictions of violence: Being accurate about accuracy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 62, 783–792.
Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Otto, R. (1992). The prediction of dangerous behavior: A review and analysis of “second generation” research. Forensic
Reports, 5, 103–133.
Otto, R.K. (2000). Assessing and managing violence risk in outpatient settings. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 1239–
1262.
Pinizzotto, A.J. (1984). Forensic psychology: Criminal personality profiling. Journal of Police Science & Administration,
12, 32–40.
Pinnizzotto, A., & Finkel, N. (1990). Criminal personality profiling: An outcome and process study. Law & Human
Behavior, 14, 215–233.
Quay, H.C. (1987). Patterns of delinquent behavior. In H.C. Quay (Ed.), Handbook of juvenile delinquency (pp. 118–138).
New York: Wiley.
Rogers, E. (2000). Fear of driving: Congress considers study of racial profiling in police traffic stops. ABA Journal, 86, 94.
Sewell, K.W., & Mendelsohn, M. (2000). Profiling potentially violent youth: Statistical and conceptual problems. Chil-
dren’s Services: Social Policy, Research, and Practice, 3, 147–169.
Snyder, H.N., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.
Snyder, M., & Swann, W.B., Jr. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social
reality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1202–1212.
Steinberg, L. (2000, April 22). Software can’t make school safe. The New York Times, p. A13.
Stossel, J. (1999, October 22). Give me a break: Media coverage of school shootings is up though violence in schools is
down. 20/20. New York: ABC News.
Sugai, G., Sprague, J.R., Horner, R., & Walker, H.M. (2000). Preventing school violence: The use of office discipline
referrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,
8, 94–101.
Tebo, M.G. (2000, April). Zero tolerance, zero sense. ABA Journal, 41–21, 44, 46, 113.
Turvey, B.E. (1999a). An overview of criminal profiling. In B. Turvey (Ed.), Criminal profiling (pp. 1–11). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Turvey, B.E. (1999b). Inductive criminal profiling. In B. Turvey (Ed.), Criminal profiling (pp. 13–23). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Turvey, B.E. (1999c). The deductive method of criminal profiling. In B. Turvey (Ed.), Criminal profiling (pp. 25–32). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Justice. (1999). 1999 annual report on school safety. Washington,
DC: Authors.
Verlinden, S., Hersen, M., & Thomas, J. (2000a). Risk factors in school shootings. Clinical Psychology Review, 20, 3–56.
Verlinden, S. Hersen, M., & Thomas, J. (2000b). “Risk factors in schools shootings”: Erratum. Clinical Psychology Review,
20, 679.
Vossekuil, B., Reddy, M., Fein, R., Borum, R., & Modzeleski, W. (2000). Safe School Initiative: An interim report on the
prevention of targeted violence in schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service, National Threat Assessment Center.
Washington Wire. (1998, April 24). Wall Street Journal, p. A1.
Weisz, A.E., & Taylor, R.L. (1969). American presidential assassination: Role of the social environment. Diseases of the
Nervous System, 30, 659–668.
Will, R. (1991). True and false dependence on technology: Evaluation with an expert system. Computers in Human
Behavior, 7, 171–183.
Winograd, T., & Florez, F. (1987). Understanding computers and cognition. New York:Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
172 Reddy et al.