5
School Active Shooter Drills and Other School Security Measures: Developmental Contexts

Childhood and adolescence are characterized by significant cognitive, behavioral, and emotional growth as well as sensitivity to social interactions and environments (NASEM, 2019a,b). It is essential to keep these facets of development in mind when considering best practices for school active shooter drills, focusing on practices that have the desired protective effects while minimizing adverse impacts on healthy mental, emotional, and behavioral development. As described in a recent National Academies report, Fostering Healthy Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Development in Children and Youth (NASEM, 2019a), healthy development entails not only preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders but also promoting healthy “cognitive development, psychological and behavioral health, and social and emotional competence” (p. 26). As discussed earlier, this report is guided by an ecological model (see Figure 1-1 in Chapter 1) tailored for considering children within the context of classrooms, schools, families, and communities.

This chapter begins by detailing the developmental and contextual considerations for implementing school active shooter drills and other security measures, such as the presence of school resource officers and the use of metal detectors for pre-K,²¹ elementary, middle

___________________

²¹ The committee includes pre-K where applicable, recognizing that some elementary school campuses include pre-K classrooms whose students may participate in school active shooter drills.

school, and high school students. It then briefly outlines unique identities of students, caregivers, teachers, and other school staff that are important to consider when planning for school active shooter drills. Finally, the chapter reviews considerations for caregivers, teachers, and other school staff as they relate to supporting children’s mental, emotional, and behavioral development. Although these descriptions are not exhaustive, they highlight individuals who may be at risk for adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes from school active shooter drills and other school security measures, as well as groups of interest as identified by the committee’s statement of task (see Box 1-1 in Chapter 1). This includes people who have experienced trauma and other adverse life events and individuals with functional or access needs, including multilingual learners who require language supports²²; people who are deaf or hard of hearing; and those with emotional and behavioral support needs, intellectual disabilities, and physical or other health conditions. Furthermore, the chapter considers challenges specific to transient or new students, as well as those with prior legal system involvement. Throughout the discussion, the emphasis is on supporting the needs of students and school staff while minimizing harmful impacts of school active shooter drills or other security measures on children’s mental, emotional and behavioral well-being, as well as promoting positive school climates and a sense of belonging.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR STUDENTS BY DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE

Drawing on reports from developmental science literature as well as current guidance from organizations including—but not limited to—the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National

___________________

²² The term multilingual learners refers to “students participating in the PreK-12 education system whose home or ancestral language is a language other than English.” School systems may use other terms, such as English learners or dual-language learners to identify these students (Regional Educational Laboratory West, 2024, p. 1; Rose et al., 2024).

Association of School Psychologists (NASP), the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO), and Safe and Sound Schools, this section summarizes developmental considerations for school active shooter drills by age group—including pre-K, elementary, middle school, and high school students. These organizations have outlined current best practices for school active shooter drills and offer some of the only written guidance on unique considerations across stages of child development. The discussion also draws on insights from the committee’s fall 2024 listening session with students (Box 5-1).

Early Childhood: Pre-K and Kindergarten (Ages 3–5)

Early childhood includes children in pre-K and kindergarten, ages 3–5 years; children in this stage experience tremendous progress in developing physical and social skills, language ability, and numerous aspects of emotional development (Crotty et al., 2023; Institute of Medicine & National Research Council, 2000). However, children in this age group continue to have a limited understanding of abstract concepts and are highly dependent on their caregivers to feel safe. Young children can understand the concepts of danger and emergencies, but only with adult guidance (Schildkraut & Nickerson, 2020).

In the context of a school active shooter drill (preparation for an emergency), children in this age group must rely on adult directions and management. Accordingly, it is important that well-trained staff use simple, clear, and reassuring language and provide students with a sense of calm and confidence.

Elementary School: Grades 1–5 (Ages 6–10)

Children aged 6–10 experience significant advances in concrete operational thought, which enables logical problem-solving (Fang & Fang, 1999; Shapiro & O’Brien, 1970). Compared with early childhood, children in elementary school have an improved understanding of rules and routines and are also developing a sense of independence.

Elementary school students are growing in their awareness of what constitutes danger and in their understanding of why drills are conducted (Hill et al., 2000; Zhe & Nickerson, 2007). However, it should be noted that children at the lower end of this age (i.e., grades 1–2) may be more developmentally similar to students in pre-K and kindergarten in terms of their ability to understand abstract concepts (Byrnes, 2008).

Most children in this age group understand basic concepts of safety and emergency procedures but require clear and simple explanations (Ammirati et al., 2014; Zhe & Nickerson, 2007). They continue to require adult direction during emergencies and are typically able to follow directions and instructions (Ammirati et al., 2014; Waterman et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2020). They also require emotional reassurance and support from adults in the context of school active shooter drills.

Middle School: Grades 6–8 (Ages 10–13)

When children reach middle school (grades 6–8, ages 10–13), their executive functioning skills are continuing to develop (Zelazo et al., 2016). Children in this age group can increasingly differentiate between likely threats and other potential dangers and can understand why active shooter drills occur (Cunningham, 2020; NASP et al., 2021; Schildkraut & Nickerson, 2020). Adult direction is essential for middle school children, but they can also perform practiced actions or roles independently during an emergency.

High School: Grades 9–12 (Ages 14–18)

As children move through their high school years, they experience significant development of their critical thinking and problem-solving skills and assume a greater sense of responsibility (Blakemore & Choudhury, 2006). Relative to younger children, high school students can make sense of complex information (Zhe & Nickerson, 2007). In addition, they are generally capable of abstract reasoning, hypothetical thinking, and strategic decision-making (NASEM, 2019b). These cognitive capacities, along with a

growing sense of responsibility and increased executive functioning, may enable them to better navigate challenges that involve complex problem-solving and use creative thinking (NASEM, 2019b). However, these abilities may vary based on individual differences in development, ability to regulate emotions under stress, and previous training.

CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO UNIQUE IDENTITIES OF STUDENTS, CAREGIVERS, TEACHERS, AND OTHER STAFF

This section describes several characteristics of subpopulations that represent the diversity within K–12 school communities in the United States—including backgrounds, experiences, identities, access, and functioning—that are relevant to identifying practices for

school active shooter drills that minimize harms to mental, emotional, and behavioral health. Although these subpopulations are all members of groups that make up a school community—students, caregivers, teachers, other school staff, and community members—the sections that follow focus primarily on research describing students and their abilities and needs when participating in a school active shooter drill. Similar observations may apply to caregivers, teachers, and other school staff on a school campus—such as a teacher who is pregnant or uses a wheelchair for mobility or a parent who is deaf or has mental health sequelae from experiencing gun violence.

Developmental considerations for mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being need to encompass the disparate and intersecting histories and functionality that everyone, including students, teachers, and other school staff, bring to the classroom and to the broader school campus. It is important to note that although the following sections are organized according to the characteristics of specific subpopulations, it is not uncommon for individuals to have intersecting identities and characteristics that can add multiplicative complexity to the challenge of conducting school active shooter drills that support mental, emotional, and behavioral health.

In a recent nationally representative survey, U.S. teachers reported that school active shooter drills were not generally designed to accommodate subpopulations (Moore et al., 2024). For example, only 26% of teachers reported that their school’s active shooter drills were designed to meet the needs of students with physical disabilities, only 23% of teachers reported that drills were designed to meet the needs of students with developmental disabilities, and only 12% of teachers reported that drills were designed to meet the needs of those with past experiences of trauma (Moore et al., 2024). See also Box 5-2 for perspectives from school staff, as shared information-gathering sessions hosted by the committee.

Finally, although the committee here highlights risk factors that can negatively affect mental, emotional, and behavioral health, it is important to emphasize positive childhood experiences that have been shown to promote well-being in children (NASEM, 2019a);

these experiences are associated with “perceived safety, security, and support; and positive and predictable qualities of life” (Narayan et al., 2018, p. 20). These experiences encompass both internal factors (i.e., positive sense of self) and family characteristics (i.e., presence of a trusted and reliable caregiver, financial security), as well as experiences outside of the home, such as positive relationships with peers and teachers, safe and supportive schools, and highly resourced neighborhood contexts. Although definitions of positive childhood experiences vary across the literature, there is robust empirical support (Raghunathan et al., 2024) for a cumulative model, with overlapping positive childhood experiences conferring better outcomes both in childhood and into adulthood. Furthermore, in addition to having a direct benefit for health and well-being outcomes, positive childhood experiences can attenuate the impact of adverse or stressful childhood experiences and thus can play a role in shaping mental, emotional, and behavioral outcomes in multiple ways (Kallapiran et al., 2025; Raghunathan et al., 2024).

Individuals with Prior Trauma Histories and Adverse Life Experiences

The individual lived experiences of students and staff shape their mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being. In turn, the histories they bring to school can potentially affect their response to school active shooter drills, depending on how they are conducted. Thus, special consideration is needed when an individual has had previous exposure to trauma, adversity, or stress that may affect their response to drills.

The terms trauma, adversity, and stress are often used interchangeably. In general, trauma can encompass a range of events including violence, natural disasters, discrimination or racism, life-threatening illness, abuse, or loss of loved ones (Dye, 2018; Kliethermes et al., 2014). While the standard for a “criterion A” traumatic event is typically defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Mol et al., 2005), prior work suggests that other events also produce traumatic stress responses (Davis & Siegel, 2000; Gradus et al., 2022) and thus need to be considered in the context of school active shooter drills. In addition, children may have had experiences that are not specifically categorized as trauma that result in “stress” or other mental and physical reactions to events in the environment, which in turn can affect mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being. These stressors—often referred to as adverse childhood experiences—encompass exposures that may or may not meet the definition of trauma and include being exposed to parental substance abuse, growing up in poverty, or experiencing the divorce of parents or caregivers (Felitti et al., 1998; Hardt & Rutter, 2004).

Similarly, teachers and other school staff come to school with their own histories of stress and trauma. For example, violence directed against teachers, such as threats, harassment, and physical assault has been highlighted as a public health issue that can lead to a decline in teachers’ mental health as well as burnout (Reddy et al., 2023).

Childhood traumatic stress is highly prevalent within the United States. Reports estimate that up to 60% of children and adolescents have had at least one direct exposure to violence, crime, or abuse, with 41% having had multiple exposures in the past year (Finkelhor et al., 2015). Among children exposed to trauma, more than 70% experienced more than one trauma (Briggs et al., 2012). Exposure to traumatic events in childhood is associated with an increased likelihood of psychiatric disorders in adulthood (Copeland et al., 2018). Although not everyone experiencing trauma develops trauma-related mental health conditions, both children and adults can develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Breslau et al., 1999), and children may show disruptions in school performance and behavior as a result of trauma (Bell et al., 2013; Perfect et al., 2016). For example, trauma exposure in childhood is associated with impairments in reading ability and executive function (Delaney-Black et al., 2002), increases in externalizing behaviors (Larson et al., 2017), and lower school performance (Goodman et al., 2012). Furthermore, children with trauma histories may show increased reactivity to other emotionally evocative stimuli (Aas et al., 2016; Marusak et al., 2015; van Nierop et al., 2018).

Histories of grief and loss among students also warrant consideration in planning for school active shooter drills. Grief can result in a child’s decline in functioning, including regression to younger behaviors, emotional dysregulation, and difficulties concentrating in school (Alvis et al., 2023; Layne et al., 2017; Oosterhoff et al., 2018). When grief involves the traumatic death of a loved one, traumatic grief can develop and result in post-traumatic stress symptoms (Dyregrov et al., 2015). When planning for school active shooter drills, school staff need to be aware of and attuned to students’ histories of trauma, grief, and other adverse childhood experiences—

in particular, exposure to gun violence exposure and other traumatic events that a student may recall during a drill. School communities that have experienced mass violence also have a significantly greater presence and persistence of PTSD (Moreland et al., 2024) that may require the availability of additional supports available when a school active shooter drill is conducted.

As noted, other adverse childhood experiences also impact mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being. Exposure to adverse childhood experiences is common in the United States; data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggest that at least 64% of individuals have had at least one such experience (Swedo et al., 2023). A substantial body of research suggests that these exposures have multifactorial downstream impacts on child development across physical, emotional, and behavioral indices (Bellis et al., 2019). For example, in a global meta-analysis, exposure to adverse childhood experiences was associated with reduced school performance (Qu et al., 2024). These exposures also place individuals at increased risk of developing adverse psychiatric outcomes, including early substance use and PTSD (Khoury et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2010; Yehuda et al., 2002).

An important mechanistic consideration is the presence of heightened discrimination, bullying, and harassment at school—which many public health experts include among adverse childhood experiences—for some subpopulations of children (see, e.g., Cronholm et al., 2015). For example, in the National School Climate Survey—a nationally representative sample of 22,298 LGBTQ+ youth for the 2020–2021 academic year—Kosciw et al. (2022) reported that 81% of respondents felt unsafe at school and 76% reported experiencing verbal harassment. Respondents who experienced higher levels of victimization at school were less likely to report positive feelings of school belonging and connectedness than students who experienced lower levels of victimization (Kosciw et al., 2022). Furthermore, sexual and gender minority youth may experience increased childhood adversity that can contribute to insecurity in housing and social support (Andersen & Blosnich, 2013; DeChants et al., 2022)—protective factors that are relevant when

considering school active shooter drills. Additionally, it is necessary to consider the practicalities of students’ sexual and gender minority status in the planning of drills. For example, according to news reports, in 2018, a transgender student at a Virginia middle school was allegedly not allowed to move to either the boys’ or girls’ locker room during a school active shooter drill and instead sat alone in a hallway (Fitzsimons, 2018). Such a scenario—given the mental, emotional, and behavioral health considerations discussed above—may impact student well-being by preventing a sense of safety (e.g., their feeling that plans are in place for them in case of an emergency). It may also contribute to feelings of “othering” that result in adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes, particularly if such othering may potentially contribute to bullying or peer victimization directed at the student. Thus, it is necessary to consider how to minimize singling out of these students and meet their unique needs in planning and implementing school active shooter drills.

In addition to their roles as educators, teachers and other school staff often support students undergoing emotional and stressful experiences. Prior research suggests that adults who work with traumatized children, including teachers and school staff, can develop symptoms related to secondary traumatic stress (Essary et al., 2020; Hensel et al., 2015; Hydon et al., 2015; Ireland & Huxley, 2018). They may report high rates of “compassion fatigue” and burnout, which are associated with adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes.

Another important consideration for students and staff in the context of active shooter drills is the potential influence of prior “vicarious trauma” or related stress on mental, emotional, and behavioral health and individual responses to active shooter drills. Social media and internet use among youth and adults has risen sharply over the past 2 decades; research from the Pew Research Center indicates that more than 97% of teens use the internet daily, with around 60% using social media sites such as TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat (Vogels et al., 2022). Frequent reports of mass violence on social media and the internet can result in vicarious trauma and adverse effects on students mental, emotional, and behavioral health. Research on vicarious

trauma and social media impacts on children and adolescents is in its nascency, with some meta-analyses suggesting that frequent social media use is associated with worsening mental, emotional, and behavioral health (Jones et al., 2016, 2017; Shannon et al., 2022), while others suggest it has limited impacts (Ferguson et al., 2022), potentially owing to other moderating factors (Ivie et al., 2020).

These impacts may vary among individual students; anecdotal reports from school staff (see Boxes 5-1 and 5-2) show that some individuals experience desensitization related to exposure to violence in their communities while others experience sensitization.

Racially/Ethnically Marginalized Students and Teachers

Students from racially/ethnically marginalized²³ backgrounds may encounter a unique set of challenges in the school environment that present important considerations in the context of school active shooter drills. Polk et al. (2024) described the historical (e.g., segregation, racialized teacher preparation practices) and contemporary factors (e.g., exclusionary discipline policies, differences in teacher expectations of achievement) that have uniquely shaped racial attitudes in the educational system within the United States. These factors are reflected in both individual interactions among peers and students and in the design of systems (e.g., school discipline) (NASEM, 2023; Polk et al., 2024). These factors, and their downstream impacts on the mental, emotional, and behavioral health (e.g., sense of belonging, safety, disproportionate exposure to harsh discipline practices) of children from marginalized populations may be critical to consider when undertaking efforts to shape the broader school climate and environment. Creating safe, supportive, and inclusive learning settings requires attention to how school policies

___________________

²³ In a scoping review of 50 years of research, Fluit et al. (2024) present an integrated definition of marginalization as “a multifaceted concept referring to a context-dependent social process of ‘othering’” where certain individuals or groups are systematically excluded based on societal norms and values, as well as the resulting experiences of disadvantage.” The authors note that both the process and outcomes of marginalization can vary significantly across contexts (Fluit et al., 2024).

and practices, including preparedness activities and implementation of security measures, may be experienced by students with diverse backgrounds and needs.

The CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey demonstrates that, among high school students, approximately 40%–60% of students from minoritized backgrounds have experienced some form of racial discrimination and—in turn—reported poorer mental health (56.9% among Asian students, 48.8% among multiracial students, 45.9% among Black students, 39.4% among Hispanic students, 38.0% among American Indian/Alaskan Native students, 37.6% among Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander students; McKinnon et al., 2024).

Younger children also experience racial/ethnic discrimination; for example, in a survey of 10,354 children aged 10–11, approximately 4.8% of children reported experiencing discrimination because of race, ethnicity, or color. Prevalence was highest among Black children, with 10% reporting having experienced racial discrimination at 9 or 10 years old, including from teachers (8.4%) (Nagata et al., 2021).

Experimental evidence also demonstrates that teachers show biases against racially minoritized boys and characterize more of their behaviors as “problematic” even when those behaviors are the same as those of children from nonminoritized groups (e.g., Owens, 2023). In the context of school active shooter drills, such potential for overattribution of problematic behaviors by staff could contribute to increased disciplinary behavior, which may have downstream mental, emotional, and behavioral consequences for children from racially/ethnically marginalized populations.

With respect to other security measures on campuses, studies have also suggested that students of color—particularly Black students—are referred at higher rates to law enforcement when school resource officers are present on campus (Office for Civil Rights, 2018; Paige & Bushway, 2024). Of note, according to 2017–2018 data from the Office for Civil Rights (2018), American Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN), Black, and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students are disproportionately arrested at schools.

Meta-analyses further suggest that race-based discrimination is associated with multiple psychological and physical outcomes (Carter et al., 2017). For example, exposure to discrimination experienced during childhood and adolescence is associated with increased depressive symptoms and biological aging measured through DNA methylation (Carter et al., 2019; Lavner et al., 2023).

Children exposed to discrimination may also adopt coping behaviors that impact responses in school. For example, discrimination exposure is associated with ruminative coping (i.e., the process of passive or active focus on negative thoughts or feelings), a behavior associated with more severe depression and anxiety symptoms in adolescents and adults (Bernard et al., 2023; Michl et al., 2013).

The general prevalence of adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes is known to vary across racial/ethnic categories. For example, some research suggests that in the United States, Hispanic/Latinx children may be more likely to meet criteria for psychiatric disorders such as PTSD or show heightened baseline levels of anxiety compared with White individuals (Alcántara et al., 2013; McLaughlin et al., 2007). However, it is important to note that prevalence estimates for different racial/ethnic groups can vary, in part because of variability in reporting and in access to receiving a diagnosis (McIntyre et al., 2017). Furthermore, Indigenous and Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) groups—like other racial/ethnic groups in the United States—are highly heterogenous and comprise several cultural groups with unique histories and practices, which can intersect with mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes for different individuals and subgroups.

Cultural Influences as Protective Factors

There may also be cultural influences on risk and protective factors that affect mental, emotional, and behavioral states in students and school staff. For example, Hispanic/Latinx youth may be more likely than White non-Latinx youth and African American youth to use certain coping mechanisms (e.g., internalizing distress, describing physical symptoms resulting from emotional distress rather than

mental health symptoms to avoid stigma) in response to stress (Varela & Hensley-Maloney, 2009).

Research on AAPI adolescents and young adults suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to a rise in anti-Asian discrimination, leading to adverse outcomes such as depression (Hahm et al., 2021; Huynh et al., 2023). However, other research on AAPI populations highlights the protective benefits of cultural identity and familial engagement with respect to resilience to adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes (Stein et al., 2014). Notably, protective or potentiating factors for adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes need not be specific to groups (e.g., cultural identity among Hispanic/Latinx individuals may also be protective). The current research landscape thus strongly suggests that multiple intersecting factors affect baseline mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being among students and staff, and may need to be considered in implementing and assessing the practice of school active shooter drills.

The Role of Immigration and Migrant Status

A portion of students and staff may have immigrant or refugee status, which may intersect with issues of trauma history, cultural differences, and other stressors. These can affect performance and other mental, emotional, and behavioral health factors considered in designing and interpreting school active shooter drills. Furthermore, children from immigrant families may experience acculturative stress, which has been associated with reduced academic performance among Hispanic/Latinx middle schoolers (Albeg & Castro-Olivo, 2014).

For example, prior research has observed that children of Asian immigrant families showed physical and mental health disparities, such as increased rates of internalizing disorders, compared with U.S.-born White children (Huynh et al., 2023). Other work suggests that Hispanic/Latinx children may be more likely to experience adverse events related to immigration and acculturation (Barajas-Gonzalez et al., 2021; Crouch et al., 2000; Zvolensky et al., 2019) that

may impact mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being. Students and staff with immigrant or migrant status may also experience fear or stress related to the perceived risk of deportation, regardless of their legal status (Eskenazi et al., 2019). Such fear or stress may affect mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being at baseline or in response to school active shooter drills; for example, students or staff may be less likely to attend school during safety drills or interact with personnel associated with drills.

Similarly, research indicates that individuals who are migrants and/or refugees often experience pre- and postmigration stressors that can impact baseline mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being, including more incidences of adversity or traumatic stress (McAuliffe & Triandafyllidou, 2021). For example, premigration stressors may include conflict or war within the country of origin or reduced access to educational opportunities, which may compound postmigration stressors around integration with new communities or resettlement.

In line with such concerns, prior research on Syrian youth resettled into Canada observed that refugee youths’ premigratory levels of adversity were positively associated with both internalizing and externalizing difficulties (Speidel et al., 2021). Another report found that in resettled Syrian youth, externalizing behaviors as well as migratory stressors such as amount of time spent in a refugee camp may be negatively associated with English-language learning (Paradis et al., 2022).

Trauma histories are also higher in migrant or immigrant populations, which can impact rates of internalizing disorders such as anxiety or PTSD (Ijadi-Maghsoodi et al., 2024). The confluence of potential stressor exposures experienced by immigrant/refugee children may be important to consider in designing and implementing school active shooter drills to minimize potentially adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health effects.

Multilingual Learners

More than 350 different languages are spoken in the United States, with nearly 5 million, (10%) K–12 students in the United States designated as multilingual learners (Dietrich & Hernandez, 2022; National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2024a). Students whose home language is Spanish (77%) represent the majority of those students designated as multilingual learners, followed by those whose home language is Arabic, Chinese, Vietnamese, or Portuguese. Multilingual learners are a highly heterogenous group not only in terms of spoken languages, but also in terms of life experiences that can impact well-being and school performance, such as immigration and refugee status. Some children may experience emotional distress when navigating language barriers in school, which can put them at increased risk for adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes (Han, 2010; Niehaus et al., 2017; Parra at al., 2014). In planning for effective training and communication with students and their parents regarding active shooter drills, available information in the family’s primary language is therefore crucial. Box 5-3 discusses supports for multilingual learners during school active shooter drills.

Individuals Who Use Communication Aids and Supports

Whether on a general school campus or at a school that specializes in meeting the needs of students with special needs, students have a wide variety of communication abilities. Teachers provide tools and strategies for students with specific needs, such as those with partial or full blindness, hearing impairments, and deaf-blindness, as well as students who are nonverbal. Special communication needs can vary in complexity; for example, students with hearing loss can range from having mild hearing impairment to profound hearing loss and deafness. Students with communication needs have also been found to have greater challenges with social-emotional development, which can be influenced, in turn, by cognitive fatigue (increased behavioral issues when having to expend greater energy to communicate), struggles with identity and self-efficacy, bullying by peers, and lack of teacher connectedness (Dalton, 2011; Fellinger et al., 2009).

Clarke et al. (2014) recommended that schools address students’ communication needs when planning for safety preparedness as they would for typical educational instruction. As described earlier, students and parents need to receive safety training information in their primary language (including Braille). Alternative communication strategies used in safety drills can include audible prerecorded directions or pairing a student with visual impairments with a sighted peer partner. Students who use alternative communication strategies benefit from having opportunities for additional practice to master emergency procedures.

Individuals with Emotional and Behavioral Support Needs

As discussed earlier in this chapter, individuals with histories of traumatic stress and other adverse life events may benefit from

additional supports and special accommodations. Similarly, other students may have significant emotional challenges, including depression and anxiety, while others may require behavioral support to avoid disruptive behavior. In each of these contexts, special considerations may be needed in carrying out school active shooter drills.

Emotional Support Needs

Students who may need additional emotional support during a drill include those with identified or unidentified histories of emotional challenges, including depression or anxiety, and those with a history of grief and loss. Guidelines recommend that schools consider additional previewing of procedures and repeated rehearsal so that the processes become more familiar (Clarke et al., 2014). For students with a history of anxiety, practicing relaxation and other coping strategies in the context of drills may be important tools for educators to use in supporting students.

Behavioral Support Needs

Students who are receiving formal school supports, as well as those who are not, may benefit from behavioral supports during school active shooter drills. For example, students who have a strong preference for routine and sameness, such as those who are neurodivergent, may benefit from having a familiar staff member assigned to them to help them cope with the abrupt change to their routine during a drill. Some researchers suggest that using social stories to assist with this transition to a new environment (e.g., in the form of a picture book illustrating what to expect during this disruption to the usual class schedule) may be helpful (Edmonds, 2017). A social story can also be used to depict the procedures of a school active shooter drill in easy-to-follow pictures in order to assist students who can benefit from previewing a new situation (Clarke et al., 2014). Understanding the additional sensory needs of students with autism is also important, since visual and auditory changes common during an emergency drill may cause some students with autism to

become agitated (Peek & Stough, 2010). Individualized modeling, prompting, and reinforcement have been used with young children with autism to teach them how to respond to a fire alarm and exit the classroom by following their teacher (Garcia et al., 2016). Classroom behavior support plans that are effective for neurodivergent students and others can also be applied to school active shooter drills. Students with disruptive behaviors may benefit from strategies such as behavioral contracts and positive reinforcements, which have been found to be effective in helping students follow instructions and remaining quiet, skills required during drills.

Individuals with Intellectual, Developmental, and Learning Disabilities

It is estimated that more than 400,000 students in the United States receive special education services because of an intellectual disability, and about 2.4 million students receive appropriate services to address learning disabilities (NCES, 2024b). For students who have challenges with learning and remembering new knowledge and skills, learning the multistep procedures for a school active shooter drill may require repeated practice, with step-by-step modeling to master the emergency procedures. Research has shown that children with cognitive impairments may not recognize emergency personnel (i.e., personnel wearing badges, uniforms, etc.), so they may benefit from provide opportunities to meet emergency personnel under nonemergent conditions.

Additionally, students with cognitive impairments may fail to recognize or understand a danger or threat (Kailes & Enders, 2007) and so may experience a greater level of confusion and anxiety during a crisis compared with other students (Boon et al., 2012). Emergency planning, including drills, needs to include post-crisis supports for students with special needs, with the understanding that they may be especially affected by the emotional stress of a crisis (Clarke et al., 2014).

Individuals with Physical and Other Health Conditions

Individuals in a school may have a wide variety of health issues, including acute conditions (e.g., a leg fracture requiring a student to use crutches temporarily) and chronic health issues (e.g., diabetes, asthma, seizures, ongoing use of a wheelchair). Students with some health conditions may require more complex supports in the event of an emergency, such as access to needed medications and medical supplies. Planning for accessible routes and adaptive equipment may also be needed.

One concern highlighted in the literature is that schools may not be routinely including students with special health care needs in emergency preparedness planning (Peek & Stough, 2010), potentially leading to greater emotional distress during drills and/or actual school crises for these students. In one study that surveyed 40 state education departments about school crisis plans, 45% reported not including information about working with individuals with mental and physical disabilities (Annandale et al., 2011). Stough et al. (2020) highlighted the continued gap in school emergency management planning due to the failure of many schools to consider children with special needs. Involving special education teachers has been emphasized as a critical foundation for having more inclusive emergency planning (McAdams Ducy & Stough, 2011).

A growing literature recommends that planning for emergency preparedness, such as school active shooter drills, be undertaken by a multidisciplinary team charged with developing inclusive drills for students (Nikolaraizi et al., 2021). Clarke et al. (2014) suggested that for those students receiving special education, special education teachers need to partner with students, parents, and other school and community support staff to create an individualized safety plan. Such a plan outlines specific accommodations that students with special needs may require for accessing the educational and participation components of a school active shooter drill. In considering the individual needs of students, teachers need to first assess the skills required of students during an active shooter drill—skills such as following directions; moving quickly; remaining quiet; and

maintaining position in a small, dark and uncomfortable space. Then they can provide guidance for accommodating a student’s individual needs, such as providing a designated support person to assist the student or ensuring that students have access to safe spaces that are physically accessible and allow them to remain awa from doors, windows, and lines of sight. Practicing these accommodations during a drill can be important in testing these strategies and revising them as necessary and ensuring that all needed supports are available during the drill.

Children Involved with Other Formal Social Systems

Children participating in school active shooter drills may also interact with other formal social systems, such as the juvenile justice and foster care systems, both of which are demonstrably associated with long-term adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes (Muentner et al., 2022; Snehil & Sagar, 2020; Whitted et al., 2013). Ultimately, that involvement may contribute to difficulties with and necessary considerations for the practice of school active shooter drills to maintain mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being.

Children Involved with the Justice System

When students who are involved in the juvenile justice system may face housing instability or encounter other circumstances that limit their access to school—such as frequent absences or disciplinary removals—they may miss key information about active shooter drill procedures (Almquist & Walker, 2022; Kearney et al., 2023). Furthermore, children having frequent contact with law enforcement may have different perceptions of school-based law enforcement or security personnel that could influence mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes such as perceptions of safety or fear and school connectedness.

Children Involved with the Child Welfare System

In the United States, nearly 400,000 children are in foster care at a given time (U.S. Department of Education, 2016), and nearly 70% of children in the foster care system are under 14 years old (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, n.d.). A recent meta-analysis found that current placement in foster care was

moderately associated with mental health problems (Dubois-Comtois et al., 2021). Earlier reports also indicate a higher prevalence of externalizing problems in foster children, with limited training provided to foster parents for dealing with of these behaviors which may emerge during school time (Vanschoonlandt et al., 2013).

At the same time, several protective factors emerged from this research, such as limited number of displacements or a stable long-term stay in the foster home. Children involved in the child welfare system may see frequent moves from school that may prevent them from receiving key information about school active shooter drills such that, when a school active shooter drill is conducted, they experience a threat to their sense of safety (e.g., being unfamiliar with specific practices that are used in a school). Furthermore, children involved in the child welfare system—especially younger children, for whom secure and stable adult relationships are key—may rely on teachers or other school staff for reassurance or extra support during times of heightened stress; yet frequent school changes may impact a child’s ability to develop supportive relationships with teachers and peers (Tilbury et al., 2014).

SUPPORTING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF SCHOOL ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS

School active shooter drills are intended to enhance safety and preparedness, but they also have the potential to contribute to adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes for students and staff. Schools have critical opportunities to provide support that can mitigate these outcomes and foster resilience. Ensuring that drills are conducted in a way that prioritizes psychological wellbeing requires a collaborative effort among teachers; school support staff, including school health care providers; and caregivers and families. This section explores the roles and responsibilities of these key groups in helping students process their experiences with drills;

recover from adverse mental, emotional, and behavioral health effects; and build coping mechanisms that foster resilience.

The Role of Teachers and School Support Staff

Teachers and school support staff often encounter a range of stressors that can impact their mental, emotional, and behavioral health (Greenberg et al., 2016). These challenges may stem from the broader school environment—such as school leadership, resource availability, and collegial relationships—as well as from the specific demands of the job, including instructional pressures and student behavior management. Individual factors, such as stress management and perceived agency, also play a role (Greenberg et al., 2016, NASEM, 2019a). Just as students bring their lived experiences and mental, emotional, and behavioral health needs to school, so too do teachers and school-based health professionals, and they must navigate the complex task of managing their own well-being while supporting the that of their students (NASEM, 2019a). Schools that provide meaningful support and foster the development of educators’ social-emotional competencies are better positioned to help staff regulate their emotions and behaviors, which in turn enhances their capacity to cultivate prosocial behavior and social-emotional skills in students (NASEM, 2019a).

Across all stages of development, teachers play a central role in the social-emotional and physical well-being of their students. Teachers are essential in creating a classroom environment that is safe and supportive (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; NASEM, 2019a). A classroom environment that consistently prioritizes psychological and physical safety and well-being can reduce anxiety during school active shooter drills (Geist, 2019). At the same time, it is important to note that even as they must demonstrate calm during drills to help students regulate their emotions and behaviors, teachers can find drills stressful as well.

While little research has been done on teachers’ experiences and needs with respect to school active shooter drills (Schildkraut & Nickerson, 2020), they require clear communications from school

leadership on how to teach drill procedures to their students. One small study of preservice teachers (N = 97) found that preservice teachers generally felt underprepared to navigate school active shooter drills and wanted additional training (Laguardia et al., 2024). In addition, an implementation evaluation in Nebraska of the “I Love U Guys” Foundation’s Standard Response Protocol also found that surveyed teachers (N = 785) wanted more formal training on how to implement the protocol, as well as guidance on supporting students with functional and access needs and students of different ages (Bulling et al., 2025).

Teachers often depend on collaboration with school-based mental health professionals to work with students who may need additional support or intervention following school active shooter drills. However, in RAND’s (2023) American Teacher Panel Survey, which assessed teacher’s experience with lockdown drills, 44% of respondents reported that their school does not provide socioemotional support or supplemental resources to students in advance of, during, or after drills (Moore et al., 2024). Furthermore, while this survey found that 48% of teachers reported that drills led them to feel more prepared to respond to an active shooter incident, 50% reported that drills made no difference (i.e., neither more nor less prepared). Only one in five teachers (19.8%) reported that the drills in which they participated made them feel safer at school, whereas 68.5% reported that participating in drills made no difference to their perceptions of safety at school, and 11.7% reported that drills made them feel less safe at school. These results also indicate that a substantial portion of teachers do not receive advance notice of school active shooter drills (14.3%). Box 5-5 provides perspectives from teachers shared with the committee during its fall 2024 listening session series.

In addition to teachers, school-based health professionals—including school counselors, school psychologists, school social workers, and school nurses—can play an important role in both informing developmentally appropriate emergency preparedness practices and providing ongoing support for the well-being of students and staff (NASP et al., 2021). As noted previously, when schools have access to these professionals, their expertise in areas such as mental health assessment, crisis intervention, trauma-informed care, and medical support can help shape response strategies while ensuring that students and staff have access to the comprehensive supports needed to foster a safe and healthy school environment year round (NASP et al., 2021).

In the context of school active shooter drills, and emergency preparedness more broadly, school health professionals can provide essential psychological and medical support before, during, and after

emergency drills as well as in the event of actual emergencies (Brymer et al., 2012; Gereige et al., 2022). However, as noted earlier in this report, many schools do not have consistent or sufficient access to school-based health professionals (e.g., Willgerodt et al., 2024). School counselors, school psychologists, and school social workers can play a key role in developing trauma-informed approaches to emergency drills, ensuring that preparedness activities do not inadvertently contribute to student anxiety, fear, or retraumatization (Dwyer et al., 2015; Nickerson & Zhe, 2004; Wallengren-Lynch, 2024; Werner, 2015). They can also assist in pre-drill planning as well as education, helping students and staff understand emergency procedures in a way that is developmentally appropriate and emotionally supportive (Gereige et al., 2022). During structured debriefing sessions, they can support students and staff in processing their experiences, identifying emotional reactions, and developing coping strategies (NASP et al., 2021).

School-based health professionals can contribute to emergency preparedness by working with other school staff to ensure that students with medical conditions or disabilities receive the necessary care and accommodations during drills and real emergencies (Dwyer et al., 2015; Gereige et al., 2022). For example, following a drill, school nurses can also be key providers of medical care, addressing physical symptoms of anxiety or distress—such as panic attacks, hyperventilation, or psychosomatic symptoms—and working in coordination with mental health staff to provide holistic care (e.g., Ginsburg et al., 2019).

Beyond emergency preparedness, school mental health professionals and school nurses play an integral role in fostering a safe, healthy, and supportive school environment (Dwyer et al., 2015). They provide direct services to students, including mental health counseling, behavioral interventions, and medical care, to address a broad spectrum of student needs (Gereige et al., 2022). These professionals are instrumental in promoting preventive initiatives, such as social-emotional learning programs, trauma-informed practices, and mental health screenings, all of which can contribute to a more resilient student body (Berardi & Morton, 2018; NASEM, 2019a).

They can also serve as consultants and educators for teachers, staff, and families by providing training on recognizing signs of emotional distress, trauma, and medical emergencies, equipping school personnel with the tools to respond effectively (e.g., Dickson et al., 2025).

Integrating both mental and physical health considerations into school safety and emergency planning may equip schools to support students and staff in managing stress and developing resilience in the face of crises. This approach can ensure that all students and staff, regardless of their medical, mental, emotional, or behavioral needs, receive the support necessary to navigate emergencies and emergency preparedness in a supportive environment.

The Role of Caregivers and Families

Throughout development, children have many relationships that shape their mental, emotional, and behavioral well-being, but perhaps none are more influential than caregivers and family. This report considers caregivers to include parents, grandparents, kinship care, foster parents, and others who assume responsibility for children’s well-being (Morris et al., 2017). An extensive body of research demonstrates the important role of caregivers in supporting their children’s emotion regulation and resilience. A nurturing parent–child relationship that provides a sense of safety and stability has been associated with positive emotional development in children. A caregiver’s emotion regulation (i.e., modulating their expression of emotion while caregiving) can influence a child’s emotion regulation as the child observes and models the caregiver and responds to their caregiving style (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Hajal & Paley, 2020; Rutherford et al., 2015). Emotion regulation is crucial to overall emotional well-being and is also related to coping with challenging situations, expressing feelings appropriately, and building healthy relationships. For those children who experience adverse life events, studies have shown that strong family relationships promote resiliency (Luthar et al., 2015). As described earlier in the discussion of different student populations, caregivers and families

themselves may struggle with challenges (e.g., poverty, trauma, mental illness) as well as caring for children with functional or access needs that require additional support (e.g., intellectual or physical disabilities). School leaders need to consider these needs as they communicate and engage with caregivers in preparation for school active shooter drills.

Given the importance of a caregiver’s role in children’s mental, emotional, and behavioral development, caregiver involvement in a child’s school has been found to have a positive effect on youth development (Epstein & Sanders, 2002; Hill & Tyson, 2009) and overall mental health (Roeser et al., 2000; Wang & Sheikh-Khalil, 2014). Family–school engagement has been shown to predict positive child outcomes across development, with respect to behavior and emotional well-being (Smith et al., 2019). This connection with a child’s education can be primarily school based, such as through caregiver–teacher communication, attendance at school events, and volunteering, providing a structure for assisting with homework, monitoring the progress of schoolwork and setting expectations, and encouraging about educational goals.

Strategies for caregiver involvement in schools have been shown to vary by race and ethnicity (Crosnoe, 2001) and socioeconomic status, influenced by structural and historical context (e.g., the legacy of racial exclusion, parental distrust in the educational system), as well as structural economic barriers to participation (Mowen, 2015). What remains constant, however, is the overall value and importance that caregivers place on their child’s education (Lareau & Horvat, 1999).

Caregivers’ school engagement has also been shown to benefit children with diverse abilities, including those with disruptive behaviors (Sheridan et al., 2017) and autism (Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016). The large body of literature evaluating family–school interventions has demonstrated the positive impact of such interventions on children’s social and behavioral competency and mental health, across developmental stages (i.e., pre-K through high school) and across race and ethnicity (e.g., larger effects found for Black students; Sheridan et al., 2019). In identifying the core components of

these interventions in a large meta-analysis, Sheridan et al. (2019) highlighted both relational and structural components of effective family–school interventions. They point out that structural tools support parents at home in fostering their child’s positive development. The authors found that relational components, such as improving communication and collaboration between caregivers and schools, had the greatest positive effect on children’s mental, emotional, and behavioral functioning (Sheridan et al., 2019).

When considering school emergency and disaster preparedness generally, one study found that disseminating emergency preparedness information to schools with limited parent involvement was a major challenge, although parents at these schools voiced interest in learning more about preparedness despite not participating in trainings (Kubicek et al., 2008). These parents instead reported learning from their children about preparedness rather than receiving the information directly, with the researchers concluding that parent leaders needed to be involved in planning of regular preparedness classes for families. In another study, Spanish-speaking Latino parents were more likely to seek disaster mitigation information from friends and family as opposed to government entities (Peguero, 2006), suggesting that culturally salient communication strategies needed to be considered.

Caregivers’ Responses and Perceptions

Building on this broader literature of emergency preparedness and applying foundational aspects of how caregivers support positive youth development at home and in collaboration with schools, the discussion that follows turns to what is known about the relationships between caregivers and school active shooter drills and other security measures. There is limited research examining caregivers’ responses to and perceptions of school active shooter drills. School counselors in one study reported that caregivers felt worried and protective of their children following school active shooter drills and suggested that more awareness of and training on these drills

were needed to mitigate “parents panicking and rushing to the schools” (Goodman-Scott & Eckhoff, 2020).

Guidance from the NASP, the NASRO, and Safe and Sound Schools, as well as the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, provides helpful guidance for supporting caregivers. These practices include involving them in the planning of drills, providing information and resources about the protocols and practices used by the school, notifying parents of the type of drill being used, and offering alternative options for students, such as discussion-based practices, if deemed appropriate (NASP et al., 2021; The National Child Traumatic Stress Network [NCTSN], 2018). These recommendations highlight the importance of a communications strategy that informs families when drills are occurring; provides details about the procedures; and considers the varying backgrounds, languages, experiences, and needs of caregivers.

Given the crucial role of caregivers in their children’s emotional development, researchers also suggest that studies be conducted to understand caregivers’ perceptions and potential needs during school active shooter drills by using validated tools to measure impact on their emotional well-being, their expressed concerns about drills, and their sense of school safety (Dailey et al., 2024). Box 5-6 provides insights from caregiver and family perspectives on school active shooter drills.

Literature on caregivers’ reactions to other security measures at schools is also limited and has been mixed. One study found that the presence of greater security measures (including metal detectors and security guards) was associated with less perceived sense of security at school among parents, controlling for other confounding variables such as neighborhood crime (Mowen & Freng, 2019). In a survey of parents in Pennsylvania, however, parents identified installing metal detectors when asked what schools could do to prepare for an active shooter event (Wallace, 2020). These findings suggest that caregivers’ perceptions of school security measures may be influenced by a variety of factors and can differ depending on school context.

CONCLUSION

Although not exhaustive, this chapter provides key developmental considerations and population-level variations that can inform the implementation of active shooter drills and other school security measures in K–12 settings across the United States. Such considerations take into account the strengths, needs, and potential vulnerabilities within school communities.

Recognizing that individuals within a school community often embody multiple intersecting characteristics, the need for person-centered, developmentally appropriate, and trauma-informed approaches to school safety planning are critical. Multiple factors must be considered simultaneously to ensure that all students have access to participation in emergency preparedness efforts. Schools must account for the unique needs of students, caregivers, educators, and support staff in creating safety protocols that are effective and inclusive.

Recent efforts in education practice and policy have emphasized the importance of flexibility in how information is presented, ensuring that learning environments are accessible and responsive to all students. The Universal Design for Learning paradigm offers a model for engaging all learners by incorporating multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression (Basham et al., 2020; Capp, 2017; Levey, 2023). Research suggests that these principles not only enhance learning outcomes but also reduce barriers that may otherwise exclude some students from fully participating in school safety efforts. Applying insights from developmental science and trauma-informed care can help schools assess whether school active shooter drills and other security measures are appropriate for different age groups and student populations.

Furthermore, schools generally have opportunities to engage in collaboration among teachers, administrators, caregivers, school-based health providers, school security personnel, students, and support staff, in order to identify the resources and accommodations needed to promote positive mental, emotional, and behavioral outcomes. However, not all schools have access to these resources,

creating disparities in the level of support available for students and staff. It is important to emphasize again that students are not the only individuals who require these supports; school staff also benefit from a school climate that prioritizes their well-being. Research and expert perspectives shared with the committee indicate that adults who are equipped with the skills to remain calm and regulated in an emergency are better able to support students in doing the same.

Ultimately, the well-being of the entire school community depends on an environment that fosters positive mental, emotional, and behavioral health. By integrating developmentally appropriate, trauma-informed, and inclusive strategies into school safety planning, educators and policymakers can ensure that these practices set the stage for the implementation of active shooter drills and other security measures in a positive and supportive school climate to enhance preparedness without compromising the psychological wellbeing of students and staff.

REFERENCES