School Safety Legislation

Abstract

This article examines laws designed to keep students safe while on school grounds and at school-sponsored events. It focuses on laws at both the national and state level that regulate possession of firearms or other weapons, bullying and anti-bullying legislation and their impacts, and on emergency preparedness for students, teachers, and staff. The article also deals with major influences on legal trends that have served to motivate legislators to pass new laws in response to events and parental and community pressure to make schools safer.

Overview

Since the late twentieth century, the safety of children and youth during school hours has been of increasing concern to legislators at all levels. "School safety" encompasses such factors as ensuring that school facilities and equipment meet all safety standards and that all maintenance is performed according to strict schedules. School safety also involves providing students with clean air, providing safe playground equipment, monitoring vehicles to make sure that no small children have been left inside, removing hazards that may cause accidents, blocking unauthorized access to school buildings, and protecting athletes from heat stress during hot summer months. Additionally, school safety entails participating in regular emergency drills that teach teachers, staff, and students how to deal with crisis situations.

Since 1999 and the school shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, in which twelve students and one teacher were killed and another twenty-one injured, much of the focus has been on keeping weapons off of school grounds. Protecting students from being bullied by others is also considered a major priority because of high profile cases in which bullied students have committed suicide because they felt they could no longer face constant harassment by others. Experts on school safety contend that all schools should establish comprehensive school security reviews (Dunlap, 2013) in order to keep a check on all aspects of school safety. Legislators have passed laws designed to prohibit the presence of weapons on school grounds, ensure that school officials are prepared to deal with any crisis that does occur, and establish anti-bullying regulations that protect students from harassment or physical abuse by other students.

School violence first became an issue of national importance in the United States in the 1970s. Between December 1974 and May 2000, at least thirty-seven incidents of targeted school violence were reported (Dunlap, 2013). In the 1980s, the Reagan administration declared war on drugs, and Congress passed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which contained the Drug-Free Schools and Communication Act that required all schools to ban alcohol and drugs on school grounds. In 1982, the Association for Middle Level Association (AMLA) began publishing its landmark series This We Believe: Keys to Educating Young Adolescents, which has served as a policy guide for lawmakers, educators, and organizations involved in defining the educational experience for middle-school students.

American schoolchildren have long participated in emergency preparedness drills. The postwar years and the dominance of Cold War politics led to "duck and cover" exercises in which students were taught how to react to the dropping of nuclear weapons. Schools, particularly those in the most vulnerable areas, added emergency drills for dealing with fires, tornadoes, or earthquakes. The prevalence of school shootings has led many schools to add drills in reacting to armed intruders within schools. In 2013, the need for increased emergency preparedness was made even clearer when two elementary schools in Oklahoma were destroyed by tornadoes that came without warning, killing seven children.

Applications

Legislators first began mandating zero tolerance for bringing weapons onto school property or engaging in violent, threatening, or disruptive behavior in the 1980s. By 1989, California, New York, and Kentucky had passed innovative zero tolerance legislation. By the 1990s, approximately 90 percent of American schools had instituted similar policies. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush's administration sponsored the Gun-Free School Zones Act with the intention of keeping guns off of school property. The Supreme Court refused to accept the congressional assertion of its right to regulate under the interstate commerce clause and held in United States v. Lopez (514 U.S. 549) in 1995 that the law was unconstitutional. Congress responded by passing the Gun-Free School Act of 1995 requiring all schools receiving federal funding to comply with the ban on weapons at schools and mandating expulsions for a period of one year as punishment for bringing guns onto school property.

Over time, the concept of zero tolerance on school grounds was broadened to encompass engaging in such acts as fighting, using alcohol or drugs, participating in gang activity, possessing over-the-counter medications, sexual harassment, threats, and vandalism (Koch, 2000). Throughout the United States, schools enacted stricter zero tolerance policies after the shooting at Columbine High. They also enhanced school safety through such actions as installing metal detectors designed to detect weapons and prevent their being brought onto school properties. Some schools began requiring students to wear uniforms in order to level out obvious socioeconomic differences that have been identified with bullying behaviors and prevent gang members from flaunting their affiliations. Other schools hired police officers to act as deterrents for school violence and to be on hand if a crisis did occur.

Pressured by the administration of George W. Bush, Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary School Education Act. The law was designed to fix problems that had been plaguing U.S. schools for decades. Section 4121 threw the considerable weight of the federal government into dealing with the use of illegal drugs and violence in schools and promoting safety and discipline. Districts were required to identify schools that had persistently been considered dangerous.

In 2002, Congress passed the Safe School Initiative in which the Secret Service and the Department of Education worked together to create threat assessments for schools and oversee the establishment of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program. In 2007, legislatures in several states passed legislation concerning the implementation of school safety policies. Some states tightened policies, but others were more concerned with fairness in implementation. North Carolina began mandating notification of parents or guardians of suspended or expelled students. Louisiana implemented strict penalties for students carrying firearms on buses or at school-related activities. Kansas required all schools to establish anti-bullying policies and train teachers and staff to deal with incidents of bullying. Rhode Island gave school districts additional leeway in handling cases covered by zero-tolerance laws.

Although the Supreme Court had held in 1969 in Tinker v. Des Moines (393 U.S. 503) that students did not leave their First Amendment rights at the door of schoolhouses, the Court decided in Morse v. Frederick (551 U.S. 393, 2007) that educators did not violate First Amendment rights of students when they punished them for appearing to advocate the use of drugs at school-related activities. In 2008, a national coalition made up of educators, civil rights activists, law enforcement, and youth advocates formed the National Safe Schools Partnership to lobby legislators for anti- bullying legislation because the problem of bullying had become so prevalent. That same year, gun control advocates placed considerable pressure on the Virginia legislature to tighten rules that allowed buyers to purchase firearms at gun shows without a background check. Support for gun control was particularly strong in the state because of the attack on the Virginia Tech campus on April 16 of the previous year in which thirty-two were killed and seventeen wounded. The gun lobby proved too strong, however, and the law was not changed. The National Rifle Association also managed to kill a federal bill introduced in the Senate by Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Jack Reed (D-RI) requiring background checks when guns were purchased at gun shows.

In 2010, AMLA's This We Believe identified bullying as a major threat to the safety of middle-school children and called for anti- bullying legislation designed to assist schools in creating safe environments for vulnerable students. By that time, forty-three states had passed anti-bullying legislation, which defined bullying, set up procedures for reporting and investigating incidences of bullying, and established punishment for those convicted of bullying behavior. Research on bullying suggests that bullying, which may involve either physical or emotional abuse, or both, is most likely to begin in late elementary school and continue throughout the middle-school years (Kueny & Zirkel, 2012).

Since the late twentieth century, cyberbullies have used intimidating e-mails and social media sites to carry out bullying campaigns. While bullying has been considered a major priority in the field of school safety for decades, the issue became more urgent following the suicide of Massachusetts teenager Phoebe Prince, who had emigrated from Ireland only months before. Six teenagers faced criminal charges for bullying her to the point of suicide. After pleading guilty, they were sentenced to either probation or community service. Prince's death motivated Massachusetts and other states to enact anti-bullying laws.

Using data from the 2013 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey, the National Center for Educational Statistics estimates that approximately 21.5 percent of students aged 12 to 18 have been bullied (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015). The most common forms of bullying include insults or being made fun of (13.6 percent) and becoming the subject of rumors (13.2 percent). Around 6 percent were shoved, tripped, or spit upon, and more than 2 percent were forced to do things they did not want to do by bullies (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015). Kueny and Zirkel (2012) identify four actors commonly found in bullying scenarios: the dominant, impulsive bully who is often angry and easily frustrated; the victim who tends to be isolated from others and may be insecure; the bully-victim who becomes a bully after being victimized by others; and the bystander who knows that the bullying is occurring but does nothing to stop it.

School safety continues to be a major priority for both national and state legislators. Title IV of the Twenty-first Century Schools Act, better known as the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act, sets up a grants program to help states keep violence out of the schools and promotes bans on drugs, alcohol, and tobacco on school grounds. The law also encourages the establishment of safe passage areas to make traveling to and from school safer through monitoring by law enforcement and community patrols.

Issues

By the mid-1990s, it had become obvious that zero tolerance policies were too all inclusive, and legislators began recognizing the need for schools to have some leeway when awarding punishments. Even those who support school safety legislation are sometimes critical of the fact that punishments too often target racial and ethnic minorities. Other criticisms focus on the issue of mandating zero tolerance for special needs students who may act disruptive because of medical or development issues. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 requires schools to place special needs students who are expelled in alternative schools. Alternative schools were first established in the United States in the early 1970s to deal with students who had been expelled from regular schools because they were perceived of as disruptive. They were also used to meet the needs of students with major medical or psychological problems that could not be dealt with in regular classrooms. As the numbers of students suspended or expelled for school safety violations increased, the number of students attending alternative schools rose accordingly. Research on alternative schools has revealed that students assigned to alternate schools are more likely than others to return to regular classes once suspensions are completed and are less likely to become involved with gangs (Koch, 2000).

One oft-repeated complaint concerning school safety legislation is that legislators have gone so far in banning weapons or potentially violent behavior from schools that school administrators have ended up punishing students for behavior that is in no way threatening to either the student involved or to others. Incidents such as a six-year-old boy in York, Pennsylvania, being suspended for bringing nail clippers to school, a second-grader being suspended in Columbus, Ohio, for drawing a picture of a gun and aiming it at students after it was cut out, a sixth-grader suspended for bringing a knife to school in a lunch bag for the purpose of cutting an orange, a 12-year-old being handcuffed after splashing classmates when walking through a puddle, and a 15-year-old Utah girl being suspended for dying her hair auburn have been labeled as absurd.

By 2015, all fifty states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had enacted legislation designed to control bullying and make schools safer. Most of those laws followed the guidelines established by the U.S. Department of Education that included such elements as a statement of purpose, the scope of the regulation, the conduct that was prohibited, teacher and staff training, preventative measures, and monitoring and reporting. While most anti-bullying legislation tends to be enacted at the state level, students may be protected from bullying and harassment by Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits any discrimination that is motivated by race, color, or national origin. Subsequent laws and legal interpretations have included protection from discrimination based on religion, gender, disability, and sexual orientation. Proposed federal legislation such as the Safe Schools Improvement Act and the Student Non- Discrimination Act failed to garner sufficient support for passage.

Despite national attention and the passage of anti-bullying legislation, bullying continues to be a major cause of teen suicides and accounts for large numbers of school absences every day. Critics of existing anti-bullying legislation insist that schools are often more interested in preventing bullying than in dealing with bullying once it occurs. Some observers suggest that anti-bullying laws punish youth for being mean-spirited even though it is a natural part of growing up. Others suggest that bullies are criminals who should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Legislators in Utah have gone so far as to make it a criminal offense for school employees to fail to report bullying. Laws in Delaware, Florida, Georgia, and Utah allow state governments to withhold funds for school districts that do not comply with anti-bullying legislation.

Considerable attention has been paid to arming teachers and staff. Both Kansas and South Dakota have passed laws permitting teachers with permits to carry concealed weapons to carry arms while at school. In 2014, the Georgia legislature passed the Safe Carry Protection Act, popularly known as the "guns everywhere bill" that allows guns to be carried in school zones, churches, bars, government buildings, and designated areas of airports with some restrictions. Bills allowing teachers to be armed were defeated in Mississippi and Wyoming. A Florida bill requiring police notification any time the zero tolerance policy was violated was also defeated. In New York, the legislature passed a law that increased penalties for bringing guns onto school grounds and improved emergency planning training.

On December 14, 2012, events proved that even the youngest children are not safe from violence when twenty children and six adults were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Most of the victims were first graders. The public outcry led to new demands by both gun control advocates and Second Amendment advocates. Suggestions for making schools safe from violence included placing armed police or security officers in all schools and tightening existing school security measures (Shah & Ujifusa, 2013). Other proposals involved video surveillance, panic alarms, access-control systems, closing off side entrances, increased safety drills, and requiring identification badges for students, staff, and visitors. Schools created task forces to study school safety, and new safety laws were passed to improve facility safety. In West Virginia, for instance, the School Building Authority began requiring shatterproof glass in all school windows. In Joplin, Missouri, Irving Elementary School was built with one safety room for students, teachers, and staff, and another for members of the community.

Terms & Concepts

Alternative schools: Schools designed to educate students that have been removed from regular classrooms because of medical, psychological, or behavioral issues in a non-traditional environment.

Anti-bullying measures: Laws and regulations designed to fight bullying in schools. Measures range from training teachers and staff to identify and react to bullying to turning violent bullies over to criminal justice officials.

Bullying: Actions designed to harass or intimidate others through sustained patterns of physical or emotional abuse.

Gun-Free School Acts: National legislation that used first the Interstate Commerce Clause and then the power of federal funding to force schools to institute bans on weapons on or near school grounds.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Act passed by Congress in 1990 that deals with the rights of disabled students to an education and requires the placement of disabled students who are expelled in alternative schools.

No Child Left Behind Act: Comprehensive legislation designed to protect the right of all children to receive an education. It contains a provision that requires districts to identify schools with records of persistent violence.

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act: Twenty-first century legislation that promotes school safety through violence prevention programs and federal bans on alcohol, tobacco, and drugs on school grounds.

Safe School Initiative: Federal legislation passed in 2002 that was designed to ensure the physical safety of students while at school by prohibiting weapons and drugs on school grounds.

School safety: Concept that encompasses the physical and emotional environment of schools and extends to protecting students from bullying and violent acts by others.

Zero tolerance: Policy that requires schools to enact mandatory punishment for students engaging in acts that are perceived as violent, threatening, or disruptive.

Bibliography

Dunlap, E. S. (Ed.). (2013). The comprehensive handbook of school safety. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor Francis.

Kenney, M. (2013). Seeking safer schools. American School and University, 84(10), 18–24. Retrieved December 19, 2014, from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=88863557&site=ehost-live

Kueny, M. and Zirkel, P. (2012). An analysis of school anti-bullying laws in the United States. Middle School Journal, 43(4), 22–31. Retrieved December 19, 2014 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=73183518&site=ehost-live

National Center for Education Statistics. (2015, April). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2013 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved December 19, 2016 from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015056.pdf

Russo, C. J. (2016). Update on school searches. School Business Affairs, 82(11), 33–35. Retrieved December 19, 2016 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=120169768&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Schargel, F. (2014). Creating safe schools: A guide for school leaders, teachers, counselors, and parents. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.

Shah, N., & Ujifusa, A. (2013). Safety legislation: A tally by state. Education Week, 32(29). Retrieved March 22, 2015 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87317445&site=ehost-live

This we believe: Keys to educating young adolescents. (2010). Waterville, OH: Association for Middle Level Education.

Vaillancourt, K., & Rossen, E. (2012). Navigating school safety law and policy. Communique, 41(4), 1–23. Retrieved December 19, 2014 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86469642&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Baker, L. (2012). A history of school design and its indoor environmental standards, 1900 to today. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.

Eckes, S., & Russo, C. (Eds.). (2012). School discipline and safety. Los Angeles: Sage.

Essex, N. L. (2016). School law and the public schools: A practical guide for educational leaders (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Fennelly, L., & Perry, M. (2014). The handbook for school safety and security. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Fein, R. (2002, May). Threat assessment in schools: A guide to managing threatening situations and to creating safe school climates. Retrieved December 29, 2014, from http://www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ssi%5Fguide.pdf