Yesterday, we published a story about an active-shooter drill at Harriet Tubman Village Charter School, a local K-8 school. During the drill, an administrator played the sounds of screaming and gunfire over staff’s walkie-talkies. It left some students and staff who heard the sounds terrified. Some feared for their lives and texted family members goodbye, others sought therapy after the event and, according to some complaints, some teachers quit.
The school made changes to the way it does active-shooter drills in the following months, but for many the damage was done. Writing the story got me thinking about the best ways to perform active-shooter drills on campus and, while there are some disagreements, research was clear that this was the wrong way.
While reporting that story, I found something surprising: California has no real guardrails around active-shooter drills. By and large, schools approach them how they please. That’s opened the door to some misguided and downright traumatic drills in California schools. They range from the Harriet Tubman example to another school where a custodian wore a mask and carried a fake gun.
Assemblymember Chris Ward is trying to change that. Back in March, Ward introduced a bill that would restrict some of the most frightening aspects of active-shooter drills. Seeing news stories about schools using simulated gunfire or fake blood during active-shooter drills motivated Ward to dig deeper. Like me, he was surprised there were no real state guidelines in place.
“I think what crystallized things for me is having kids in school myself. As I read news stories and saw what’s going on out there, and then I said ‘Oh my god, if that happened at my kids’ elementary school … I’d be frustrated that there was an experience that led others to believe, both the students and also the parents on the outside, that a real event was occurring,” Ward said.
Thus, AB 1858 was born. Ward’s bill would prohibit the use of simulated gunfire, mandate that drills be age-appropriate and require schools to help connect students with resources after a drill should they be needed. Schools would also have to notify parents before and after a drill takes place.
While some organizations question whether active-shooter drills are even necessary, Ward seems to understand schools’ desire to have them. Without more robust gun control laws nationally, he said, spaces like schools can be at risk. It’s natural for educators to want to ensure they’re prepared in the event something happens.
Even so, there needs to be guardrails, Ward said, especially given the overzealous drills some schools have performed. When I asked him for his thoughts on the drill Harriet Tubman carried out, he called it “terrifying.”
“It’s important that you are thinking through ways to keep your local school environment or your campus safe … but you can also do it in a way that is not inducing stress and harm and anxiety,” Ward said. “We know through advocacy groups and those that have been studying this issue, that responses like this do more harm than good.”
And he’s right. Researchers have found no evidence that active-shooter drills better prepare students, but they have found a link between symptoms of stress, anxiety and depression. That’s why they’ve counseled against doing such drills in elementary, middle or even high school. Researchers have also urged schools to abandon unannounced active-shooter drills in favor of optional ones.
Since his bill’s debut earlier this year, Ward said he’s encountered no real opposition. Outreach from community members has further strengthened his belief that it’s needed. He said his office had received calls and letters from people who’d experienced highly realistic drills that left them thinking they were going to die. Some had even sent texts to their mothers saying they loved her and weren’t sure they’d see her again.
“That’s just unacceptable and traumatic. People that are still living with PTSD, going to junior college, but are still shook by something that they experienced three years ago on a high school campus. These are real stories that are happening all around us and they’re unnecessary,” he said.
Related: While Ward’s bill regulating active-shooter drills has been well received, another bill recently signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom has sparked controversy.
The bill restricts districts from requiring educators to inform parents if their children choose to go by a different name, gender or pronoun. Its critics, however, have interpreted it much differently, claiming it prevents educators from ever informing parents of such a change. That’s not true.
Our Sacramento reporter Deborah Sullivan Brennan spelled out that important difference in a recent piece.
What We’re Writing
For the latest edition of the Progress Report, I explored a San Diego County Office of Education program that works with the region’s migrant students. The program isn’t new and isn’t just a San Diego thing. It dates back to the 1960s and Lyndon B. Johnson’s sweeping “Great Society,” platform and provides support and resources to students whose families have moved seeking work in the agricultural, fishing or lumber industries.
Rein in, not reign in.
The drills remind me of the atomic bomb drills we used to do in schools back in the sixties. In hindsight, they did nothing but scare kids. It is up to leaders to stop any attack, not the children.