There are also more urgent signs that indicate a child is about to commit violent acts that require immediate intervention. They are:

• Serious violent fighting
• Serious property damage
• Severe rage
• Self-injury or attempted suicide
• Possession/use of weapons
• Detailed lethal threats

If campus officials do notice such signs in their students, they should develop a multidisciplinary threat assessment team to help evaluate the situation before it escalates. The team should consist of respected, trained members in administration; school disciplinary and safety personnel; a mental health professional with training in threat assessment, local law enforcement, and community members with ties with the student.

“The key is [having someone on the team] who knows the student,” Satterly stressed. “Again, you’re looking for those trusting relationships that require some knowledge of the person you’re assessing.”

Satterly noted that there are numerous tools available to help campus leaders develop a threat assessment team, however, he suggested the United States Department of Education’s guide because it’s well-researched, straight-forward and free of charge.

The tool is made up of six principles:

• Principle 1: Targeted violence is the end result of an understandable, and oftentimes discernible, process of thinking and behavior.
• Principle 2: Targeted violence stems from an interaction among the person, the situation, the setting and the target.
• Principle 3: An investigative, skeptical, inquisitive mindset is critical to successful threat assessment.
• Principle 4: Effective threat assessment is based on facts rather than characteristics or “traits.”
• Principle 5: An “integrated systems approach” should guide threat assessment investigations.
• Principle 6: The central question of a threat assessment is whether a student poses a threat, not whether the student made a threat.

When reviewing principles three and four, Satterly stressed the importance of remaining unbiased when conducting a threat assessment of a student.

“If you start by thinking the subject is trouble, then you get a biased process already, and you may not get to the truth,” he explained. Profiling is not a predictive science, so we’re not using this to predict what the child will do. We’re looking at what the child has done to determine the level of threat that he poses to others and then coming up with solutions to address those [issues].”

Additionally, an effective multidisciplinary threat assessment has three elements:

Authority: The facility has a formal policy in place authorizing officials to conduct a threat assessment. The policy should describe the purpose and scope of the policy, the role of the leaders and the threat assessment team in relation to the role of law enforcement; the identity of the delegation of authority to officials concerning the determination that a threat assessment inquiry or investigation should be pursued.

Note: there is a difference between an inquiry, which is an informal process of collecting information, and an investigation, which involves law enforcement.

Capacity: The skills and training needed to conduct the assessment. Campus officials must have a questioning, analytical and skeptical mindset and the ability to relate well to people. Additionally, familiarity with child growth and development is crucial.

The person on the team needs to have discretion and an appreciation for the importance of keeping information confidential and if a possible harm may result, then give police appropriate information.

Integrated Systems Relationships (Boundary Spanners): This involves individuals who build and maintain relationships across disciplines and agencies. They serve as formal liaisons between various systems and meet regularly with them. Boundary Spanners have credibility, respect, and strong interpersonal skills. In addition, they should understand the means and operations of other systems. This understanding of these systems helps with integrating ongoing interagency relationships in developing written protocols and facilitating the resolution of t
he conflicts.

Implementing these tips can help school administrators combat violent behavior before it escalates into something tragic, Satterly explained.

“It’s a wonderful thing when a person can make the right call during critical, high-stress decision points,” he said. “How much more wonderful would it be to make the right call before the tragedy? Shouldn’t that be our goal?”

Has your campus implemented these practices? What has worked for your campus? Leave your comments below!

 

If you appreciated this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!

Related Content