Active Shooter Drills in High Schools: A Comprehensive Overview (as of 12/28/2025)
As of today, December 28, 2025, schools nationwide are grappling with the complex issue of preparing for active shooter events through drills,
balancing safety with potential psychological harm to students and staff, requiring careful consideration.
Historical Context of Active Shooter Drills
Historically, active shooter drills emerged in the wake of increasingly frequent and devastating school shootings across the United States. While school safety measures have always existed, the formalized practice of drills simulating active shooter scenarios gained prominence following events like Columbine High School in 1999. Initially, these drills often mirrored law enforcement protocols, focusing heavily on lockdown procedures – securing classrooms and remaining silent.
Early iterations lacked standardized guidelines, leading to significant variation in implementation. Over time, as the frequency of school shootings continued, the approach evolved. The focus shifted towards empowering individuals to react, rather than solely relying on waiting for law enforcement. This led to the introduction of methodologies like “Run, Hide, Fight,” and later, more trauma-informed approaches such as ALICE (Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate). The evolution reflects a growing understanding of the psychological impact on students and staff, and a desire to move beyond simply reacting to actively mitigating threats.
The Rise in Drill Implementation
The implementation of active shooter drills in high schools has seen a marked increase since the early 2000s, accelerating particularly after high-profile tragedies. A significant surge occurred around 2013, and continues to this day, driven by perceived gaps in school security and public demand for proactive safety measures. Principals report widespread drill implementation, with approximately nine in ten indicating their schools conduct these exercises.
However, the prevalence isn’t uniform; drills appear slightly more common in secondary schools compared to elementary schools. This rise is also reflected in increased first responder involvement, with events like those in Chelsea, Massachusetts, showcasing collaborative training exercises involving up to 100 personnel. Despite this growing practice, a critical gap remains: a lack of consistent federal or state guidelines, leading to varied approaches and concerns about effectiveness and potential harm.
Federal and State Guidelines (or Lack Thereof)
Currently, a significant challenge in active shooter drill implementation is the notable absence of comprehensive, standardized federal guidelines. While there’s increasing awareness of the need for trauma-informed approaches, no overarching national policy dictates how these drills should be conducted. This void leads to considerable variation across states and even within school districts, creating inconsistencies in drill design and execution.
Some states have begun to address this, but a unified approach remains elusive. The lack of clear direction contributes to concerns about age-appropriateness and potential psychological harm, as educators express skepticism about the drills’ impact on younger students; Schools are largely left to develop their own protocols, often relying on best practices and recommendations from security consultants, but without the weight of official regulation or support.
Psychological Impacts on Students
Research indicates active shooter drills correlate with increased rates of depression, anxiety, and stress in students—affecting even young children, their parents, and teachers alike.
Increased Anxiety and Stress Levels
Active shooter drills, while intended to enhance safety, demonstrably contribute to heightened anxiety and stress among high school students. The very nature of simulating a life-threatening event can be deeply unsettling, triggering fear responses and a sense of vulnerability. Students may experience increased physiological arousal, such as a racing heart or difficulty breathing, both during and after drills. This anxiety isn’t limited to the drill itself; anticipatory anxiety can build in the days leading up to a scheduled drill, disrupting concentration and academic performance.
Furthermore, repeated exposure to these drills can normalize the idea of school shootings, fostering a climate of fear and distrust. Students may begin to perceive their school—a place traditionally associated with learning and safety—as a potential danger zone. This chronic stress can have long-term consequences for mental and emotional well-being, potentially leading to more serious mental health issues.
Correlation with Depression Symptoms
Research indicates a concerning correlation between participation in active shooter drills and an increase in depressive symptoms among high school students. Studies reveal a significant association – a 39% increase – in reported depression following drill implementation. The repeated exposure to simulated trauma can contribute to feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and a diminished sense of safety, all key indicators of depressive disorders.
This isn’t merely a temporary reaction; the cumulative effect of frequent drills can erode a student’s emotional resilience. The normalization of school shooting scenarios can foster a pessimistic outlook and a sense that violence is inevitable. Furthermore, the anxiety and stress induced by drills can exacerbate pre-existing vulnerabilities to depression, creating a cyclical pattern of negative emotions and mental health decline. The impact extends beyond students, affecting parents and teachers as well.
Effects on Younger High School Students
Younger high school students, particularly freshmen and sophomores, demonstrate heightened vulnerability to the negative psychological impacts of active shooter drills. These students often lack the emotional maturity and coping mechanisms to process the simulated threat effectively, leading to more pronounced anxiety and fear responses. Their developing brains are more susceptible to trauma, potentially resulting in lasting emotional scars.
Reports suggest that younger students struggle to differentiate between the drill and a real-life emergency, experiencing intense physiological reactions like increased heart rate, sweating, and difficulty breathing. This can manifest as behavioral changes, including withdrawal, clinginess, and nightmares. The drills can disrupt their sense of security and trust in the school environment, hindering their ability to focus on learning and social development. Age-appropriateness of drills is a key concern, with teachers expressing skepticism.
Impact on Students with Pre-existing Conditions
Students with pre-existing mental health conditions, such as anxiety disorders, depression, or PTSD, are disproportionately affected by active shooter drills. The drills can act as triggers, exacerbating existing symptoms and potentially leading to acute emotional distress or even panic attacks. These students may experience a resurgence of traumatic memories or a heightened sense of vulnerability, undoing progress made in therapy.
For students with anxiety, the drills can amplify their fears and worries, leading to avoidance behaviors and social isolation. Those with depression may experience increased feelings of hopelessness and despair. It’s crucial to recognize that drills can unintentionally retraumatize students who have experienced past trauma. Schools must prioritize identifying and supporting these vulnerable students, offering individualized accommodations and access to mental health resources to mitigate potential harm, adhering to the “do no harm” principle.
Impact on School Staff
School staff experience significant anxiety and trauma during and after active shooter drills, alongside increased administrative burdens and the need for consistent first responder training.
Teacher Anxiety and Trauma
Active shooter drills demonstrably contribute to heightened anxiety and potential trauma among teaching staff. Educators are placed in the emotionally challenging position of simulating life-threatening scenarios, forcing them to confront the possibility of violence within their schools and impacting their sense of safety. This can manifest as increased stress levels, difficulty concentrating, and even symptoms mirroring post-traumatic stress.
Reports indicate teachers express skepticism regarding the age-appropriateness of drills, particularly for younger students, adding to their emotional burden. They feel responsible for the well-being of their students during these exercises and grapple with the ethical implications of potentially causing psychological distress. The need to remain calm and composed while simultaneously preparing for a horrific event creates a significant strain, potentially leading to long-term emotional consequences for dedicated educators.
Administrative Burden and Stress
Organizing and implementing active shooter drills places a substantial administrative burden on school leadership. Principals and administrators are tasked with coordinating with local law enforcement, developing drill protocols, ensuring compliance with evolving (and often lacking) federal and state guidelines, and managing logistical challenges. This requires significant time and resources, diverting attention from core educational priorities.
Nine in ten principals report designing drills to address different age groups, yet teacher skepticism exists. The responsibility for post-drill debriefing, addressing student and staff concerns, and communicating with parents further amplifies administrative stress. Furthermore, the lack of comprehensive research on long-term drill effectiveness adds to the pressure, as administrators strive to balance safety concerns with the potential for negative psychological impacts, creating a complex and demanding workload.
First Responder Involvement and Training
Effective active shooter preparedness necessitates close collaboration between schools and first responder agencies. Recent drills, like those conducted in Chelsea, Massachusetts, involving up to 100 first responders, demonstrate a commitment to joint training exercises. These drills are crucial for familiarizing law enforcement with school layouts, establishing communication protocols, and coordinating response strategies.
However, the effectiveness hinges on consistent and comprehensive training for both school staff and first responders. Training should encompass not only tactical procedures but also trauma-informed approaches to minimize harm and provide appropriate support. The Scranton School District’s training with the Scranton Police Department highlights the practical application of barricade procedures. Ongoing collaboration and shared learning are essential to ensure a coordinated and effective response in a real-world event, maximizing safety for all involved.
Types of Active Shooter Drills
Schools employ various drill types, including lockdown, run-hide-fight, ALICE training (a trauma-informed approach), barricade exercises, and full evacuation simulations, to prepare for potential threats.
Lockdown Drills: Procedures and Effectiveness
Lockdown drills, a common practice, typically involve securing classrooms, turning off lights, and remaining silent until an “all clear” signal is given by authorities. These procedures aim to create a safe space and minimize visibility to a potential attacker. However, their effectiveness is debated, with concerns raised about creating heightened anxiety and potentially hindering escape routes.
Principals generally design drills considering student ages, though teacher skepticism exists regarding age appropriateness. While intended to prepare, lockdown drills can inadvertently cause trauma, especially without adequate post-drill support. The effectiveness hinges on consistent practice, clear communication, and a school-wide understanding of protocols. Furthermore, simply locking doors may not be sufficient without addressing windows and other vulnerabilities.
Recent assessments emphasize the need to “do no harm” during these exercises, suggesting a shift towards more nuanced and trauma-informed approaches.
Run, Hide, Fight Methodology
The “Run, Hide, Fight” strategy, popularized by law enforcement, provides a tiered response to active shooter situations. Initially, individuals are instructed to run if a safe escape path is available, prioritizing evacuation over other actions. If escape isn’t possible, the next step is to hide – securing a room, barricading the door, and remaining silent to avoid detection.
As a last resort, when life is in imminent danger and no other options remain, the methodology advocates for fight – aggressively defending oneself and others using any available means. This approach, while potentially life-saving, is understandably the most psychologically challenging aspect of the training.
Schools implementing this methodology must carefully consider the potential trauma associated with simulating violent confrontation, emphasizing that fighting is a final, desperate measure. Effective training requires realistic scenarios and clear guidance on assessing risk and making informed decisions.
ALICE Training: A Trauma-Informed Approach
ALICE (Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate) represents a shift towards a more proactive and trauma-informed approach to active shooter preparedness. Unlike the rigid “Run, Hide, Fight” model, ALICE empowers individuals to make dynamic decisions based on the specific circumstances. It begins with alerting authorities and securing the immediate area through lockdown procedures.
Crucially, ALICE emphasizes informing individuals about the situation and providing real-time updates. The “Counter” component involves creating distractions or, as a last resort, employing aggressive intervention. Evacuation remains a primary option, but is considered alongside other strategies.
ALICE training prioritizes empowering staff and students, reducing feelings of helplessness, and fostering a more resilient school environment. It acknowledges the psychological impact of drills and aims to minimize trauma through realistic, yet sensitive, scenario-based training.
Barricade and Evacuation Drills
Barricade drills focus on fortifying classrooms as a temporary safe haven during an active shooter event. These drills involve utilizing furniture and available materials to obstruct entry points, creating physical barriers to delay an attacker. Simultaneously, evacuation drills practice the swift and orderly removal of students and staff from the building, prioritizing speed and minimizing exposure.
Effective implementation requires clear protocols for identifying evacuation routes, designated assembly points, and accounting for all individuals. Scranton School District recently conducted active shooter training, including barricading classroom doors, highlighting the practical application of these drills.
However, the effectiveness of both depends on factors like building layout, student cooperation, and the potential for panic. Careful consideration must be given to accessibility needs and ensuring drills don’t inadvertently create bottlenecks or dangerous situations. Coordination with first responders is also crucial.
Effectiveness and Limitations of Drills
Principals generally believe drills address diverse age groups, yet teacher skepticism exists; limited long-term research hinders definitive conclusions about drill effectiveness and potential harm.
Principal Perspectives on Drill Design
Principals overwhelmingly report a conscious effort to tailor active shooter drill designs to the developmental needs of students across different age groups within their high schools. A significant nine out of ten principals indicated that their drill protocols specifically consider the varying capacities of younger versus older students to process and respond to such serious scenarios. This suggests a widespread awareness of the potential for trauma and a desire to minimize negative psychological impacts.
However, this perspective isn’t universally shared by teaching staff. While administrators prioritize age-appropriateness, educators on the ground sometimes express reservations about the effectiveness of drills, particularly for younger high school students. The challenge lies in creating realistic scenarios that prepare students without inducing undue anxiety or fear. Principals are navigating a delicate balance, aiming for preparedness while upholding student well-being.
Teacher Skepticism Regarding Age Appropriateness
Despite administrative assurances, a notable level of skepticism exists among teachers regarding the age-appropriateness of current active shooter drill practices in high schools. Educators frequently report concerns that the intensity and realism of these drills can be particularly distressing for younger adolescents, potentially causing more harm than good. This skepticism stems from direct classroom observations and interactions with students exhibiting heightened anxiety following drill participation.
Teachers have voiced that drills, while more prevalent in secondary schools, often lack sufficient nuance to account for the emotional and cognitive development of students. The “one-size-fits-all” approach is questioned, with calls for more tailored drills that consider the unique vulnerabilities of each age group. This concern highlights a disconnect between administrative intent and the lived experiences of students and teachers within the classroom.
The “Do No Harm” Principle in Drill Implementation
Given the documented psychological impacts of active shooter drills, the principle of “do no harm” has emerged as a central tenet in guiding their implementation. With limited research definitively proving long-term effectiveness, prioritizing the emotional and psychological well-being of students and staff is paramount. This necessitates a shift away from solely focusing on procedural preparedness towards a more holistic, trauma-informed approach.
Schools are increasingly urged to meticulously evaluate potential negative consequences before conducting drills, actively mitigating factors that could exacerbate anxiety, stress, or depression. This includes careful consideration of drill realism, frequency, and the provision of adequate post-drill support. The emphasis is on creating a safe and supportive learning environment, even while preparing for a worst-case scenario, acknowledging the potential for unintended harm.
Limited Research on Long-Term Effectiveness
Despite the widespread implementation of active shooter drills in K-12 schools across the United States, robust, long-term research evaluating their actual effectiveness remains surprisingly scarce. While drills aim to improve response times and potentially save lives during an active shooter event, concrete data demonstrating a measurable reduction in casualties or improved outcomes is currently lacking. Much of the existing evidence relies on self-reported data and observational studies, presenting limitations in establishing causality.
This absence of conclusive evidence underscores the need for cautious interpretation of drill outcomes and a greater investment in rigorous research. Schools are encouraged to adopt a data-driven approach, continually evaluating their drill programs and adapting them based on emerging best practices and a thorough understanding of potential psychological impacts, acknowledging the current knowledge gap.
Mitigating Negative Psychological Effects
Prioritizing student and staff well-being requires trauma-informed drill design, post-drill support, open parental communication, and readily available mental health resources for all involved.
Trauma-Informed Drill Design
Implementing active shooter drills necessitates a shift towards trauma-informed practices, recognizing the potential for re-traumatization. Drills should avoid overly realistic scenarios that mimic actual shooting events, focusing instead on procedural responses. Age-appropriateness is crucial; what’s suitable for high schoolers differs significantly from elementary students.
Principals generally aim to tailor drills to different age groups, though teacher skepticism exists regarding this implementation. Avoiding sudden, unannounced drills—which can induce panic—is vital. Providing clear, concise instructions and allowing students to ask questions fosters a sense of control.
Furthermore, drills should incorporate opportunities for emotional processing afterward. The “do no harm” principle must guide drill design, prioritizing psychological safety alongside physical preparedness. Schools should carefully consider the potential for increased anxiety, stress, and even depression symptoms associated with these exercises.
Post-Drill Debriefing and Support
Crucially, following an active shooter drill, comprehensive debriefing and support systems are essential. This involves creating a safe space for students and staff to process their emotional responses – anxiety, fear, or even re-experienced trauma. Facilitated discussions, led by trained mental health professionals, can help normalize these feelings and address concerns.
Debriefing should focus on what went well during the drill, areas for improvement, and individual experiences. It’s vital to avoid re-traumatizing participants by dwelling on graphic details. Schools must proactively offer access to mental health resources, including counseling services, for those who need additional support.
Parental involvement is also key; communicating drill procedures beforehand and providing post-drill updates can alleviate anxieties. Recognizing the potential for increased depression and physiological health problems, ongoing monitoring and support are paramount.
Parental Communication and Involvement
Effective parental communication is paramount when implementing active shooter drills. Schools should proactively inform parents about the drill schedule, procedures, and the rationale behind these exercises, fostering transparency and trust. Detailed explanations can address concerns and dispel misinformation, reducing anxiety within the community.
Providing parents with resources on how to discuss these sensitive topics with their children is also crucial. Open dialogue at home can help children process their feelings and ask questions. Schools should actively solicit parental feedback on drill procedures, demonstrating a commitment to collaboration.
Acknowledging the potential for increased stress and anxiety – for both students and parents – is vital. Clear communication channels and readily available mental health resources can support families navigating these challenging conversations and potential emotional responses.
Mental Health Resources for Students and Staff
Robust mental health support is essential following active shooter drills, recognizing the potential for increased anxiety, stress, and even depression. Schools must ensure readily available access to qualified counselors, psychologists, and social workers for both students and staff.
These resources should extend beyond immediate post-drill support, offering ongoing counseling services for those experiencing lasting emotional distress. Trauma-informed care is critical, acknowledging the varied ways individuals may react to these exercises. Confidentiality and accessibility are paramount to encourage help-seeking behavior.
Furthermore, schools should proactively train staff to recognize signs of distress in students and colleagues, and to appropriately refer them to mental health professionals. Partnerships with community-based mental health organizations can expand the scope of available support.