With just a few days left before students were to head out for winter break, the country was hit with yet another tragic school shooting event. On Dec. 16, 2024, a 15-year-old female student opened fire at Abundant Life Christian School in Madison, Wisc. The incident left one teacher and two students dead, including the shooter.

According to sources, the K-12 school, which serves about 420 students, did not have a resource officer however, local law enforcement arrived three minutes after a teacher called 911 to report the shooting. The shooting marked the 39th school shooting of 2024 that resulted in injuries of deaths.

Having been a Madison resident myself, this incident particularly struck a chord with me, especially with acquaintances of mine having school-aged children in the area. Recently, I connected with some security professionals with a variety of experience in the education security industry for their thoughts on the recent incident and what lessons can be gleaned from these tragic events and I will be sharing their knowledge throughout the year in this column.

Here, we start the series with an interview with Kristen Devitt, a former city of Madison Police Officer, current Director of Campus Safety at Oak Park & River Forest High School in Oak Park Illinois, and a 2023 Women in Security honoree. Devitt also served as the Director of the Office of School Safety at the Wisconsin Department of Justice from 2018-2022.

Security: Often, after an event like an active shooter, there can be a public outcry for immediate changes or action to a security program. What advice do you have for security professionals in the K-12 space when faced with this?
Devitt: There are a few very important things to consider after a major incident. First, the most important is to make sure that the school community has the time and resources needed to heal. I have unfortunately seen schools in a hurry to ‘get back to normal’ and fail to effectively address the needs of the students, faculty, and staff in the aftermath. This can cause irreparable harm to those impacted by the incident, and the reputation of the school in the community. Leadership needs to understand that the ‘old normal’ does not exist anymore, and the ‘new normal’ has to be the focus.

Second, as an emotional reaction to a school safety crisis, leadership can be susceptible to vendors who will promise the world but significantly under deliver. It is important to make all school safety decisions from a data informed perspective, and a nationally recognized best practices lens. There are several companies who will promise that their ‘newest technology’ is the only thing that will keep your kids safe, when statistically we know that the most effective measure of preventing an assailant from gaining access to a classroom full of children is a locked door.

Finally, while we may not be able to prevent all school attacks, many attackers follow a discernable pathway of thinking. This gives us opportunities for intervention. All schools should have multidisciplinary Behavioral Threat Assessment teams that are properly trained, meet on a regular basis, and focus on constant information sharing so that new concerning or prohibited student behavior does not get trapped in a silo.

Security: What are the pros and cons to this reactionary mind-set versus a proactive approach?
Devitt: Having a reactionary mindset means you are OK with a major incident happening, you just want to prepare for the aftermath. Clearly that is not acceptable when it come to the safety of our schools. All schools should seek to be proactive in providing training to students, employees, and parents on how to identify concerning/threatening behaviors and how to report them. All community stakeholders should understand that reporting information is not ‘snitching’, it is seeking help for someone who is struggling. And all reporters should feel confident that when they report a concern, someone will address it. The more trust the school community has that leadership will be proactive, and address concerns appropriate, the more likely it is that important information will be reported.

Security: How can security leaders balance fostering a welcoming school environment while maintaining a secure campus?
Devitt: It is very important to not rely on technology to prevent violence in schools. The human factor is irreplaceable when it comes to recognizing and addressing the emotional state of our students. There is no AI, camera system, or metal detector that can identify a significant change in a student’s behavior. There is no digital mapping service that can connect with a student and be perhaps the only positive trusting relationship that student has with an adult. Your presence at the door, greeting students as they come into the building not only makes your students feel welcome, but gives us the opportunity to recognize who may be struggling as they enter the building that morning. Of course, we keep our exterior doors locked, we keep our classroom doors locked while we are teaching, we make sure everyone in the building wears an ID, and we continuously train on our emergency response protocols.

Security: What steps can schools take to ensure staff and students feel safe after a high-profile security incident?
Devitt: Feeling safe and being safe can often be two different things. It may be difficult to feel safe after a violent incident happens in our community. We need to make sure that we provide resources for our students and employees to address their concerns and have the support they need. It may also be a good idea to review your safety/security protocols, reporting procedures, and emergency operations plans. If any opportunity for improvement is discovered, it should be addressed immediately.

Security: What role does mental health and behavioral threat assessment play in the overall security approach for schools?
Devitt: Mental health services, trauma informed practices and social emotional learning programs should be available universally in a school to remove the stigma attached to the need for help. A key component of Behavioral Threat Assessment is identifying what risk factors may exist that could escalate someone toward violence and identifying what services may be available to mitigate that risk. Often a school psychologist, social worker, or counselor can be the ideal resource for a student desperately in need of an intervention. It is also important to understand that the pathway to violence does not always include a mental health disorder. It can begin with being the perpetrator of dating violence, stalking, sexual assault, or other concerning / criminal behaviors. Again, behavioral health resources can be leveraged to mitigate concerning/criminal behaviors, but law enforcement intervention may be needed. In order to know when it is appropriate for law enforcement to take action, it is important for schools to partner with local authorities in the behavioral threat assessment practices.