4.2 STUDENT THREAT ASSESSMENT AS A STANDARD SCHOOL SAFETY PRACTICE

Abstract

Leading authorities in education, law enforcement, and mental health recommend a systematic threat assessment approach to evaluate youth who threaten to commit a violent act. School providers do not want to overreact to threats that are not serious, yet they must recognize and take action in response to a serious threat in order to prevent a threat from being carried out. Farah Williams, PhD, will briefly review the use of the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG), an evidence-based model for schools to use in conducting threat assessments in K-12 schools. The CSTAG focuses on the identification, assessment, and management of threats with a preventative and problem-solving approach. The guidelines allow providers to resolve less serious, transient threats quickly while focusing greater attention on more serious, substantive threats. The CSTAG has been extensively examined through field tests and controlled studies that demonstrate its utility and effectiveness. It has been widely adopted by schools nationwide and was recognized as an evidence-based program by the National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP) in 2013. Research comparing general-education and special-education students receiving a threat assessment using the CSTAG evidenced no statistically significant differences in terms of disciplinary sanctions. Similarly, no statistically significant differences in disciplinary sanctions were seen for White, Black, or Hispanic students when the CSTAG was used to evaluate threats made. School threat assessment teams using the CSTAG learn how to use a decision-tree process to efficiently assess whether a youth is not just making a threat but actually poses a threat of violence. Using this prevention- and intervention-focused, systematic approach promotes efficient identification and resolution of threats with less susceptibility to reactive, fear-based responses and less vulnerability to discriminatory biases that often come to light in threat assessment, including disproportionate discipline and suspension of our minority and special-education students.