Can Schools Address Catastrophic Shootings Using School Based Social Workers?
Beginning at age 4-6, all children in the United States are expected to receive standardized education, most often by attending a public, private or charter school. Education is compulsory, typically until the age of 16. (education.findlaw.com) This unelected participation results in a mix of populations and personalities that is somewhat unique in our society. Even in neighborhood schools and private schools that may be predominantly attended by one racial or socioeconomic group, children will face a more diverse group of peers than they would at an elective activity. In addition to basic education functions, such as math and reading, students must learn to navigate the social waters of their assigned institution. This includes interacting with peers, sometimes fighting or learning how to avoid fights, interacting with teachers and school administration, participating in or disrupting class and dealing with consequences of those decisions.
Social Workers in Schools
Schools have tried various methods over the years to assist individuals and the student body at large with successful completion at each stage of education. Beginning in the early 1900s, “Visiting Teachers” left the confines of the school buildings to try to bridge the gap between home and school. (Callahan-Sherman, 2016) Children do not, and never have, arrived at school equally prepared for class work. Some students enjoy a warm breakfast in a safe haven where parents have assisted them with homework. Other students are caring for younger siblings while parents are absent, alcoholic or violent. The variety of situations at home and how they affect a child’s ability to focus at school is as varied as there are individuals on the planet. Visiting Teachers attempted to provide a more wholistic educational experience for the children in their classes by engaging the parents at home. These were the forerunners to the modern School Social Worker.
The current School Social Worker “provide[s] a variety of services, including…individual, familial and group therapy, case management, teacher and classroom support and children and family advocacy.” (Allen-Meares, 2013) In a discussion entitled “School-Based Social Work Interventions: A Cross-National Systematic Review,” authors P. Allen-Meares et. al. conducted a literature review on outcomes of Social Workers in schools. They identified two different basic services provided, labeling them Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions. Tier 1 interventions were school-wide interventions, programs, talks, and curriculums that assist classrooms and teachers by preventing disruptive behavior. Examples of Tier 1 interventions might be bringing in an entertainer to provide a student assembly on the topic of drugs and alcohol, or providing teacher training on the subject of spotting and disrupting bullying behavior.
Positive Behavior Supports (PBS) is a Tier 1 intervention. Widely adopted by elementary schools, PBS is a school wide program in which every teacher is authorized to give “tickets” for positive behavior. For example, if a student shares his or her crayons, or sits quietly during lunch, the teacher can reward the child with a ticket. Tickets usually take the form of photocopied school logos or slips of paper with teacher signatures. Students can then cash their tickets in for prizes such as candy, pencils, lunch with friends, or when schools get creative, things like movie nights, dress down days or pies in the teacher’s face. PBS has been suggested as one method to address the School-To-Prison Pipeline, a way in which students can be nurtured in their positive behavior instead of increasingly punished for bad behavior. (McCarter, 2016)
Tier 2 activities are individual and group counseling. Social workers perform both types of interventions within the school, but Tier 2 activities tend to be reserved for students who are already identified with behavioral problems. In their literature review, Allen-Meares et. al. discovered that up to 85% of students can be successful with only Tier 1 interventions, where “5 to 10 percent of all school-age students are in need of tier 2 level interventions to be successful in the school setting.” (Allen-Meares, 2013).
The Surgeon General, in a discussion of youth violence following the Columbine school shooting, put forth several suggestions for school administrations and government bodies interested in stemming the tide of violence. Programs they found effective include Strengthening Families, an interactive parent-child program which teaches families how to communicate and interact in a positive manner, Life Skills Training programs, and specific curriculums for problem solving in elementary school. Suggested interventions included a variety of programs that work with parents, families, classrooms, and students. Teachers are encouraged to engage in cooperative learning and adapt their lesson plans to student skill levels in a hierarchy that advances individually. Many of the standardized computer based learning curriculum are constructed in this fashion. What the Surgeon General does not recommend is individual counseling. “In fact, one long-term follow-up of delinquent youths treated in [an institutionalized] setting shows several significant negative effects, including increases in alcoholism, unemployment, marital difficulties and premature death.” (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) The Surgeon General does go on to note that youth treated with individual counseling and casework outside of an institution do fare better than those who are incarcerated, they still claim “that individual counseling can be one of the least effective prevention approaches for delinquent youths.” (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
School Shootings
On February 14, 2018, Nikolas Cruz took an Uber to his high school, his backpack loaded with ammunition. He shot students in the classrooms and in the hallways before dropping his rifle and blending in with the fleeing crowd. 17 people died in Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida, one school among many to have suffered this type of tragedy. (time.com) Thus far, in 2024 there were at least 107 incidents of gunfire on school grounds, resulting in 29 deaths and 61 injuries nationally. (Everytown for gun safety).
The Melissa Institute for Violence Prevention and Treatment drew up a list of recommendations for principals to avoid and address school violence. This list was a reaction to the nationwide March for Our Lives, a demonstration against gun violence in schools that occurred in the wake of the Parkland shooting. Typically, the public reaction has followed the same script: shock and horror from everyone, immediately dissolving into calls for gun control from the left and more heavily armed security personnel from the right. Calls for increased mental health awareness and advocacy are also included in this maelstrom of public outcry, along with statements about media bias towards white perpetrators. What seems to be lost is a collaborative discussion about what can be done, including how to effectively research the phenomenon. The Melissa Institute suggests “implement[ing] an independent post-school shooting assessment team of experts to identify the ‘lessons to be learned,’ rather than to place blame. This strategy is modeled after the National Transportation Board, which investigates the causes of various accidents.” (Melissa Institute, 2018)
Also included in the Melissa Institute’s list of recommendations are education programs such as “bully prevention, peer warning procedures, school readiness programs, reading skills training, student school connectedness efforts, parent involvement programs” (Melissa Institute, 2018) all of which could be accomplished using school social workers. The report also recommends Tier 2 activities such as “assessment-driven behavior intervention plans” and skills training for students identified with behavior problems. Staff trainings, partnerships with family and community organizations, and referrals for students with multiple Adverse Childhood Experiences, are all included in this list. (Melissa Institute, 2018) Each of these activities could be undertaken by school social workers.
In fact, with such a large repertoire of services, social workers are currently being employed not just by schools and government service centers, but also by libraries and hospitals. Anywhere there is a need for people to connect to available programs, to get emotional support, training or case management, social workers are necessary.
Recommendations
1. Research. In researching this paper, the search terms “social worker + school” were entered into the Ebscohost database, a repository for peer-reviewed articles. Resulting articles numbered in the thousands. When the term “shootings” was added to the search criteria, the database produced only a single article. Though this phenomena affects every individual in the country on a profound emotional level, there is not enough empirical data-driven research on the subject.
2. Social workers in every school. The age of “Visiting Teachers” has passed. Teachers no longer have the time to reach out of their classrooms to engage the parents or provide the bridge between home and school. Teachers are often overworked and underpaid, and need an ally when it comes to wraparound services for their students. Social workers can recommend curriculum to address social-emotional wellbeing, they can reach out to parents, provide home visiting and referrals to other home-based services such as Functional Family Therapy. Social workers can provide school-wide workshops, lead talks, connect with community organizations that can provide a wealth of services for students and staff. Without social workers in schools, many more students would be unsuccessful in their learning goals.
3. Social workers focusing on Tier 1 interventions. Anti-bullying efforts, teacher trainings, parent engagement beyond token “Math nights”, these types of interventions should consume up to 80% of a social workers’ time. Tier 2 interventions should be employed with the understanding that the student in question be integrated as much as possible into other school-based activities. Students should not be treated in isolation, even when receiving case management or counseling services.
Author Bio
Dr. James J. Ruffin is an experienced instructional leader with a record of accomplishment in leading successful "turn-around" school and district-wide efforts, in high poverty low achievement schools. He believes that public education is the most powerful instrument for promoting equity and justice for all children and families. Dr. Ruffin holds a EdD in Innovative Leadership from Wilmington University.
References
Allen-Meares, P., Montgomery, K., Kim, J., (2013). School-based Social Work Interventions: A Cross-National Systematic Review, National Association of Social Workers
Callahan Sherman, M., (2016). The School Social Worker: A Marginalized Commodity within the School Ecosystem, National Association of Social Workers
Crepeau-Hobson, M., Filaccio, M., Gottfried, L. (2005). Violence Prevention after Columbine: A Survey of High School Mental Health Professionals, National Association of Social Workers
McCarter, S., (2016). The School-to-Prison pipeline: A primer for social workers, National Association of Social Workers
Retrieved from https://education.findlaw.com/education-options/compulsory-education-laws-background.html
Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44295/
Retrieved from http://eschoolsafety.org/concern
Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/426a18_6e2ea91d04ac4ec88af70517f4beb707.pdf
Retrieved from http://www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/practice/public-libraries-add-social-workers-and-social-programs/
Retrieved from http://time.com/5158678/what-to-know-about-the-active-shooter-situation-at-florida-high-school/
Retrieved from https://everytownresearch.org/maps/gunfire-on-school-grounds/