Violence in Our Schools

  • Matt Thompson
  • Bobbie Burcham
  • Kathy McLaughlin

Imagine a school where every student feels connected to the school, the staff members, the other students, and the vision and goals of the school. That is, imagine a school where every student feels that the adults there care about them as individuals and care about their learning. That is a school in which there will be few cases, if any, of any type of violence, let alone a shooting on the magnitude that we have seen in the last 10 years. As educators, this is the type of school that we need to work to create each and every day. Such work needs to be very intentionally focused to ensure that each and every student feels valued and connected to the school community. The work toward this goal can occur in two different ways, personal modeling and creating structures within the school. Specific examples of personal modeling can be recreated on a larger scale through entire school structures and serve as a unifying force for all staff members to help students feel connected. Once these structures are in place, a net is created that helps prevent any student, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic status, home-life situation, or even ability, from falling through the cracks and feeling unconnected. Several examples of such structures follow.


Extracurricular Activity School Community School Connectedness School Violence Threat Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barkley, R. (2007). School interventions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Where to from here? School Psychology Review, 36(2), 279–286.Google Scholar
  2. Blum, R. W. (2005). A case for school connectedness. Educational Leadership, 62(7), 16–20.Google Scholar
  3. Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice of the American Institutes for Research (1998). Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schools. U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  4. Educational Resources Information Center (2000). How Can We Prevent Violence in Our Schools? U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  5. Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. New York: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  6. Greene, R. W. (2001). The Explosive Child. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  7. O’Toole, M. E. & The Critical Incident Response Group (2007). The School Shooter: A Threat Assessment Perspective. Quantico, Virginia: National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crimes.Google Scholar
  8. Pogrow, S. (2005). HOTS revisited: A thinking development approach to reducing the learning gap after grade 3. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(1), 64–75.Google Scholar
  9. Sprick, R., et al. (2002). Foundations: Establishing Positive Discipline Policies. Pacific North West Publishing Company. Eugene, Oregon.Google Scholar
  10. The Silent Epidemic, March 2006: A Report on High School Dropouts by Civic

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matt Thompson
    • 1
  • Bobbie Burcham
    • 2
  • Kathy McLaughlin
    • 3
  1. 1.Deep Springs Elementary School in LexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Fayette County Public Schools in LexingtonUSA
  3. 3.University of KentuckyKentuckyUSA

Personalised recommendations