Watch the RecordingListen to the Podcast

A student talks about serial killers with friends in school. His comments raise a red flag about a possible violent threat. He is reported to the school leadership, who must act in response.

There is a good chance, based on the event and a zero-tolerance policy, that the student could be expelled. But is that the right move to make? Ideally, a deeper dive into the student’s actions can help determine whether a threat exists and what a student with concerning behaviors might need.

A structured, evidence-based threat-assessment process, as explained by Dr. Dewey Cornell, the creator of the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG) model, during the edLeader Panel “Integrating Behavioral Threat Assessment into Your System of Supports,” can guide reactions to threats with an eye on supporting troubled students.

What is a Threat Assessment?

A threat assessment helps to determine the potential for safety risks and danger. It aims to prevent something from happening. A thoughtfully designed threat assessment (with multi-tier support systems) allows educators to respond constructively to a student’s troubling behavior before removing them from school.

The goal is to examine the situation more closely to understand how a student’s language or actions were perceived or interpreted, and then find out why they acted a particular way.

The assessment ensures educators avoid two common errors: overreaction and underreaction, each with severe consequences. Does a student get expelled from school because he brought a gun-shaped piece from an action figure (overreaction)? Does the school not appropriately respond when a student brings a real gun to school (underreaction)? The assessment informs appropriate decisions.

Threat Assessment in Practice

Many U.S. schools conduct threat assessments, with 85% having established threat-assessment teams. Approaches vary, but tend to share three phases:

Phase 1: Identification – A school culture that encourages students and adults to report concerning behavior and potential violence.

Phase 2: Evaluation – A multi-disciplinary team evaluates reported threats, gathering information to determine their seriousness.

Phase 3: Intervention – The team undertakes appropriate interventions, integrated with multi-tiered support systems, to address the underlying conflict or problem.

Schools should build these core phases into the approaches they design.

Alternatively, they can utilize the CSTAG model, developed by the University of Virginia, which has been proven effective in identifying and addressing threats.

The model relies on a multi-disciplinary team of school administrators, mental health staff, a school resource officer, and other staff members (such as teachers, nurses, and special education staff) to gather information and assess threats.

The model has four threat-assessment classifications:

• Non-threat – A threat report may not be an actual or serious threat. It might even just be a false rumor.
• Transient threat – A threat can take the form of rhetoric, such as something said in anger or an overstatement. There is no intent to injure anyone.
• Serious substantive threat – If someone threatens to physically confront or fight someone, that constitutes a more serious threat.
• Very serious substantive threat – This type of threat is often discovered through sources beyond the student. Maybe students report that a peer is trying to obtain a handgun, or that they are posting photographs of serial killers whom they admire on social media, particularly their tactics. This type of behavior is highly concerning. It indicates the intent to shoot, stab, or severely injure.

A five-step decision tree helps to gauge the threat’s seriousness and inform protective action, if needed:

1. Evaluate the threat (get a detailed event from all involved).
2. Attempt to resolve the threat as transient (explore whether the threat is an expression of humor, rhetoric, anger, or frustration).
3. Respond to a substantive threat (warn and protect potential or intended victims, find ways to resolve the conflict, discipline the student, if needed).
4. Conduct a safety evaluation for a very serious substantive threat (student screening for mental health or counselling, law enforcement for criminal activity, safety plan to reduce risk and address student needs).
5. Implement and monitor the safety plan.

At the model’s core is identifying and resolving the underlying problem or concern to address the threat and support the student. Its multi-tiered approach utilizes a range of interventions and programs to ensure students get what they need.

Threat Assessment: Impact and Benefit

The power of a threat assessment in preventing school-based violence is significant. Studies of CSTAG’s work have shown a decline in school bullying and aggression, the resolution of thousands of threats without violence, an enhanced school climate, heightened socio-emotional and educational support for assessed students, reduced suspension rates, and fewer arrests when law enforcement is involved.

Learn more about this edWeb broadcast, Integrating Behavioral Threat Assessment into Your System of Supports, sponsored by Branching Minds.

Watch the RecordingListen to the Podcast

Join the Community

School Health & Safety is a free professional learning community that provides educators, school staff, school leaders, and district administrators with a forum to collaborate and discuss the issues and practices that can keep schools, students, and staff healthy and safe.

Branching Minds is a leading K-12 educational technology platform designed to streamline the work of MTSS and make personalized learning sustainable. By integrating data and providing actionable insights, our platform empowers teachers to meet the unique needs, strengths, and challenges of every student. Branching Minds simplifies the MTSS process, giving teachers the tools and guidance needed to personalize support, freeing up their time to focus on building meaningful, positive relationships with students.

Article by Michele Israel, based on this edLeader Panel