Back to school means emergency drills are back too. Fire drills. Severe weather drills. Active shooter drills.
Parents need to know what schools are teaching their children and teachers to do during an active shooter emergency. More importantly, we need to ask whether those procedures truly prioritize getting people out of harm’s way.
Ask What the School Is Teaching
Start with a straightforward conversation. Ask your child what happens during an active shooter drill. Ask what their teacher tells them to do. Ask where they are expected to go, and what they should do if they are not with their normal class.
Many schools teach some version of lockdown: lock the doors, barricade them, move children to a designated part of the classroom, and wait. That may be the plan your school has. But parents should not assume that a plan exists on paper and stop asking questions.
The Problem With a One Size Fits All Lockdown Response
This is not about taking shots at schools or teachers. They are working with the policies, training, facilities, and resources they have been given. This is about asking whether the policy itself should be better.
One concern with a blanket “buckle down in the classroom” response is that it can leave people in the same place as the threat. If danger is immediately outside a classroom, locking and barricading may be the most realistic option. But if there is a viable way to get away from the threat and out of the school, that option should be part of the conversation.
Think about a fire drill. Nobody argues that students should lock themselves in a room and hope the fire does not reach them. The whole point is to evacuate, get away from the danger, and gather at a predetermined safe location. (This was brought up (honestly this whole blog was inspired by it) in a great podcast from Making Shooters Better with Ed Monk, you should definitely take a listen… scroll to the bottom of this blog for more on Ed and his First 30 Seconds book – I HIGHLY recommend)
The same basic question belongs in school active shooter planning: when it is feasible to escape, why would evacuation not be part of the plan?
Waiting behind a locked door does not magically remove the danger. Doors, windows, and walls may not stop every threat. No number of seconds is acceptable when a better plan could have gotten children and staff farther from danger.
Accountability Cannot Be the Reason to Keep Everyone Inside
A common objection to evacuation is accountability. If children leave classrooms in different directions, how will the school know where everyone is?
That is a real planning issue. It is not a reason to dismiss evacuation altogether.
Schools already manage accountability during fire drills, where students and staff leave rooms and move toward assembly areas. An active emergency may be more chaotic, and it may not look like a calm single file walk to one spot. Fine. Plan for that reality.
Teachers have phones. School staff can communicate. Schools can establish multiple exterior meeting locations, organize reunification procedures, and account for students once they reach safety. The goal should be to build a workable process around getting people away from danger, not to treat attendance tracking as more important than immediate survival.
What a More Flexible Evacuation Plan Could Include
Every campus is different, so this is not a cookie cutter map. But a school safety plan can account for the fact that students may be separated from their assigned classrooms when an emergency happens.
- Multiple exterior safety locations: Designate several places outside the building rather than relying on one gathering point.
- Zone based destinations: Assign nearby exterior locations to areas or blocks of the campus.
- Alternate options: If a student cannot reach the location assigned to their usual classroom, they should know they can go to another approved safe location.
- Clear communication: Teachers and staff need a practical method to report which students are with them once they arrive.
- Training that reflects real movement: Students may be in a restroom, hallway, office, or another classroom when something happens. The plan must account for that.
For example, students in one building area could be directed to exterior location A, while another area uses location B. A student caught away from their normal class should not be left wondering whether they have to cross the campus to find their assigned group. They need permission and direction to get to the nearest designated safe location they can reach.
Parents Role & Pushing for Better School Safety Planning
It is also worth talking with children, at an age-appropriate level, about situational awareness, personal safety, and taking initiative when their life may depend on it. They should understand that an emergency may require them to think, move, and adapt rather than simply staying put because they have been told to remain in one place.
That also means having an age-appropriate conversation about what happens if the teacher or other adult in charge is unable to lead them, becomes injured, or the situation changes so quickly that waiting for instructions is no longer realistic. Children should not be taught that their only option is to sit quietly and wait for someone else to save them. If there is a safe opportunity to escape, they should understand that getting away from the danger may be the right choice. And if escape is no longer possible and they are directly confronted with an attacker, fighting back, creating distractions, throwing objects, moving, and joining others who are resisting may become part of surviving.
This is not about teaching children to disrespect teachers or disregard school rules. It is about teaching them that rules and authority do not replace their right to protect themselves when an immediate threat to life exists. The point is not to demand that every child run outside in every situation. The point is to reject the idea that lockdown is automatically the only response, even when it may keep people close to the threat. Sometimes initiative may begin with one person acting, and others recognizing that they can act too.
Parents should be having these conversations at home, but we also need to be willing to advocate for our children before an emergency ever occurs. Ask schools, districts, and school boards what students are actually being taught. Push for policies that go beyond locking a door, hiding in a corner, and waiting. Our children deserve training that gives them realistic options to escape, respond, and survive—not a plan that leaves “lie there and hope” as the only answer when everything else has failed.
Schools should be planning for more than locking doors and hoping the danger passes. They should be planning for escape routes, safe gathering locations, communication, accountability, and the fact that children are not always sitting at their assigned desks when an emergency begins.
Lobby for safer active shooter practices. Ask what the plan is. Ask whether it gets children away from harm when it can. And keep asking until the answer makes sense.
Ed Monk has studied the active shooter problem since 2007 and has trained schools, churches, businesses, law enforcement, and government agencies across the country. A retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel, current law enforcement officer, firearms trainer, and former public school teacher, Ed brings a unique perspective to how we prepare for and respond to these attacks. His book, First 30 Seconds: The Active Shooter Problem, examines the critical role of time, response, and taking action to minimize victims during an active shooter event. Follow him on Facebook.
