Eight-foot wire gates surround Del Sol High School in Oxnard on Oct. 3, 2023.
Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource
The shooting in September at Apalachee High School in Georgia, which left two students and two teachers dead and nine people wounded, was the latest in a line of multiple casualty shootings at schools in the United States.
Given the incredible suffering and loss of life resulting from these tragic events, they understandably generate considerable media attention and public concern over the safety of students and staff. Schools should be safe places for children and adults to come to each day without the threat of violence.
But, despite the attention generated by high-casualty school shootings, the data indicate something very surprising. For nearly 30 years — approximately 98-99% of all homicides of school-aged youth (generally youth between the ages of 5 and 18) have occurred outside of schools.
It’s important California policymakers and school leaders understand the data so that they can best protect our youth. One injury or death caused by violence in the school setting is already too much, but let’s dig into the data a bit more to get a better sense of what’s going on.
The graph below shows the total homicides on school grounds using the School-Associated Violent Death Surveillance System (SAVD-SS) and the total number of homicides of school aged youth using the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) from academic year 1992-93 to 2019-20, in four year increments.
As we can see in the graph, school-related homicides have hovered between 1% and 2% of the total number of homicides of school-aged youth for these four-year increments.
How we got the data
We examined data routinely compiled by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) for their periodic reports on school safety. Homicides and suicides that occur on school grounds are tracked by the Center for Disease Control’s School-Associated Violent Death Surveillance System (SAVD-SS).
The CDE survey tracks homicides and suicides that that occur in the school building during normal operating hours, as well as those that might have taken place on the bus to and from school or at school events after hours (e.g., football games). The Center for Disease Control’s National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) shows the total number of homicides of school-aged youth. Comparing the two datasets enables us to determine the proportion of homicides that occur on school grounds versus total homicides for school-aged youth (which would include those at school and those outside of schools).
Even for periods in which high casualty events in schools are included (such as the tragedies in Colorado, Connecticut and Florida in 1999, 2012 and 2018 respectively), the proportion of school-related homicides did not reach 2% of all homicides of school-aged youth.
An additional year, 2020-21, is now available from the U.S. Department of Education; those data indicate there were 11 homicides of school-aged youth at school in 2020-21. This was a period in which many schools moved to a virtual learning environment due to Covid-19.
However, 2020-21 was one of the worst years ever for total homicides of school-aged youth: 2,436 young people were murdered. For this single year, homicides of school-aged youth at school represented less than one-half of one percent (0.45%) of total homicides of school-aged youth.
These data do not give us the full picture. For example, they do not reveal anything about preceding factors that may have led to the homicide: an altercation that occurred in school may have spilled over to a homicide that occurred later on the street. In such cases, although the homicide would not be captured by the school homicide, the school was very much related to what happened.
What should these data inspire us to do?
Yes, we absolutely must protect children— and staff — in school. Parents are entrusting their children to educators. In no way do we want to minimize the pain and suffering caused by a shooting such as what occurred at Apalachee High School, or other communities around the nation.
However, given that the vast majority of homicides of school-aged children do not occur in school—but in the home, on the streets, and at other venues—a comprehensive approach to protecting children from violence is needed. If we truly care about children, we’ve got to do a lot more.
School and Community Strategies for Youth Violence Prevention
What about our educators and school leaders in California? We recommend that they advocate for evidence-based approaches in the community to help address factors contributing to youth violence in the home and neighborhoods where the majority of homicides of school-aged youth occur.
And given that the average child spends approximately 18,000 hours in school, they are often the most likely place for prevention and intervention programs. These need to be comprehensive and evidence-based to provide our youth with the skills they need to cope in and out of school environments.
For California state policymakers, we recommend that they balance the policy focus on evidence-based school safety measures with appropriate investments in evidence-based social services, mental health support, and violence prevention programs that reach into the heart of our communities.
At all levels, we need to inform policies with comprehensive data to guide policy use and evaluation to understand how such investments are faring in reality compared to their design and initial promise.
It is the rare educator, policymaker, parent, or police officer who doesn’t care about children. But while caring is necessary, it is insufficient. These data should provoke us to do more to protect children everywhere. Yes, that means in school. But just as importantly, we need to do more to protect them in their homes and the communities in which they live.
•••
A version of this article was previously published by the University of Oregon’s HEDCO Institute on October 3, 2024.
Anthony Petrosino serves as Director of the WestEd Justice and Prevention Research Center. He is also an Affiliated Faculty and Senior Research Fellow at George Mason University’s Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy.
Ericka Muñoz is a Research Associate at WestEd’s Justice and Prevention Research Center and is currently pursuing graduate studies in the Criminology, Law & Society program at the University of California, Irvine.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
